E. K. Buabang, Sarah Ashcroft-Jones, Celia Esteban Serna, Katarina Kastelic, Jakob Kveder, Amanda Lambertus, Tasja S. Müller, K. Ruggeri
{"title":"Validation and Measurement Invariance of the Personal Financial Wellness Scale","authors":"E. K. Buabang, Sarah Ashcroft-Jones, Celia Esteban Serna, Katarina Kastelic, Jakob Kveder, Amanda Lambertus, Tasja S. Müller, K. Ruggeri","doi":"10.1027/1015-5759/a000750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. In 2020, 17.1% of the population in the European Union was at risk of poverty ( Eurostat, 2021 ). Poverty is often assessed using objective measures such as absolute and relative income levels. However, different individuals may experience different levels of financial stress at the same income level. Therefore, it is crucial to have measures that capture the subjective components of poverty. In this multinational study, we tested the validity and measurement invariance of the Personal Financial Wellness (PFW) scale across six European countries (Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, and the UK) and the US, and six languages (German, Italian, Dutch, Slovenian, Spanish, and English). Results provided mixed evidence for the fit of the expected one-factor structure. Exploration of a modified one-factor structure indicated an improved fit. The scale showed excellent reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity. This suggests that the PFW scale captures subjective financial stress and is a dependable self-report measure. Measurement invariance testing of the modified one-factor model showed metric invariance across Slovenia, Spain, the UK, and the US. Given that scalar invariance was not achieved and the invariance testing was based on an exploratory model, we do not advise the use of the scale for comparisons between countries.","PeriodicalId":48018,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000750","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Abstract. In 2020, 17.1% of the population in the European Union was at risk of poverty ( Eurostat, 2021 ). Poverty is often assessed using objective measures such as absolute and relative income levels. However, different individuals may experience different levels of financial stress at the same income level. Therefore, it is crucial to have measures that capture the subjective components of poverty. In this multinational study, we tested the validity and measurement invariance of the Personal Financial Wellness (PFW) scale across six European countries (Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, and the UK) and the US, and six languages (German, Italian, Dutch, Slovenian, Spanish, and English). Results provided mixed evidence for the fit of the expected one-factor structure. Exploration of a modified one-factor structure indicated an improved fit. The scale showed excellent reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity. This suggests that the PFW scale captures subjective financial stress and is a dependable self-report measure. Measurement invariance testing of the modified one-factor model showed metric invariance across Slovenia, Spain, the UK, and the US. Given that scalar invariance was not achieved and the invariance testing was based on an exploratory model, we do not advise the use of the scale for comparisons between countries.
期刊介绍:
The main purpose of the EJPA is to present important articles which provide seminal information on both theoretical and applied developments in this field. Articles reporting the construction of new measures or an advancement of an existing measure are given priority. The journal is directed to practitioners as well as to academicians: The conviction of its editors is that the discipline of psychological assessment should, necessarily and firmly, be attached to the roots of psychological science, while going deeply into all the consequences of its applied, practice-oriented development.