ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

多群体收敛效度×多群体测量不变性检验×
领域心理测量学心理测量学
方法族Latent structureLatent structure
起源年份1981 / 20001971–1993
提出者Fornell & Larcker (convergent validity criteria); Vandenberg & Lance (multi-group extension)Jöreskog, K. G. (1971); Meredith, W. (1993)
类型Validity assessment procedureModel comparison / hypothesis testing
开创性文献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 ↗
别名cross-group convergent validity, multi-sample convergent validity, MGCFA convergent validity, AVE across groupsmeasurement invariance, factorial invariance, cross-group invariance, MI testing
相关66
摘要Multi-group convergent validity examines whether items purported to measure the same latent construct relate strongly to that construct consistently across distinct subgroups such as demographic categories, cultures, or experimental conditions. It extends single-sample convergent validity checks into a comparative multi-group confirmatory factor analysis framework.Multi-group measurement invariance testing examines whether a latent construct is measured in the same way across two or more distinct groups — such as cultures, genders, or age cohorts. It is a prerequisite for meaningful group comparisons of latent means or relationships, ensuring that observed score differences reflect true differences rather than measurement artifacts.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Multi-group convergent validity · Multi-group measurement invariance. 于 2026-06-19 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare