2009
DOI: 10.1080/15427600902911163
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measurement and the Study of Change

Abstract: Many constructs developmental scientists study cannot be directly observed. In such cases, scales are created that reflect the construct of interest. Observed behaviors are taken as manifestations of an unobserved common cause. As crucial as measurement is to understanding many psychological phenomenon, it is perhaps even more important when the goal of research is to understand how a construct changes over time. In this article we review several approaches to measurement, note features of latent variable meas… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
80
0
4

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 71 publications
(87 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
(28 reference statements)
2
80
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Partial invariance of item parameters implies that "the observed response frequencies are changing more (or less) than would be predicted by changes in the latent con struct" (p. 88; Edwards & Wirth, 2009). Thus, if item thresholds decline over time, a greater proportion of the persons in the respective age-group endorsed the item than would have been expected as a result of the average change in latent ATOA.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Partial invariance of item parameters implies that "the observed response frequencies are changing more (or less) than would be predicted by changes in the latent con struct" (p. 88; Edwards & Wirth, 2009). Thus, if item thresholds decline over time, a greater proportion of the persons in the respective age-group endorsed the item than would have been expected as a result of the average change in latent ATOA.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…However, longitudinal factorial invariance is not sufficient by itself to claim that equivalent measures reflect the same underlying construct and, as a result, is no substitute for construct validity invariance (Knight & Zerr, 2010), as we describe later. We recommend testing longitudinal factorial invariance whether the same or different manifest variables are used, because evidence of failed longitudinal factorial invariance can be informative of developmental change in the phenomena of interest (Edwards & Wirth, 2009; Widaman et al, 2010). …”
Section: Implication Of Heterotypic Continuity For Measurementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, we tested whether the self-esteem measure used showed measurement invariance across cohorts and time. Measurement invariance is essential for growth modeling because scores for different cohorts and scores at different waves are comparable only when measurement invariance holds (Edwards & Wirth, 2009;Widaman, Ferrer, & Conger, 2010). Thus, results of growth curve analyses are valid only under the assumption of measurement invariance-an assumption that is, however, rarely tested in research on self-esteem development.…”
Section: The Present Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%