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。

多层次收敛效度×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20052000
提出者Dyer, Hanges & Hall; Chen, Bliese & MathieuVandenberg & Lance
类型Measurement validity evaluationMulti-group confirmatory factor analysis procedure
开创性文献Dyer, N. G., Hanges, P. J. & Hall, R. J. (2005). Applying multilevel confirmatory factor analysis techniques to the study of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 16(1), 149–167. DOI ↗Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70. DOI ↗
别名cross-level convergent validity, multilevel measurement validity, between-level convergent validityFactorial Invariance, Measurement Equivalence, Configural-Metric-Scalar Testing, Ölçüm Değişmezliği
相关43
摘要Multilevel convergent validity evaluates whether items or scales intended to measure the same construct show coherent, strong associations at each level of a nested data structure — within individuals, within groups, and between groups. It extends classical convergent validity from single-level measurement models into the multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (ML-CFA) framework.Measurement invariance testing is a sequence of nested confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models that examines whether a psychological scale measures the same latent construct in the same way across distinct groups or time points. Systematized and popularized by Vandenberg and Lance (2000), the procedure tests a hierarchy of constraints — from identical factor patterns to identical item intercepts — so that researchers can justify meaningful group comparisons on latent means.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 1 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Multilevel Convergent Validity · Measurement Invariance. 于 2026-06-19 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare