Search

Measurement invariance research has focused on identifying biases in test indicators measuring a latent trait across two or more groups. However, relatively little attention has been devoted to the practical implications of noninvariance. An important question is whether noninvariance in indicators or items results in differences in observed composite scores across groups. The current study introduces the Bayesian region of measurement equivalence (ROME) as a framework for visualizing and testing the combined impact of partial invariance on the group difference in observed scores. Under the proposed framework, researchers first compute the highest posterior density intervals (HPDIs)-which contain the most plausible values-for the expected group difference in observed test scores over a range of latent trait levels. By comparing the HPDIs with a predetermined range of values that is practically equivalent to zero (i.e., region of measurement equivalence), researchers can determine whether a test instrument is practically invariant. The proposed ROME method can be used for both continuous indicators and ordinal items. We illustrated ROME using five items measuring mathematics-specific self-efficacy from a nationally representative sample of 10th graders. Whereas conventional invariance testing identifies a partial strict invariance model across gender, the statistically significant noninvariant items were found to have a negligible impact on the comparison of the observed scores. This empirical example demonstrates the utility of the ROME method for assessing practical significance when statistically significant item noninvariance is found. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When estimating path coefficients among psychological constructs measured with error, structural equation modeling (SEM), which simultaneously estimates the measurement and structural parameters, is generally regarded as the gold standard. In practice, however, researchers usually first compute composite scores or factor scores, and use those as observed variables in a path analysis, for purposes of simplifying the model or avoiding model convergence issues. Whereas recent approaches, such as reliability adjustment methods and factor score regression, has been proposed to mitigate the bias induced by ignoring measurement error in composite/factor scores with continuous indicators, those approaches are not yet applicable to models with categorical indicators. In this article, we introduce the two-stage path analysis (2S-PA) with definition variables as a general framework for path modeling to handle categorical indicators, in which estimation of factor scores and path coefficients are separated. It thus allows for different estimation methods in the measurement and the structural path models and easier diagnoses of violations of model assumptions. We conducted three simulation studies, ranging from latent regression to mediation analysis with categorical indicators, and showed that 2S-PA generally produced similar estimates to those using SEM in large samples, but gave better convergence rates, less standard error bias, and better control of Type I error rates in small samples. We illustrate 2S-PA using data from a national data set, and show how researchers can implement it in Mplus and OpenMx. Possible extensions and future directions of 2S-PA are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article shows how the concept of reliability of composite scores, as defined in classical test theory, can be extended to the context of multilevel modeling. In particular, it discusses the contributions and limitations of the various level-specific reliability indices proposed by Geldhof, Preacher, and Zyphur (2014), denoted as ω̃b and ω̃w (and also α̃b and α̃w). One major limitation of those indices is that they are quantities for latent, unobserved level-specific composite scores, and are not suitable for observed composites at different levels. As illustrated using simulated data in this article, ω̃b can drastically overestimate the true reliability of between-level composite scores (i.e., observed cluster means). Another limitation is that the development of those indices did not consider the recent conceptual development on construct meanings in multilevel modeling (Stapleton & Johnson, 2019; Stapleton, Yang, & Hancock, 2016). To address the second limitation, this article defines reliability indices (ω2l, ωb, ωw, α2l, αb, αw) for three types of multilevel observed composite scores measuring various multilevel constructs: individual, configural, shared, and within-cluster. The article also shows how researchers can obtain sample point and interval estimates using the derived formulas and the provided R and Mplus code. In addition, a large-scale national data set was used to illustrate the proposed methods for estimating reliability for the three types of multilevel composite scores, and practical recommendations on when different indices should be reported are provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The research literature has paid little attention to the issue of finite population at a higher level in hierarchical linear modeling. In this article, we propose a method to obtain finite-population-adjusted standard errors of Level-1 and Level-2 fixed effects in 2-level hierarchical linear models. When the finite population at Level-2 is incorrectly assumed as being infinite, the standard errors of the fixed effects are overestimated, resulting in lower statistical power and wider confidence intervals. The impact of ignoring finite population correction is illustrated by using both a real data example and a simulation study with a random intercept model and a random slope model. Simulation results indicated that the bias in the unadjusted fixed-effect standard errors was substantial when the Level-2 sample size exceeded 10% of the Level-2 population size; the bias increased with a larger intraclass correlation, a larger number of clusters, and a larger average cluster size. We also found that the proposed adjustment produced unbiased standard errors, particularly when the number of clusters was at least 30 and the average cluster size was at least 10. We encourage researchers to consider the characteristics of the target population for their studies and adjust for finite population when appropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents brief information on estimated prevalence rates and risk factors associated with gambling disorder in Macau, a city in China. It talks about random, representative sample of 1,018 Macao residents which was analyzed with a phone poll design in January 2013. It further mentions that the study highlighted the estimated prevalence rate of gambling disorder to be 2.1 percent of the adult population in Macao.