Researchers often compare groups of individuals on psychological variables. When comparing groups an assumption is made that the instrument measures the same psychological construct in all groups. If this assumption holds, the comparisons are valid and differences/similarities between groups can be meaningfully interpreted. If this assumption does not hold, comparisons and interpretations are not fully meaningful. The establishment of measurement invariance is a prerequisite for meaningful comparisons across groups. This paper first reviews the importance of equivalence in psychological research, and then the main theoretical and methodological issues regarding measurement invariance within the framework of confirmatory factor analysis. A step-by-step empirical example of measurement invariance testing is provided along with syntax examples for fitting such models in LISREL.Key words: measurement invariance, cross-cultural research, confirmatory factor analysis, LISREL. RESUMENLos investigadores a menudo comparan grupos de individuos en diferentes variables psicológicas. Cuando se comparan grupos se asume que el instrumento usado para la medición da cuenta de los mismos constructos psicológicos en todos los grupos. Si tal suposición es cierta, las comparaciones son válidas y las diferencias/similitudes entre los grupos pueden ser interpretadas apropiadamente. Si tal suposición no es cierta, las comparaciones e interpretaciones pierden validez. El establecimiento de la invariancia en las mediciones es un prerrequisito esencial para lograr comparaciones apropiadas entre grupos. En este artículo se presenta primero la importancia de la invariancia en investigación psicológica y luego se presentan asuntos teóricos y metodológicos en relación con la invariancia en las mediciones dentro del marco del análisis factorial confirmatorio. Se presenta un ejemplo en LISREL que ejemplifica la prueba de invariancia de mediciones.Palabras clave: invariancia en las mediciones, investigación transcultural, análisis factorial confirmatorio, LISREL

Author ContributionsCGS and FKB contributed equally to the article; they conceptualized and designed the study and planned the pre-registration. CGS processed the data and conducted the analyses. FKB with LMG and NCO conducted the literature review and drafted the manuscript, with significant input from CGS, NS, MSW, CHJL, PM, JB, DO, TLM, CAH, IMD, and RVJ. NS and LMG prepared the figures.

We conducted preregistered replications of 28 classic and contemporary published findings, with protocols that were peer reviewed in advance, to examine variation in effect magnitudes across samples and settings. Each protocol was administered to approximately half of 125 samples that comprised 15,305 participants from 36 countries and territories. Using the conventional criterion of statistical significance ( p < .05), we found that 15 (54%) of the replications provided evidence of a statistically significant effect in the same direction as the original finding. With a strict significance criterion ( p < .0001), 14 (50%) of the replications still provided such evidence, a reflection of the extremely high-powered design. Seven (25%) of the replications yielded effect sizes larger than the original ones, and 21 (75%) yielded effect sizes smaller than the original ones. The median comparable Cohen’s ds were 0.60 for the original findings and 0.15 for the replications. The effect sizes were small (< 0.20) in 16 of the replications (57%), and 9 effects (32%) were in the direction opposite the direction of the original effect. Across settings, the Q statistic indicated significant heterogeneity in 11 (39%) of the replication effects, and most of those were among the findings with the largest overall effect sizes; only 1 effect that was near zero in the aggregate showed significant heterogeneity according to this measure. Only 1 effect had a tau value greater than .20, an indication of moderate heterogeneity. Eight others had tau values near or slightly above .10, an indication of slight heterogeneity. Moderation tests indicated that very little heterogeneity was attributable to the order in which the tasks were performed or whether the tasks were administered in lab versus online. Exploratory comparisons revealed little heterogeneity between Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) cultures and less WEIRD cultures (i.e., cultures with relatively high and low WEIRDness scores, respectively). Cumulatively, variability in the observed effect sizes was attributable more to the effect being studied than to the sample or setting in which it was studied.

No abstract

No abstract

Este artigo descreve a teoria funcionalista dos valores humanos e a relaciona com variáveis importantes para as organizações. A teoria identifica duas funções consensuais dos valores: os valores guiam as ações e dão expressão às necessidades humanas. A primeira função diferencia três tipos de orientações valorativas (social, central e pessoal), enquanto a segunda função classifica os valores como humanitários ou materialistas. A união dessas duas funções origina seis subfunções de valores (experimentação, realização, existência, suprapessoal, interacional e normativa). Três estudos empíricos são apresentados, examinando a influência das subfunções no comprometimento organizacional de funcionários de uma empresa privada (Estudo 1), no bem-estar afetivo de funcionários de uma prefeitura (Estudo 2) e na fadiga e burnout de enfermeiros, médicos e psicólogos (Estudo 3). Os resultados demonstram a influência dos valores nessas variáveis e são discutidos de acordo com a teoria funcionalista dos valores.

SignificanceBiologists and social scientists have long tried to understand why some societies have more fluid and open interpersonal relationships—differences in relational mobility—and how those differences influence individual behaviors. We measure relational mobility in 39 societies and find that relationships are more stable and hard to form in east Asia, North Africa, and the Middle East, while they are more fluid in the West and Latin America. Results show that relationally mobile cultures tend to have higher interpersonal trust and intimacy. Exploring potential causes, we find greater environmental threats (like disease and warfare) and sedentary farming are associated with lower relational mobility. Our society-level index of relational mobility for 39 societies is a resource for future studies.

Copyright and reuse:Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University.Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available.Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way.Article accepted for publication in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000175 © American Psychological Association (APA) This article may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. contrast between independence and interdependence does not adequately capture the diverse models of selfhood that prevail in different world regions. Cultural groups emphasize different ways of being both independent and interdependent, depending on individualism-collectivism, national socioeconomic development, and religious heritage. Our seven-dimensional model will allow future researchers to test more accurately the implications of cultural models of selfhood for psychological processes in diverse ecocultural contexts.Keywords: CULTURE; SELF-CONSTRUALS; INDEPENDENCE-INTERDEPENDENCE Twenty-five years ago, Markus and Kitayama (1991) published their classic article on culture and the self, proposing that people in different parts of the world tend to construe themselves in two fundamentally different ways. They argued that Western cultures are unusual in promoting an independent view of the self as bounded, unitary, stable, and separate from the social context, whereas cultures in other parts of the world emphasize an interdependent view of the self as closely connected to others, fluid, and contextually embedded. They proposed that people with independent self-construals would strive for self-expression, uniqueness, and self-actualization, basing their actions on personal thoughts, feelings, and goals. In contrast, people with interdependent self-construals would strive to fit in and maintain social harmony, basing their actions on situationally defined norms and expectations.Markus and Kitayama's (1991) proposals had a dramatic impact on social, personality and developmental psychology, challenging ethnocentric assumptions, drawing attention to cultural diversity, and providing conceptual tools for theorizing about it. Social and personality psychologists used measures and manipulations of self-construals to predict numerous outcomes: cognitive styles, well-being, self-regulation, selfesteem, communication styles, social anxiety, and pro...