This article summarizes the key finding of a study that (a) tests the measurement invariance (MI) of the popular Students’ Approaches to Learning instrument (Programme for International Student Assessment [PISA]) across ethnic/cultural groups within a country and (b) discusses implications for research focusing on the role of affective measures in immigrant and minority education. The Students’ Approaches to Learning instrument captures some of the most prominent constructs in educational psychology. Results indicate significant variation in MI across various affective scales and across cultural groups. This study demonstrates that even if MI for specific scales is established across countries, it is still necessary to test MI across cultural groups within a country. We then discuss implications of MI across immigrant groups and highlight the relevance of MI testing for all research studying the affective conditions of educational achievement among immigrant students or the educational motivation of minority students.
AlbaR. D. (2008). Why we still need a theory of mainstream assimilation. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 48, 37-56.
2.
AveryD. R.TonidandelS.ThomasK. M.JohnsonC. D.MackD. A. (2007). Assessing the multigroup ethnic identity measure for measurement equivalence across racial and ethnic groups. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 877-888.
3.
BecksteadJ. W.YangC.-Y.LengacherC. A. (2008). Assessing cross-cultural validity of scales: A methodological review and illustrative example. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45, 110-119.
4.
BerryJ. W.PoortingaY. H.SegallM. H.DasenP. R. (2002). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BoekaertsM. (1997). Self-regulated learning: A new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7, 161-186.
6.
BrownT. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
7.
BrowneM. W.CudeckR. (2003). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In BollenK. A.LongJ. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
8.
ByrneB. M. (2008). Testing for multigroup equivalence of a measuring instrument: A walk through the process. Psicothema, 20, 872-882.
9.
ByrneB. M.ShavelsonR. J.MuthénB. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456-466.
10.
ByrneB. M.VandeVijverF. J. R. (2010). Testing for measurement and structural equivalence in large-scale cross-cultural studies: Addressing the issue of nonequivalence. International Journal of Testing, 10, 107-132.
11.
ByrneB. M.WatkinsD. (2003). The issue of measurement invariance revisited. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 155-175.
12.
CapraraG. V.VecchioneM.AlessandriG.GerbinoM.BarbaranelliC. (2011). The contribution of personality traits and self-efficacy beliefs to academic achievement: A longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 78-96.
13.
CheungG. W.RensvoldR. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255.
14.
ChristensenG. S.SegeritzM. (2008). An international perspective on student achievement. In StiftungBertelsmann (Ed.), Immigrant students can succeed (pp. 11-33). Gütersloh, Germany: Bertelsmann Stiftung.
15.
FontaineJ. R. J. (2011). A fourfold conceptual framework for cultural and cross-cultural psychology: Relativism, construct universalism, repertoire universalism and absolutism. In VanF. J. R.VijverDeChasiotisA.BreugelmansS. M. (Eds.), Fundamental questions in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 165-189). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
16.
GrahamJ. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549-576.
17.
HallerW.PortesA.LynchS. M. (2011). Dreams fulfilled, dreams shattered: Determinants of segmented assimilation in the second generation. Social Forces, 89, 733-762.
18.
HornJ. L.McArdleJ. J. (1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18, 117-144.
19.
HuL.-t.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
20.
JohnsonT.KulesaP.LlcI.ChoY. I.ShavittS. (2005). The relationship between culture and response styles: Evidence from 19 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 264-277.
21.
KaoG.TiendaM. (1995). Optimism and achievement: The educational performance of immigrant youth. Social Science Quarterly, 76, 1-19.
22.
LittleR. J. A.RubinD. B. (2002). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York, NY: Wiley.
23.
LittleT. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS)analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 53-76.
24.
MarcoulidesG. A.EmrichC.MarcoulidesL. D. (2008). Testing for multigroup invariance of the computer anxiety scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 325-334.
25.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
26.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (2010). Cultures and selves: A cycle of mutual constitution. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 420-430.
27.
MarshH. W.CravenR. G.HinkleyJ. W.DebusR. L. (2003). Evaluation of the big-two factor theory of academic motivation orientations: An evaluation of jingle-jangle fallacies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38, 189-224.
28.
MarshH. W.HauK.-T.ArteltC.BaumertJ.PescharJ. L. (2006). OECD’s brief self-report measure of educational psychology’s most useful affective constructs: Cross-cultural, psychometric comparisons across 25 countries. International Journal of Testing, 6, 311-360.
29.
MarshH. W.O’MaraA. (2008). Reciprocal effects between academic self-concept, self-esteem, achievement, and attainment over seven adolescent years: Unidimensional and multidimensional perspectives of self-concept. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 543-552.
30.
MarshH. W.TrautweinU.LüdtkeO.KöllerO.BaumertJ. (2006). Integration of multidimensional self-concept and core personality constructs: Construct validation and relations to well-being and achievement. Journal of Personality, 74, 403-456.
31.
MeadeA. W.JohnsonE. C.BraddyP. W. (2008). Power and sensitivity of alternative fit indices in tests of measurement invariance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 568-592.
MylonasK. (2009). Statistical analysis techniques based on cross-cultural research methods: Cross-cultural paradigms and intra-country comparisons. Psychology, 16, 185-204.
34.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2001). Knowledge and skills for life: First results from PISA 2000. Paris, France: Author.
35.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2005). PISA 2003: Technical report. Paris, France: Author.
36.
PajaresF.MillerM. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 193-203.
37.
PescharJ. L.VeenstraR.MolenaarI. W.BoomsmaA.HuismanM.van der WalM. (1999a). Synthesis report: Self-regulated learning as a cross-curricular competency: The construction of instruments in 22 countries for the PISA main study 2000. Groningen, Netherlands: University of Groningen.
38.
PescharJ. L.VeenstraR.MolenaarI. W.BoomsmaA.HuismanM.van der WalM. (1999b). Technical report: Self-regulated learning as a cross-curricular competency: The construction of instruments in 22 countries for the PISA main study 2000. Groningen, Netherlands: University of Groningen.
39.
PintrichP. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In BoekaertsM.PintrichP. R.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
40.
RaykovT.MarcoulidesG. A.LiC.-H. (2012). Measurement invariance for latent constructs in multiple populations: A critical view and refocus. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72, 954-974.
41.
RocheC.KupermincG. P. (2012). Acculturative stress and school belonging among Latino youth. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 34, 61-76.
42.
RyanA. M.WestB. J.CarrJ. Z. (2003). Effects of the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01 on employee attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 647-659.
43.
RyanR. M.DeciE. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.
44.
SegeritzM.WalterO.StanatP. (2010). Muster des schulischen Erfolgs von jugendlichen Migranten in Deutschland: Evidenz für segmentierte Assimilation? [Patterns of educational success of young immigrants in Germany: Evidence for segmented assimilation?]. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 62, 113-138.
45.
ShavelsonR. J.ByrneB. M. (1987). Adolescent self-concept: Testing the assumption of equivalent structure across gender. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 365-385.
46.
SilviaP. J. (2006). Exploring the psychology of interest. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
47.
SimonH. A.EricssonK. A. (1998). How to study thinking in everyday life: Contrasting think-aloud protocols with descriptions and explanations of thinking. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5, 178-186.
48.
SitzmannT.ElyK. (2011). A meta-analysis of self-regulated learning in work-related training and educational attainment: What we know and where we need to go. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 421-442.
49.
StanatP.ChristensenG. S. (2006). Where immigrant students succeed: A comparative review of performances and engagement in PISA 2003. Paris, France: OECD.
50.
StanatP.SegeritzM.ChristensenG. S. (2010). Schulbezogene Motivation und Aspiration von Schülerinnen und Schülern mit Migrationshintergrund.[Educational motivations and aspirations of students with an immigrant background.] In BosW.KliemeE.KöllerO. (Eds.), Schulische Lerngelegenheiten und Kompetenzentwicklung. Festschrift für Jürgen Baumert[Learning opportunities and development of competencies in the school context] (pp. 31-57). Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
51.
TakleM. (2011). (Spät) Aussiedler: From Germans to immigrants. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 17, 161-181.
52.
TwengeJ. M.CrockerJ. (2002). Race and self-esteem: Meta-analyses comparing Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians and comment on Gray-Little and Hafdahl (2000). Psychological Bulletin, 128, 371-408.
53.
VandeVijverF. J. R.LeungK. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54.
VandeVijverF. J. R.LeungK. (2011). Equivalence and bias: A review of concepts, models, and data analytic procedures. In MatsumotoD.vanF. J.Vijverde (Eds.), Cross-cultural research methods in psychology (pp. 17-45). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
55.
VandeVijverF. J. R.PoortingaY. H. (2002). Structural equivalence in multilevel research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 141-156.
56.
VandenbergR. J.LanceC. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4-70.
57.
WichertsJ. M.DolanC. V. (2010). Measurement invariance in confirmatory factor analysis: An illustration using IQ test performance of minorities. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 29(3), 39-47.
58.
WigfieldA.EcclesJ. S.RodriguezD. (1998). The development of children’s motivation in school contexts. Review of Research in Education, 23, 73-118.
59.
WuA. D.LiZ.ZumboB. D. (2007). Decoding the meaning of factorial invariance and updating the practice of multi-group confirmatory factor analysis: A demonstration with TIMSS data. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(3), 1-26.
60.
YuanK.-H.BentlerP. M. (2000). Three likelihood-based methods for mean and covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Sociological Methodology, 30, 165-200.
61.
ZimmermanB. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In BoekaertsM.PintrichP. R.ZeidnerM. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
