IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v40y2011i2p279-310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measurement Equivalence of Ordinal Items: A Comparison of Factor Analytic, Item Response Theory, and Latent Class Approaches

Author

Listed:
  • MiloÅ¡ KankaraÅ¡

    (Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands, m.kankaras@uvt.nl)

  • Jeroen K. Vermunt

    (Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands)

  • Guy Moors

    (Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Three distinctive methods of assessing measurement equivalence of ordinal items, namely, confirmatory factor analysis, differential item functioning using item response theory, and latent class factor analysis, make different modeling assumptions and adopt different procedures. Simulation data are used to compare the performance of these three approaches in detecting the sources of measurement inequivalence. For this purpose, the authors simulated Likert-type data using two nonlinear models, one with categorical and one with continuous latent variables. Inequivalence was set up in the slope parameters (loadings) as well as in the item intercept parameters in a form resembling agreement and extreme response styles. Results indicate that the item response theory and latent class factor models can relatively accurately detect and locate inequivalence in the intercept and slope parameters both at the scale and the item levels. Confirmatory factor analysis performs well when inequivalence is located in the slope parameters but wrongfully indicates inequivalence in the slope parameters when inequivalence is located in the intercept parameters. Influences of sample size, number of inequivalent items in a scale, and model fit criteria on the performance of the three methods are also analyzed.

Suggested Citation

  • MiloÅ¡ KankaraÅ¡ & Jeroen K. Vermunt & Guy Moors, 2011. "Measurement Equivalence of Ordinal Items: A Comparison of Factor Analytic, Item Response Theory, and Latent Class Approaches," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 40(2), pages 279-310, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:40:y:2011:i:2:p:279-310
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124111405301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124111405301
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124111405301?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. Geoff Masters, 1982. "A rasch model for partial credit scoring," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 149-174, June.
    2. Guy Moors, 2003. "Diagnosing Response Style Behavior by Means of a Latent-Class Factor Approach. Socio-Demographic Correlates of Gender Role Attitudes and Perceptions of Ethnic Discrimination Reexamined," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 277-302, August.
    3. David Andrich, 1978. "A rating formulation for ordered response categories," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 43(4), pages 561-573, December.
    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)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laura Pasca & María Teresa Coello & Juan Ignacio Aragonés & Cynthia McPherson Frantz, 2018. "The equivalence of measures on the Connectedness to Nature Scale: A comparison between ordinal methods of DIF detection," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-11, November.
    2. Ross L. Matsueda & Kevin M. Drakulich, 2016. "Measuring Collective Efficacy," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 45(2), pages 191-230, May.
    3. Jennifer Oser & Marc Hooghe & Zsuzsa Bakk & Roberto Mari, 2023. "Changing citizenship norms among adolescents, 1999-2009-2016: A two-step latent class approach with measurement equivalence testing," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(5), pages 4915-4933, October.
    4. Cernat, Alexandru, 2015. "Using equivalence testing to disentangle selection and measurement in mixed modes surveys," Understanding Society Working Paper Series 2015-01, Understanding Society at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    5. Luisa Corrado & Majlinda Joxhe, 2016. "The Effect of Survey Design on Extreme Response Style: Rating Job Satisfaction," CEIS Research Paper 365, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 08 Feb 2016.

    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. Salzberger, Thomas & Newton, Fiona J. & Ewing, Michael T., 2014. "Detecting gender item bias and differential manifest response behavior: A Rasch-based solution," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 598-607.
    2. Timothy R. Johnson & Daniel M. Bolt, 2010. "On the Use of Factor-Analytic Multinomial Logit Item Response Models to Account for Individual Differences in Response Style," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 35(1), pages 92-114, February.
    3. P. A. Ferrari & S. Salini, 2008. "Measuring Service Quality: The Opinion of Europeans about Utilities," Working Papers 2008.36, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Chang, Hsin-Li & Yang, Cheng-Hua, 2008. "Explore airlines’ brand niches through measuring passengers’ repurchase motivation—an application of Rasch measurement," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 105-112.
    5. Ivana Bassi & Matteo Carzedda & Enrico Gori & Luca Iseppi, 2022. "Rasch analysis of consumer attitudes towards the mountain product label," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, December.
    6. Antonio Caronni & Marina Ramella & Pietro Arcuri & Claudia Salatino & Lucia Pigini & Maurizio Saruggia & Chiara Folini & Stefano Scarano & Rosa Maria Converti, 2023. "The Rasch Analysis Shows Poor Construct Validity and Low Reliability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology 2.0 (QUEST 2.0) Questionnaire," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-19, January.
    7. Hua-Hua Chang, 1996. "The asymptotic posterior normality of the latent trait for polytomous IRT models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 445-463, September.
    8. Curt Hagquist & Raili Välimaa & Nina Simonsen & Sakari Suominen, 2017. "Differential Item Functioning in Trend Analyses of Adolescent Mental Health – Illustrative Examples Using HBSC-Data from Finland," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 10(3), pages 673-691, September.
    9. Rasmus A. X. Persson, 2023. "Theoretical evaluation of partial credit scoring of the multiple-choice test item," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 81(2), pages 143-161, August.
    10. Chang, Hsin-Li & Wu, Shun-Cheng, 2008. "Exploring the vehicle dependence behind mode choice: Evidence of motorcycle dependence in Taipei," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 307-320, February.
    11. Genge, Ewa & Bartolucci, Francesco, 2019. "Are attitudes towards immigration changing in Europe? An analysis based on bidimensional latent class IRT models," MPRA Paper 94672, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Jesper Tijmstra & Maria Bolsinova, 2019. "Bayes Factors for Evaluating Latent Monotonicity in Polytomous Item Response Theory Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(3), pages 846-869, September.
    13. Salzberger, Thomas & Koller, Monika, 2013. "Towards a new paradigm of measurement in marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1307-1317.
    14. Richard N McNeely & Salissou Moutari & Samuel Arba-Mosquera & Shwetabh Verma & Jonathan E Moore, 2018. "An alternative application of Rasch analysis to assess data from ophthalmic patient-reported outcome instruments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-32, June.
    15. Gerhard Tutz & Moritz Berger, 2016. "Response Styles in Rating Scales," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 41(3), pages 239-268, June.
    16. Francesca DE BATTISTI & Giovanna NICOLINI & Silvia SALINI, 2008. "Methodological overview of Rasch model and application in customer satisfaction survey data," Departmental Working Papers 2008-04, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    17. Kuan-Yu Jin & Yi-Jhen Wu & Hui-Fang Chen, 2022. "A New Multiprocess IRT Model With Ideal Points for Likert-Type Items," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 47(3), pages 297-321, June.
    18. van der Ark, L. Andries, 2012. "New Developments in Mokken Scale Analysis in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i05).
    19. Piotr Tarka, 2013. "Model of latent profile factor analysis for ordered categorical data," Statistics in Transition new series, Główny Urząd Statystyczny (Polska), vol. 14(1), pages 171-182, March.
    20. Richard Sawatzky & Pamela Ratner & Joy Johnson & Jacek Kopec & Bruno Zumbo, 2009. "Sample Heterogeneity and the Measurement Structure of the Multidimensional Students’ Life Satisfaction Scale," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 94(2), pages 273-296, November.

    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:40:y:2011:i:2:p:279-310. 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.