组织研究中的测量等效:什么是旧的，什么是新的，下一步是什么?

IF 8.9 2区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Organizational Research Methods Pub Date : 2021-12-17 DOI:10.1177/10944281211056524

Ajay V. Somaraju, Christopher D. Nye, J. Olenick

{"title":"组织研究中的测量等效:什么是旧的，什么是新的，下一步是什么?","authors":"Ajay V. Somaraju, Christopher D. Nye, J. Olenick","doi":"10.1177/10944281211056524","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study of measurement equivalence has important implications for organizational research. Nonequivalence across groups or over time can affect the results of a study and the conclusions that are drawn from it. As a result, the review paper by Vandenberg & Lance (2000) has been highly cited and has played an important role in understanding the measurement of organizational constructs. However, that paper is now 20 years old, and a number of advances have been made in the application and interpretation of measurement equivalence (ME) since its publication. Therefore, the goal of the present paper is to provide an updated review of ME techniques that describes recent advances in testing for ME and proposes a taxonomy of potential sources of nonequivalence. Finally, we articulate recommendations for applying these newer methods and consider future directions for measurement equivalence research in the organizational literature.","PeriodicalId":19689,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Research Methods","volume":"25 1","pages":"741 - 785"},"PeriodicalIF":8.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Review of Measurement Equivalence in Organizational Research: What's Old, What's New, What's Next?\",\"authors\":\"Ajay V. Somaraju, Christopher D. Nye, J. Olenick\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10944281211056524\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The study of measurement equivalence has important implications for organizational research. Nonequivalence across groups or over time can affect the results of a study and the conclusions that are drawn from it. As a result, the review paper by Vandenberg & Lance (2000) has been highly cited and has played an important role in understanding the measurement of organizational constructs. However, that paper is now 20 years old, and a number of advances have been made in the application and interpretation of measurement equivalence (ME) since its publication. Therefore, the goal of the present paper is to provide an updated review of ME techniques that describes recent advances in testing for ME and proposes a taxonomy of potential sources of nonequivalence. Finally, we articulate recommendations for applying these newer methods and consider future directions for measurement equivalence research in the organizational literature.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19689,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Research Methods\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"741 - 785\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Research Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281211056524\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281211056524","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 11

摘要

度量等价性研究对组织研究具有重要意义。跨群体或随着时间的推移，不对等会影响研究的结果和从中得出的结论。因此，Vandenberg&Lance（2000）的综述论文被高度引用，并在理解组织结构的测量方面发挥了重要作用。然而，这篇论文已经发表了20年，自发表以来，在测量等效的应用和解释方面取得了许多进展。因此，本文的目标是对ME技术进行最新的综述，描述ME测试的最新进展，并提出非等价性潜在来源的分类法。最后，我们阐明了应用这些新方法的建议，并考虑了组织文献中测量等效研究的未来方向。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

A Review of Measurement Equivalence in Organizational Research: What's Old, What's New, What's Next?

The study of measurement equivalence has important implications for organizational research. Nonequivalence across groups or over time can affect the results of a study and the conclusions that are drawn from it. As a result, the review paper by Vandenberg & Lance (2000) has been highly cited and has played an important role in understanding the measurement of organizational constructs. However, that paper is now 20 years old, and a number of advances have been made in the application and interpretation of measurement equivalence (ME) since its publication. Therefore, the goal of the present paper is to provide an updated review of ME techniques that describes recent advances in testing for ME and proposes a taxonomy of potential sources of nonequivalence. Finally, we articulate recommendations for applying these newer methods and consider future directions for measurement equivalence research in the organizational literature.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Organizational Research Methods Multiple-

CiteScore

23.20

自引率

3.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Organizational Research Methods (ORM) was founded with the aim of introducing pertinent methodological advancements to researchers in organizational sciences. The objective of ORM is to promote the application of current and emerging methodologies to advance both theory and research practices. Articles are expected to be comprehensible to readers with a background consistent with the methodological and statistical training provided in contemporary organizational sciences doctoral programs. The text should be presented in a manner that facilitates accessibility. For instance, highly technical content should be placed in appendices, and authors are encouraged to include example data and computer code when relevant. Additionally, authors should explicitly outline how their contribution has the potential to advance organizational theory and research practice.