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。
| 多群体项目分析× | 多组验证性因子分析 (MG-CFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 心理测量学 | 心理测量学 |
| 方法族 | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| 起源年份≠ | 1986 | 1971 |
| 提出者≠ | Classical test theory tradition; systematised by Crocker & Algina (1986) | Karl Jöreskog |
| 类型≠ | Comparative item-level analysis | Measurement model / invariance test |
| 开创性文献≠ | Crocker, L. & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory. Holt, Rinehart and Winston. ISBN: 978-0030616341 | 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 | MGIA, group-comparative item analysis, subgroup item analysis, cross-group item analysis | MG-CFA, multi-group CFA, measurement invariance testing, multi-sample CFA |
| 相关 | 6 | 6 |
| 摘要≠ | Multi-group item analysis computes classical item statistics — difficulty, discrimination, and corrected item-total correlations — separately for each subgroup in a sample and then compares those statistics across groups. It is a standard diagnostic step in scale development and test fairness evaluation, revealing items that behave differently for men versus women, across age cohorts, or across cultural groups before more formal DIF testing. | 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数据集 ↗ |
|
|