Necessary but Insufficient: Why Measurement Invariance Tests Need Online Probing as a Complementary Tool

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Cross-national data production in social science research has increased dramatically in recent decades. Assessing the comparability of data is necessary before drawing substantive conclusions that are based on cross-national data. Researchers assessing data comparability typically use either quantitative methods such as multigroup confirmatory factor analysis or qualitative methods such as online probing. Because both methods have complementary strengths and weaknesses, this study applies both multigroup confirmatory factor analysis and online probing in a mixed-methods approach to assess the comparability of constructive patriotism and nationalism, two important concepts in the study of national identity. Previous measurement invariance tests failed to achieve scalar measurement invariance, which prohibits a cross-national comparison of latent means (Davidov 2009). The arrival of the 2013 ISSP Module on National Identity has encouraged a reassessment of both constructs and a push to understand why scalar invariance cannot be achieved. Using the example of constructive patriotism and nationalism, this study demonstrates how the combination of multigroup confirmatory factor analysis and online probing can uncover and explain issues related to cross-national comparability.
Original languageEnglish
Article number81(2)
Pages (from-to)447-472
JournalPublic Opinion Quarterly
Volume81
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • measurement invariance
  • Web probing
  • mixed methods
  • cross-national
  • National Identity
  • Patriotism
  • nationalism

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Necessary but Insufficient: Why Measurement Invariance Tests Need Online Probing as a Complementary Tool'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this