Abstract
Media psychology increasingly focuses on comparative research questions by comparing media use and media effects across different populations and across time. Such comparisons require that the constructs of interest be measured in the same way across populations – that is, invariant measures are required. However, this methodological issue has rarely been addressed in media psychology. In this article, we explain the concept of measurement invariance and illustrate how measurement invariance can be established to compare media use and media effects across populations and over time.
References
2009). ANHCS 2009 data set. Retrieved from anhcs.asc.upenn.edu
. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
(2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
(2008). What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1005–1018. doi: 10.1037/a0013193
(1999). Testing factorial invariance across groups: A reconceptualization and proposed new method. Journal of Management, 25(1), 1–27. doi: 10.1177/014920639902500101
(2011). A meta-analysis of pathological gaming prevalence and comorbidity with mental health, academic and social problems. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 45, 1573–1578. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2011.09.005
(2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
(2011). Fearing the future of empirical psychology: Bem’s (2011) evidence of psi as a case study of deficiencies in modal research practice. Review of General Psychology, 15(4), 371–379. doi: 10.1037/a0025172
(2004). Our ‘long return to the concept of powerful mass media’: A cross-national comparative investigation of the effects of consonant media coverage. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 16(2), 144–168. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/16.2.144
(1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 552–566. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.114.3.552
(2008). Toward improving the validity and reliability of media information processing measures in surveys. Communication Methods and Measures, 2(3), 193–225. doi: 10.1080/19312450802310474
(2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74.
(1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 78–90. doi: 10.1086/209528
(2009). Testing measurement invariance using multigroup CFA: Differences between educational groups in human values measurement. Quality & Quantity, 43(4), 599–616. doi: 10.1007/s11135-007-9143-x
(2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70. doi: 10.1177/109442810031002
(2012). A longitudinal analysis of US adults’ pornography exposure: Sexual socialization, selective exposure, and the moderating role of unhappiness. Journal of Media Psychology, 24(2), 67–76. doi: 10.1027/1864-1105/a000063
(