Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance
Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance is a research paper published in Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal (2002). On theSindex it has a DataRank of 1.4. It has been cited 15,302 times.
Abstract
Abstract Measurement invariance is usually tested using Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis, which examines the change in the goodness-of-fit index (GFI) when cross-group constraints are imposed on a measurement model. Although many studies have examined the properties of GFI as indicators of overall model fit for single-group data, there have been none to date that examine how GFIs change when between-group constraints are added to a measurement model. The lack of a consensus about what constitutes significant GFI differences places limits on measurement invariance testing. We examine 20 GFIs based on the minimum fit function. A simulation under the two-group situation was used to examine changes in the GFIs (ΔGFIs) when invariance constraints were added. Based on the results, we recommend using Δcomparative fit index, ΔGamma hat, and ΔMcDonald's Noncentrality Index to evaluate measurement invariance. These three ΔGFIs are independent of both model complexity and sample size, and are not correlated with the overall fit measures. We propose critical values of these ΔGFIs that indicate measurement invariance.
›Data sources & pipeline
FAIR Checklist
Context only (not used in score)- Has DOI
FAIR checklist signals are shown for context only and do not affect DataRank scoring.
DataRank Breakdown
Base Score Contribution
1.4
From this paper's citation signal
Citation Network Contribution
0
Citation network not refreshed for this result
This paper's DataRank is currently driven only by its base citation score. Citation network data was not refreshed for this result.
Learn more about DataRank methodology →Why this DataRank?
DataRank blends this paper's own citation count with the influence of the papers that cite it. Here, roughly 100% comes from its base citations and 0% from the citation network.
- Base score B(p)
- log1p(citation_count) — grows sub-linearly, so a paper with 1,000 citations is not 10× a paper with 100.
- Network N(p)
- Σ over citers of log1p(Cq) ÷ max(outdegreeq, 1). Being cited by a highly-cited paper with few references counts most.
- Damping factor d = 0.85
- DataRank = (1−d)·B(p) + d·N(p) — the two cards above are each already multiplied by their share.
- Self-citations excluded
- Citers sharing any OpenAlex author ID with this paper are filtered out before the network sum.
Citers are pulled from OpenAlex sorted by cited_by_count:descand capped per paper, so when the cap binds we keep the highest-signal references and the score is reproducible across reruns.