IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v47y2018i4p729-760.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Explaining Measurement Nonequivalence Using Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Eldad Davidov
  • Hermann Dülmer
  • Jan Cieciuch
  • Anabel Kuntz
  • Daniel Seddig
  • Peter Schmidt

Abstract

It is necessary to test for equivalence of measurements across groups to guarantee that comparisons of regression coefficients or mean scores of a latent factor are meaningful. Unfortunately, when tested, many scales display nonequivalence. Several researchers have suggested that nonequivalence may be used as a useful source of information as to why equivalence is biased and proposed employing a multilevel structural equation modeling (MLSEM) approach to explain why equivalence is not given. This method can consider a latent between-level factor and/or single contextual variables and use them to explain items’ nonequivalence. In the current study, we show that this method may also be useful for social science studies in general and for survey research and sociological comparative studies in particular when one fails to establish cross-group equivalence. We utilize data from the International Social Survey Program national identity module (2003) to test for the cross-country equivalence of a scale measuring attitudes toward granting citizenship rights to immigrants. As expected, the scale fails to achieve scalar equivalence. However, we explain a significant part of the most nonequivalent intercept by a latent between-level factor and one contextual variable, namely, the percentage of foreigners in the country relying on group threat theory. We show that the method does not necessarily rectify nonequivalence, but it can help to explain why it is absent.

Suggested Citation

  • Eldad Davidov & Hermann Dülmer & Jan Cieciuch & Anabel Kuntz & Daniel Seddig & Peter Schmidt, 2018. "Explaining Measurement Nonequivalence Using Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 47(4), pages 729-760, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:47:y:2018:i:4:p:729-760
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124116672678
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124116672678
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124116672678?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gal Ariely & Eldad Davidov, 2011. "Can we Rate Public Support for Democracy in a Comparable Way? Cross-National Equivalence of Democratic Attitudes in the World Value Survey," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 271-286, November.
    2. Davidov, Eldad, 2009. "Measurement Equivalence of Nationalism and Constructive Patriotism in the ISSP: 34 Countries in a Comparative Perspective," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 64-82, January.
    3. World Bank, 2014. "World Development Indicators 2014," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 18237.
    4. Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E M & Baumgartner, Hans, 1998. "Assessing Measurement Invariance in Cross-National Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(1), pages 78-90, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Willem E. Saris & André Pirralha & Diana Zavala-Rojas, 2018. "Testing the Comparability of Different Types of Social Indicators Across Groups," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 927-939, February.
    2. Paola Annoni & Nicholas Charron, 2019. "Measurement Assessment in Cross-Country Comparative Analysis: Rasch Modelling on a Measure of Institutional Quality," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 31-60, January.
    3. Gal Ariely & Eldad Davidov, 2011. "Can we Rate Public Support for Democracy in a Comparable Way? Cross-National Equivalence of Democratic Attitudes in the World Value Survey," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 271-286, November.
    4. Jannes Jacobsen & Lukas Marian Fuchs, 2020. "Can We Compare Conceptions of Democracy in Cross-Linguistic and Cross-National Research? Evidence from a Random Sample of Refugees in Germany," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 151(2), pages 669-690, September.
    5. Vasilev, Aleksandar, 2015. "Welfare gains from the adoption of proportional taxation in a general-equilibrium model with a grey economy: the case of Bulgaria's 2008 flat tax reform," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 48(2), pages 169-185.
    6. Muhammad Akhtaruzzaman & Shaohua Yang & Azizah Omar, 2018. "Are Resource-Rich Countries More Attractive than Countries with Good Institutions to Foreign Direct Investors in Sub-Saharan Africa?," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(6), pages 65-74, June.
    7. Khan, Syed Abdul Rehman & Zaman, Khalid & Zhang, Yu, 2016. "The relationship between energy-resource depletion, climate change, health resources and the environmental Kuznets curve: Evidence from the panel of selected developed countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 468-477.
    8. Charléty, Patricia & Romelli, Davide & Santacreu-Vasut, Estefania, 2017. "Appointments to central bank boards: Does gender matter?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 59-61.
    9. Jan Fagerberg & Martin Srholec, 2017. "Global Dynamics, Capabilities and the Crisis," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Uwe Cantner (ed.), Foundations of Economic Change, pages 83-106, Springer.
    10. Julian Aichholzer & Sylvia Kritzinger & Carolina Plescia, 2021. "National identity profiles and support for the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 293-315, June.
    11. Simplice A. Asongu, 2014. "Knowledge Economy and Financial Sector Competition in African Countries," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 26(2), pages 333-346, June.
    12. Stephanie E. Austin & Robbert Biesbroek & Lea Berrang-Ford & James D. Ford & Stephen Parker & Manon D. Fleury, 2016. "Public Health Adaptation to Climate Change in OECD Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, September.
    13. Al Zayed, Islam Sabry & Elagib, Nadir Ahmed & Ribbe, Lars & Heinrich, Jürgen, 2016. "Satellite-based evapotranspiration over Gezira Irrigation Scheme, Sudan: A comparative study," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 66-76.
    14. David Roodman, 2020. "The impact of life-saving interventions on fertility," Papers 2007.11388, arXiv.org.
    15. Dreher, Axel & Fuchs, Andreas & Langlotz, Sarah, 2019. "The effects of foreign aid on refugee flows," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 127-147.
    16. Tsukasa Kato, 2021. "Measurement Invariance in the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D) Scale among English-Speaking Whites and Asians," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-10, May.
    17. Day, Creina & Guest, Ross, 2016. "Fertility and female wages: A new link via house prices," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 121-132.
    18. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    19. Reinsberg,Bernhard Wilfried & Michaelowa,Katharina & Knack,Stephen, 2015. "Which donors, which funds ? the choice of multilateral funds by bilateral donors at the World Bank," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7441, The World Bank.
    20. Chen, Han & Huang, Ye & Shen, Huizhong & Chen, Yilin & Ru, Muye & Chen, Yuanchen & Lin, Nan & Su, Shu & Zhuo, Shaojie & Zhong, Qirui & Wang, Xilong & Liu, Junfeng & Li, Bengang & Tao, Shu, 2016. "Modeling temporal variations in global residential energy consumption and pollutant emissions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 820-829.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:47:y:2018:i:4:p:729-760. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.