Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measurement Invariance in Multilingual Survey Research: The Role of the Language of the Questionnaire

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines whether or not survey measures asked to two linguistic groups exhibit invariance within a country. It tests configural, metric and scalar invariance in a model that distinguishes the response component and the cognitive component of the measurement process using survey items. Our findings show that when differences in the response process are allowed, concepts are (partially) invariant across groups. The analysis is conducted for items measuring some aspects of political trust and satisfaction with politics for six linguistic groups including French, Dutch, Estonian, German, Ukrainian and Russian in four countries. Data comes from the European Social Survey.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alwin, D. F. (2007). Margins of error: A study of reliability in survey measurement. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables (1st ed.). New York: Wiley-Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, M. H., & Yang, K.-S. (1982). Ethnic affirmation versus cross-cultural accommodation: the variable impact of questionnaire language on Chinese Bilinguals from Hong Kong. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 13(2), 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002182013002003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butts, M. M., Vandenberg, R. J., & Williams, L. J. (2006). Investigating the susceptibility of measurement invariance tests: The effects of common method variance. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2006(1), D1–D6. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2006.27182126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M., & Watkins, D. (2003). The issue of measurement invariance revisited. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34(2), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022102250225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cieciuch, J., Davidov, E., Oberski, D., & Algesheimer, R. (2015). Testing for measurement invariance by detecting local misspecification and an illustration across online and paper-and-pencil samples. European Political Science, 14(4), 521–538. https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2015.64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. B. (2009). Many forms of culture. American Psychologist, 64(3), 194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidov, E., & De Beuckelaer, A. (2010). How harmful are survey translations? A test with Schwartz’s human values instrument. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(4), 485–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidov, E., Meuleman, B., Cieciuch, J., Schmidt, P., & Billiet, J. (2014). Measurement equivalence in cross-national research. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 55–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Social Survey. (2005). ESS Round 2: European Social Survey Round 2 Data. Bergen: Norwegian Social Science Data Services, Norway – Data Archive and distributor of ESS data.

  • European Social Survey. (2014). ESS round 7 translation guidelines. London: City University London.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Values Survey. (2010). EVS 2008 Guidelines and Recommendations. Bonn: GESIS – Technical Reports 2010/16.

  • Harkness, J. A., Villar, A., & Edwards, B. (2010). Translation, adaptation, and design. In Survey methods in multinational, multiregional, and multicultural contexts (pp. 115–140). Wiley. http://doi.org/10.1002/9780470609927.ch7.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Holleman, B. (2000). The forbid/allow asymmetry: On the cognitive mechanisms underlying wording effects in surveys. Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, J. L., & McArdle, J. J. (1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18(3–4), 117–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610739208253916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2004). LISREL 8.7 for Windows. Lincolnwood, IL. URL http://www.Ssicentral.Com/lisrel, Jöreskog, K. G., Sörbom, D. (2004). LISREL 8.7 f.

  • Keysar, B., Hayakawa, S. L., & An, S. G. (2012). The foreign-language effect thinking in a foreign tongue reduces decision biases. Psychological Science, 23(6), 661–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luna, D., Ringberg, T., & Peracchio, L. A. (2008). One individual, two identities: Frame switching among biculturals. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(2), 279–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., & Byrne, B. M. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis of multitrait-multimethod self-concept data: Between-group and within-group invariance constraints. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28(3), 313–449. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2803_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525–543. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J., Slomczynski, K., & Schoenberg, R. (1981). Assessing comparability of measurement in cross-national research: Authoritarian-conservatism in different sociocultural settings. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44(3), 178–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeskens, T., & Hooghe, M. (2007). Cross-cultural measurement equivalence of generalized trust. Evidence from the European Social Survey (2002 and 2004). Social Indicators Research, 85(3), 515–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-007-9100-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richard, M.-O., & Toffoli, R. (2009). Language influence in responses to questionnaires by bilingual respondents: A test of the Whorfian hypothesis. Journal of Business Research, 62(10), 987–994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.10.016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saris, W. E., & Gallhofer, I. (2014). Design, evaluation, and analysis of questionnaires for survey research (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Saris, W. E., Satorra, A., & Van der Veld, W. M. (2009). Testing structural equation models or detection of misspecifications? Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16(4), 561–582. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510903203433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (2003). A proposal for measuring value orientations across nations. In European Social Survey core questionnaire development, Chapter 7. http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/docs/methodology/core_ess_questionnaire/ESS_core_questionnaire_human_values.pdf.. Accessed 09 Nov 2014.

  • Schwartz, S. J., Benet-Martínez, V., Knight, G. P., Unger, J. B., Zamboanga, B. L., Des Rosiers, S. E., et al. (2014). Effects of language of assessment on the measurement of acculturation: Measurement equivalence and cultural frame switching. Psychological Assessment, 26(1), 100–114. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. J., Unger, J. B., Zamboanga, B. L., & Szapocznik, J. (2010). Rethinking the concept of acculturation: Implications for theory and research. 2American Psychologist, 65(4), 237–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinmetz, H. (2011). Estimation and comparison of latent means across cultures. In E. Davidov, P. Schmidt, & J. Billiet (Eds.), Cross-cultural analysis: Methods and applications (pp. 85–116). New York: Routledge Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmetz, H. (2013). Analyzing observed composite differences across groups: Is partial measurement invariance enough? Methodology, 9, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Kenneth, R. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Uskul, A. K., Oyserman, D., & Schwarz, N. (2010). Cultural emphasis on honor, modesty, or self-enhancement: Implications for the survey-response process. In Survey methods in multinational, multiregional, and multicultural contexts (pp. 191–201). Wiley. http://doi.org/10.1002/9780470609927.ch11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Tanzer, N. K. (2004). Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: an overview. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée/European Review of Applied Psychology, 54(2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2003.12.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Veld, W. M., & Saris, W. E. (2004). Separation of error, method effects, instability, and attitude strength. In W. E. Saris & P. M. Sniderman (Eds.), Studies in public opinion: Gauging attitudes, non-attitudes, measurement error, and change (pp. 37–59). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Veld, W. M., & Saris, W. E. (2011). Causes of generalized social trust. In E. Davidov, P. Schmidt, & J. Billiet (Eds.), Cross-cultural analysis: Methods and applications (pp. 207–247). New York: Routledge Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Veld, W. M., Saris, W. E., & Satorra, A. (2008). Judgement rule aid for structural equation models.

  • Vandenberg, R. J. (2002). Toward a further understanding of and improvement in measurement invariance methods and procedures. Organizational Research Methods, 5(2), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428102005002001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, K.-S., & Bond, M. H. (1980). Ethnic affirmation by Chinese Bilinguals. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 11(4), 411–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022180114002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavala-Rojas, D. (2012). Evaluation of the concepts ‘Trust in institutions’ and ‘Trust in authorities’ (European Social Survey Deliverable 12.4: Evaluation of questions and concepts - report 2. (RECSM Working Paper 29).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Research and Expertise Centre for Survey Methodology, C. Ramon Trias Fargas, 25-27, 08005, Barcelona, Spain

    Diana Zavala-Rojas & Willem E. Saris

Authors
  1. Diana Zavala-Rojas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Willem E. Saris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diana Zavala-Rojas.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Demographic Characteristics of the Groups in the Models

The tables below summarise the basic demographic characteristics of the groups in each study. In Table 7, for the average “year of birth” and the average “years of full-time education completed” we run t-tests to assess if the mean difference was significant or not.

Table 7 Average year of birth and average years of full-time education completed
Full size table

In the case of gender, we run proportion tests assuming unequal variance. The results are shown in Table 8.

Table 8 Average year of birth and average years of full-time education completed
Full size table

Appendix 2: Global Fit Indexes of the Models

Belgium, Political trust: DF = 19; \(\chi^{2} = 52.18 \left( {p = 0.00} \right)\); RMSEA = 0.056, 90% CI for RMSEA = (0.038; 0.074); CFI = 1.00.

Belgium, Satisfaction with politics: DF = 19; \(\chi^{2} = 25.25 \left( {p = 0.15} \right)\); RMSEA = 0.031, 90% CI for RMSEA = (0.0; 0.064); CFI = 1.00.

Estonia, Political trust: DF = 18; \(\chi^{2} = 70.87 \left( {p = 0.00} \right)\); RMSEA = 0.065, 90% CI for RMSEA = (0.049; 0.082); CFI = 1.00.

Estonia, Satisfaction with politics: DF = 18; \(\chi^{2} = 29.86 \left( {p = 0.039} \right)\); RMSEA = 0.046, 90% CI for RMSEA = (0.0; 0.076); CFI = 1.00.

Switzerland, Political trust: DF = 16; \(\chi^{2} = 59.49 \left( {p = 0.00} \right)\); RMSEA = 0.044, 90% CI for RMSEA = (0.032; 0.056); CFI = 1.00.

Switzerland, Satisfaction with politics: DF = 18; \(\chi^{2} = 36.32 \left( {p = 0.0064} \right)\); RMSEA = 0.056, 90% CI for RMSEA = (0.029; 0.082); CFI = 1.00.

Ukraine, Political trust: DF = 19; \(\chi^{2} = 36.81 \left( {p = 0.0084} \right)\); RMSEA = 0.038, 90% CI for RMSEA = (0.019; 0.056); CFI = 1.00.

Ukraine, Satisfaction with politics: DF = 17; \(\chi^{2} = 56.73 \left( {p = 0.00} \right)\); RMSEA = 0.100, 90% CI for RMSEA = (0.072; 0.13); CFI = 0.99.

Appendix 3: Survey Questions Asked to Each Linguistic Group

3.1 Political Trust

3.1.1 Belgium–Dutch

Survey items Kunt u op een schaal van 0 tot 10 aangeven hoeveel vertrouwen u persoonlijk heeft in elk van de instellingen die ik voorlees? 0 betekent dat u helemaal geen vertrouwen heeft in een instelling en 10 betekent dat u volledig vertrouwen heeft. Ten eerste …

  • Q1 …het Belgisch parlement?

  • Q2 …het rechtssysteem?

  • Q3 …politici?

Response scale time 1 0 “Helemaal geen vertrouwen” to “10 Volledig vertrouwen”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “Weet niet”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 0 “Helemaal geen vertrouwen” to “10 Volledig vertrouwen”, with numeric categories in between. No “don’t know” option was possible.

3.1.2 Belgium–French

Survey items En utilisant cette carte, dites-moi, sur une échelle de 0 à 10 quelle confiance vous faites personnellement à chacune de ces institutions. 0 signifie que vous ne faites pas confiance du tout à une institution et 10 que vous lui faites complètement confiance. Tout d’abord…

  • Q1 le Parlement fédéral belge

  • Q2 la justice

  • Q3 les hommes politiques

Response scale time 1 0 “Pas du tout confiance” to “Complètement confiance”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ne sait pas”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 0 “Pas du tout confiance” to “Complètement confiance”, with numeric categories in between. No “don’t know” option was possible.

3.1.3 Switzerland–German

Survey items Bitte sagen Sie mir, wie Sie persönlich Ihr Vertrauen in die folgenden Institutionen oder Personengruppen auf einer Skala von 0 bis 10 einstufen würden. 0 bedeutet, dass Sie in eine Institution überhaupt kein Vertrauen haben, 10 steht für Ihr volles Vertrauen. Erstens…

  • Q1 National- und Ständerat

  • Q2 Justiz

  • Q3 Politiker

Response scale time 1 0 “Pas du tout confiance” to “Complètement confiance”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “Weiss nicht”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 0 “Pas du tout confiance” to “Complètement confiance”, with numeric categories in between. No “don’t know” option was possible.

3.1.4 Switzerland–French

Survey items En utilisant cette carte, dites-moi, sur une échelle de 0 à 10, quelle confiance vous faites personnellement à chacune de ces institutions. 0 signifie que vous ne faites pas du tout confiance à une institution et 10 que vous lui faites complètement confiance.

  • Q1 Le parlement suisse (Conseil National et Conseil des Etats)

  • Q2 La justice

  • Q3 Les hommes politiques

Response scale time 1 0 “Pas du tout confiance” to “Complètement confiance”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ne sait pas”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 0 “Pas du tout confiance” to “Complètement confiance”, with numeric categories in between. No “don’t know” option was possible.

3.1.5 Estonia–Estonian

Survey items Järgnevalt palun vastake, kuivõrd Te usaldate järgmisi institutsioone, mille ma Teile ette loen. Vastamiseks kasutage 10-pallist skaalat, kus 0 tähendab, et Te seda institutsiooni üldse ei usalda ja 10 tähendab, et usaldate täielikult. Vastamiseks kasutage kaarti 8. Esiteks, kuivõrd usaldate …

  • Q1 … Eesti riigikogu?

  • Q2 … Eesti õigussüsteemi?

  • Q3 … Eesti poliitikuid?

Response scale time 1 0 “Ei usalda üldse” to “Usaldan täielikult”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “EOÖ”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 1 0 “Ei usalda üldse” to “Usaldan täielikult”, with numeric categories in between.

3.1.6 Estonia–Russian

Survey items Иcпoльзyя этy кapтoчкy co шкaлoй oт 0 дo 10, oтвeтьтe пoжaлyйcтa, нacкoлькo вы личнo мoжeтe дoвepять, кaждoй из opгaнизaций, нaзвaния кoтopыx я пpoчитaю. 0 oзнaчaeт, чтo Bы coвepшeннo нe дoвepяeтe этoй opгaнизaции, a 10 oзнaчaeт чтo Bы пoлнocтью eй дoвepяeтe. Для oтвeтa иcпoльзyйтe кapтoчкy 8. Итaк

  • Q1 … пapлaмeнтy Эcтoнии?

  • Q2 …зaкoнoдaтe льнoй (пpaвoвoй) cиcтeмe?

  • Q3 … пoлитикaм?

Response scale time 1 “0 Coвceм нe дoвepяю” to “Пoлнocт ью дoвepяю”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ЗO”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 1 “0 Coвceм нe дoвepяю” to “Пoлнocт ью дoвepяю”, with numeric categories in between.

3.1.7 Ukraine–Ukrainian

Survey items Bикopиcтoвyючи цю кapткy, бyдь лacкa, cкaжiть нacкiльки Bи ocoбиcтo дoвipяєтe opгaнiзaцiям, щo я ïx зapaз нaзвy. Oцiнiть cтyпiнь Baшoï дoвipи зa шкaлoю, дe 0 бaлiв oзнaчaє “зoвciм нe дoвipяю”, a 10 бaлiв oзнaчaє “пoвнicтю дoвipяю”. Oтжe, нacкiльки Bи дoвipяєтe КAPTКA 8.

  • Q1…Bepxoвнiй Paдi Укpaïни?

  • Q2…cyдoвo-пpaвoвiй cиcтeмi?

  • Q3…пoлiтикaм?

Response scale time 1 0 “Зoвciм нe дoвipяю” to “Пoвнicтю дoвipяю”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “BB”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 1 0 “Зoвciм нe дoвipяю” to “Пoвнicтю дoвipяю”, with numeric categories in between.

3.1.8 Ukraine–Russian

Survey items Иcпoльзyя кapтoчкy 8, cкaжитe мнe, пoжaлyйcтa, нacкoлькo Bы личнo дoвepяeтe opгaнизaциям, кoтopыe я ceйчac бyдy нaзывaть. Oцeнитe cтeпeнь cвoeгo дoвepия пo шкaлe, гдe 0 бaллoв oзнaчaeт “coвepшeннo нe дoвepяю”, a 10 бaллoв oзнaчaeт “пoлнocтью дoвepяю”. Итaк, нacкoлькo Bы дoвepяeтe

  • Q1…Bepxoвнoй Paдe Укpaины?

  • Q2…cyдeбнo-пpaвoвoй cиcтeмe?

  • Q3…пoлитикaм?

Response scale time 1 0 “Coвepшeн- нo нe дoвepяю”“to ““Пoлнocтью дoвepяю”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ЗO”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 1 0 “Coвepшeн- нo нe дoвepяю”“to ““Пoлнocтью дoвepяю”, with numeric categories in between.

3.2 Satisfaction with Politics

3.2.1 Belgium–Dutch

Survey items Q1. Hoe tevreden bent u in het algemeen met de huidige staat van de economie in België? Gebruik deze kaart.

Q2. Als u nu denkt aan de Belgische regering, hoe tevreden bent u over de manier waarop zij haar werk doet? Gebruik nog steeds deze kaart.

Q3. Hoe tevreden bent u over het algemeen met de manier waarop de democratie werkt in België? Gebruik nog steeds deze kaart.

Response scale time 1 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Zeer ontevreden” and 10 “Zeer tevreden”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “Weet niet”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Zeer ontevreden”, 5 “Niet tevreden, niet ontvreden”, 10 “Zeer tevreden”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “Weet niet”, don’t know option was possible.

3.2.2 Belgium–French

Survey items Q1. Dans l’ensemble, dans quelle mesure êtes-vous satisfait de l’état actuel de l’économie en Belge? Veuillez utiliser cette carte.

Q2. Maintenant, en pensant au gouvernement Belge (Fédéral), dans quelle mesure êtes-vous satisfait de son travail? Veuillez encore utilisez cette carte.

Q3. Et dans l’ensemble, dans quelle mesure êtes-vous satisfait de la manière dont la démocratie fonctionne en Belgique? Veuillez encore utilisez cette carte.

Response scale time 1 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Très insatisfait”, 10 “Très satisfait”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ne sait pas”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Très insatisfait”, 10 “Très satisfait”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ne sait pas”, don’t know option was possible.

3.2.3 Switzerland–German

Survey items Q1. Wie zufrieden sind Sie insgesamt mit der aktuellen wirtschaftlichen Lage in der Schweiz? Verwenden Sie bitte wieder diese Liste

Q2. Wenn Sie nun an die Schweizer Regierung denken: Wie sehr sind Sie mit der Art und Weise, wie diese die Geschicke des Landes lenkt, zufrieden? Bitte benutzen Sie noch einmal diese Liste.

Q3. Und wie sehr sind Sie mit der Art und Weise, wie die Demokratie in der Schweiz funktioniert, zufrieden? Bitte sagen Sie es mir noch einmal anhand dieser Liste.

Response scale time 1 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Äusserst unzufrieden” and 10 “Äusserst zufrieden”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “Weiss nicht”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Äusserst unzufrieden”, and 10 “Äusserst zufrieden”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “Weiss nicht”, don’t know option was possible.

3.2.4 Switzerland–French

Survey items Q1. Dans l’ensemble, dans quelle mesure êtes-vous satisfait de l’état actuel de l’économie en Suisse? Veuillez utiliser cette carte.

Q2. Maintenant, en pensant au gouvernement suisse (Conseil Fédéral), dans quelle mesure êtes-vous satisfait de son travail? Veuillez encore utilisez cette carte.

Q3. Et dans l’ensemble, dans quelle mesure êtes-vous satisfait de la manière dont la démocratie fonctionne en Suisse? Veuillez encore utilisez cette carte.

Response scale time 1 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Très insatisfait”, 10 “Très satisfait”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ne sait pas”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Très insatisfait”, 10 “Très satisfait”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ne sait pas”, don’t know option was possible.

3.2.5 Estonia–Estonian

Survey items Q1. Kui rahule olete üleüldiselt majanduse praeguse olukorraga Eestis? Kasutage kaarti #.

Q2. Mõeldes nüüd Eesti valitsusele3, kui rahul olete sellega, kuidas valitsus oma tööd teeb? Kasutage ikka veel kaarti #.

Q3. Kui rahul olete üldiselt sellega, kuidas demokraatia4 Eestis toimib? Kasutage ikka veel seda kaarti #.

Response scale time 1 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Täiesti rahulolematu” and 10 “Täiesti rahul”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “EOÖ”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Täiesti rahulolematu”, 5 “Ei ole rahulolematu ega rahul”, 10 “Täiesti rahul”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “EOÖ”, don’t know option was possible.

3.2.6 Estonia–Russian

Survey items Q1. Hacкoлькo Bы в oбщeм дoвoльны тeпepeшним cocтoяниeм экoнoмики в Эcтoнии? Иcпoльзyйтe кapтoчкy #.

Q2. Имeя в видy пpaвитeльcтвo Эcтoнии, нacкoлькo Bы дoвoльны тeм, кaк пpaвитeльcтвo выпoлняeт cвoю paбoтy? Иcпoльзyйтe вce eщe кapтoчкy #.

Q3. Hacкoлькo Bы в oбщиx чepтax дoвoльны тeм, кaк paбoтaeт дeмoкpaтия в Эcтoнии? Иcпoльзyйтe вce eщe кapтoчкy #.

Response scale time 1 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Кpaйнe нeдoвoлeн(нeдoвoльнa)” and 10 “Кpaйнe дoвoлeн(дoвoльнa)”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ЗO”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Кpaйнe нeдoвoлeн(нeдoвoльнa)”, 5 “Hи дoвoлeн(дoвoльнa) ни нeдoвoлeн(нeдoвoльнa)”, 10 “Кpaйнe дoвoлeн(дoвoльнa)”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ЗO”, don’t know option was possible.

3.2.7 Ukraine–Ukrainian

Survey items Q1. Hacкiльки Bи в цiлoмy зaдoвoлeнi тeпepiшнiм cтaнoм eкoнoмiки в Укpaïнi?

Q2. Наскільки Ви задоволені роботою уряду в Україні? Скористайтеся цією ж карткою.

Q3. I в цiлoмy, нacкiльки Bи зaдoвoлeнi тим, як пpaцює (дiє) дeмoкpaтiя в Укpaïнi? Cкopиcтaйтecя цiєю ж кapткoю.

Response scale time 1 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Зoвciм нeзaдoвoлeний” and 10 “Пoвнicтю зaдoвoлeний”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “BB”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Зoвciм нeзaдoвoлeний”, 5 “Baжкo cкaзaти, зaдoвoлeний чи нi”, 10 “Пoвнicтю зaдoвoлeний”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “BB”, don’t know option was possible.

3.2.8 Ukraine–Russian

Survey items Q1. Hacкoлькo Bы в цeлoм yдoвлeтвopeны нынeшним cocтoяниeм экoнoмики в Укpaинe? Иcпoльзyйтe этy кapтoчкy

Q2. Hacкoлькo Bы yдoвлeтвopeны paбoтoй пpaвитeльcтвa в Укpaинe? Иcпoльзyйтe этy жe кapтoчкy.

Q3. И в цeлoм, нacкoлькo Bы yдoвлeтвopeны тeм, кaк paбoтaeт (дeйcтвyeт) дeмoкpaтия в Укpaинe? Иcпoльзyйтe этy жe кapтoчкy.

Response scale time 1 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Coвepшeннo нe yдoвлeтвopeн(a)” and 10 “Пoлнocтью yдoвлeтвopeн(a)”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ЗO”, don’t know option was possible.

Response scale time 2 11-point scale with verbal labels 0 “Coвepшeннo нe yдoвлeтвopeн(a)”, 5 “Tpyднo cкaзaть, yдoвлeтвopeн или нeт”, 10 “Пoлнocтью yдoвлeтвopeн(a)”, with numeric categories in between. A spontaneous “ЗO”, don’t know option was possible.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zavala-Rojas, D., Saris, W.E. Measurement Invariance in Multilingual Survey Research: The Role of the Language of the Questionnaire. Soc Indic Res 140, 485–510 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1787-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1787-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation