IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/eduaab/103-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating Measurement Invariance of TALIS 2013 Complex Scales: Comparison between Continuous and Categorical Multiple-Group Confirmatory Factor Analyses

Author

Listed:
  • Deana Desa

Abstract

This paper evaluates measurement invariance of complex scales from a social survey using both a continuous approach and a categorical approach to help inform future decisions in choosing the most appropriate methods to perform the validation of complex scales. In particular, continuous and categorical approaches are compared for constructing and validating 11 complex scales across 23 countries participating in the first round of the OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS). Two invariance testing approaches were compared – 1) continuous multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis; 2) categorical multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis. Latent variable modelling was employed to account for the complex structure of the relationships between many items in each scale. The performance of the models is reported and illustrated based on the evaluation of the level of measurement invariance. All of the scales established configural and metric levels of invariance from both approaches, and three scales established scalar invariance from the categorical approach, allowing for a meaningful mean score comparison across countries. Limitations of the models compared in this study and future considerations for construction and validation of scaling complex scales are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Deana Desa, 2014. "Evaluating Measurement Invariance of TALIS 2013 Complex Scales: Comparison between Continuous and Categorical Multiple-Group Confirmatory Factor Analyses," OECD Education Working Papers 103, OECD Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:eduaab:103-en
    DOI: 10.1787/5jz2kbbvlb7k-en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/5jz2kbbvlb7k-en
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/5jz2kbbvlb7k-en?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oec:eduaab:103-en. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deoecfr.html .

    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.