Testing importance weighting: Lessons from the quality of life literature

Q2 Social Sciences
Chang‐ming Hsieh
{"title":"Testing importance weighting: Lessons from the quality of life literature","authors":"Chang‐ming Hsieh","doi":"10.1111/issj.12461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Marsh and Scalas (2018) proposed a taxonomic structural equation modelling approach to test the individually importance weighted‐average models (IWAMs) in their article published in Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 25 : 137–158. As Marsh and Scalas (2018) pointed out, IWAMs could be found in many research areas, including self‐concept, job satisfaction and quality of life (QOL) research. Based on the findings of their proposed approach, Marsh and Scalas (2018) argued that importance weights do not make a difference. The purpose of this paper is to assess the applicability of the approach developed by Marsh and Scalas (2018) and their conclusion that importance weights do not make a difference in the area of QOL, specifically subjective well‐being, research. In the research area of QOL, IWAMs have been discussed often under the topic of domain importance weighting. Findings from an analysis of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics’ Wellbeing and Daily Life Supplement data show that different domain importance weighting methods, based on different underlying (within‐domain vs between/across‐domain) perspectives, produced different results leading to different conclusions. Although the approach for testing IWAMs developed by Marsh and Scalas (2018) offered several methodological advances and strengths, its applicability to the evaluation of domain importance weighting in QOL studies is limited by its underlying (within‐domain) perspective, its assumption that domain importance can be accurately and precisely measured, and the possibility of the small effect size of domain importance. Marsh and Scalas’ (2018) findings that importance weights do not make a difference should be interpreted with caution.","PeriodicalId":35727,"journal":{"name":"International Social Science Journal","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Social Science Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/issj.12461","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Marsh and Scalas (2018) proposed a taxonomic structural equation modelling approach to test the individually importance weighted‐average models (IWAMs) in their article published in Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 25 : 137–158. As Marsh and Scalas (2018) pointed out, IWAMs could be found in many research areas, including self‐concept, job satisfaction and quality of life (QOL) research. Based on the findings of their proposed approach, Marsh and Scalas (2018) argued that importance weights do not make a difference. The purpose of this paper is to assess the applicability of the approach developed by Marsh and Scalas (2018) and their conclusion that importance weights do not make a difference in the area of QOL, specifically subjective well‐being, research. In the research area of QOL, IWAMs have been discussed often under the topic of domain importance weighting. Findings from an analysis of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics’ Wellbeing and Daily Life Supplement data show that different domain importance weighting methods, based on different underlying (within‐domain vs between/across‐domain) perspectives, produced different results leading to different conclusions. Although the approach for testing IWAMs developed by Marsh and Scalas (2018) offered several methodological advances and strengths, its applicability to the evaluation of domain importance weighting in QOL studies is limited by its underlying (within‐domain) perspective, its assumption that domain importance can be accurately and precisely measured, and the possibility of the small effect size of domain importance. Marsh and Scalas’ (2018) findings that importance weights do not make a difference should be interpreted with caution.
测试重要性加权:来自生活质量文献的教训
Marsh和Scalas(2018)在发表于《结构方程建模:多学科期刊》25:137-158的文章中提出了一种分类结构方程建模方法来测试个体重要性加权平均模型(IWAMs)。正如Marsh和Scalas(2018)指出的那样,IWAMs可以在许多研究领域找到,包括自我概念、工作满意度和生活质量(QOL)研究。基于他们提出的方法的发现,Marsh和Scalas(2018)认为重要性权重不会产生影响。本文的目的是评估Marsh和Scalas(2018)开发的方法的适用性,以及他们的结论,即重要性权重对生活质量(特别是主观幸福感)研究领域没有影响。在生活质量的研究领域中,iwam经常以领域重要性加权为主题进行讨论。对收入动态幸福感和日常生活补充数据的小组研究的分析结果表明,不同的领域重要性加权方法,基于不同的潜在视角(域内vs域间/跨域),产生不同的结果,从而得出不同的结论。尽管Marsh和Scalas(2018)开发的测试iwam的方法提供了一些方法上的进步和优势,但其对生活质量研究中领域重要性权重评估的适用性受到其潜在(领域内)视角的限制,其假设领域重要性可以准确和精确地测量,以及领域重要性效应大小较小的可能性。Marsh和Scalas(2018)的研究结果表明,重要性权重不会产生影响,应谨慎解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Social Science Journal
International Social Science Journal Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The International Social Science Journal bridges social science communities across disciplines and continents with a view to sharing information and debate with the widest possible audience. The ISSJ has a particular focus on interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary work that pushes the boundaries of current approaches, and welcomes both applied and theoretical research. Originally founded by UNESCO in 1949, ISSJ has since grown into a forum for innovative review, reflection and discussion informed by recent and ongoing international, social science research. It provides a home for work that asks questions in new ways and/or employs original methods to classic problems and whose insights have implications across the disciplines and beyond the academy. The journal publishes regular editions featuring rigorous, peer-reviewed research articles that reflect its international and heterodox scope.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信