期刊
MULTIVARIATE BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH
卷 55, 期 2, 页码 312-328出版社
ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00273171.2019.1633617
关键词
Equivalence tests; measurement invariance; confirmatory factor analysis; model comparison; structural equation modeling
类别
资金
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) [435-2016-1057]
Measurement Invariance (MI) is often concluded from a nonsignificant chi-square difference test. Researchers have also proposed using change in goodness-of-fit indices (GOFs) instead. Both of these commonly used methods for testing MI have important limitations. To combat these issues, To combat these issues, it was proposed using an equivalence test (EQ) to replace the chi-square difference test commonly used to test MI. Due to concerns with the EQ's power, and adjusted version (EQ-A) was created, but provides little evaluation of either procedure. The current study evaluated the Type I error and power of both the EQ and EQ-A, and compared their performance to that of the traditional chi-square difference test and GOFs. The EQ was the only procedure that maintained empirical error rates below the nominal alpha level. Results also highlight that the EQ requires larger sample sizes than traditional difference-based approaches or using equivalence bounds based on larger than conventional RMSEA values (e.g., > .05) to ensure adequate power rates. We do not recommend the proposed adjustment (EQ-A) over the EQ.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据