ScholarGate
アシスタント

手法を比較

選択した手法を並べて確認できます。異なる行はハイライト表示されます。

多群判別的妥当性評価×多群同時確認的因子分析(MG-CFA)×
分野心理測定学心理測定学
系統Latent structureLatent structure
提唱年1981 (foundational criterion); multi-group extension 1990s–2000s1971
提唱者Fornell & Larcker (for the AVE-based criterion); extended to multi-group settings by the SEM invariance literatureKarl Jöreskog
種類Validity assessment / model comparisonMeasurement model / invariance test
原典Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. DOI ↗Vandenberg, R. J. & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70. DOI ↗
別名cross-group discriminant validity, multi-sample discriminant validity, MGDV, discriminant validity across groupsMG-CFA, multi-group CFA, measurement invariance testing, multi-sample CFA
関連56
概要Multi-group discriminant validity assessment tests whether constructs measured by a scale are empirically distinct not just in one sample but consistently across two or more groups (e.g., cultures, genders, age cohorts). It extends standard discriminant validity criteria — such as the AVE rule and the HTMT ratio — into a multi-group confirmatory factor analysis framework to verify that conceptual distinctness is replicable across subpopulations.Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis tests whether a measurement model holds equivalently across two or more groups — such as cultures, genders, or time points. By imposing increasingly stringent equality constraints and comparing model fit, it determines whether comparisons of latent mean scores are justified.
ScholarGateデータセット
  1. v1
  2. 2 出典
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 出典
  3. PUBLISHED

検索へ スライドをダウンロード

ScholarGate手法を比較: Multi-group discriminant validity · Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis. 2026-06-17に以下より取得 https://scholargate.app/ja/compare