Journals / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2020 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 4

A Systematic Review of Research Articles on Measurement Invariance in Education and Psychology

Pages
607–630
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the results of the bibliometric analysis, on the other hand, only Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis was mostly conducted on the Mplus software package.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to reveal the trends in the related field by examining the researches evaluating the measurement invariance in education and psychology between 2008-2019.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Accordingly, 99 articles published in three journals that were selected using the purposive sampling method among the journals indexed on Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)were analyzed within the scope of the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results of the bibliometric analysis, on the other hand, only Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis was mostly conducted on the Mplus software package.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2008-2019 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Measurement invariance · Confirmatory Factor Analysis · Content analysis

Abstract

This study aims to reveal the trends in the related field by examining the researches evaluating the measurement invariance in education and psychology between 2008-2019. Accordingly, 99 articles published in three journals that were selected using the purposive sampling method among the journals indexed on Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)were analyzed within the scope of the study. As a result of the content analysis, in the studies investigating the measurement invariance, typical response tests were observed to be the most frequently employed tests, sample sizes often included 1501 or greater number of subjects, and data were mostly collected from students. The measurement invariance of the tests was mostly analyzed in terms of the gender variable. According to the results of the bibliometric analysis, on the other hand, only Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis was mostly conducted on the Mplus software package. In the studies, the most cited article was "Cheung and Rensvold (2002)", the author was "Cheung, G. W.", and the journal was "Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal". According to the results of the analysis, studies, references, and keywords including factor analysis were among the most commonly used group, which denotes that factor analysis has a crucial role in invariance measurement analyses.

Özet

This study aims to reveal the trends in the related field by examining the researches evaluating the measurement invariance in education and psychology between 2008-2019. Accordingly, 99 articles published in three journals that were selected using the purposive sampling method among the journals indexed on Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)were analyzed within the scope of the study. As a result of the content analysis, in the studies investigating the measurement invariance, typical response tests were observed to be the most frequently employed tests, sample sizes often included 1501 or greater number of subjects, and data were mostly collected from students. The measurement invariance of the tests was mostly analyzed in terms of the gender variable. According to the results of the bibliometric analysis, on the other hand, only Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis was mostly conducted on the Mplus software package. In the studies, the most cited article was "Cheung and Rensvold (2002)", the author was "Cheung, G. W.", and the journal was "Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal". According to the results of the analysis, studies, references, and keywords including factor analysis were among the most commonly used group, which denotes that factor analysis has a crucial role in invariance measurement analyses.

🔖

Cite This Article

Alatlı, B. (2022). A Systematic Review of Research Articles on Measurement Invariance in Education and Psychology. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 4, 607–630. https://ajindex.com/articles/540140

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Acar, G. M. & Özkan, Ö. Y. (2015). Türkiye’deki eğitim alanında yayımlanan bilimsel dergilerde ölçek geliştirme ve uyarlama konulu makalelerin incelenmesi. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(52), 23-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.17755/esosder.54872
  2. Akaydın, Ş. & Çeçen M. A. (2015). Okuma becerisiyle ilgili makaleler üzerine bir içerik analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 40(178), 183-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.4139 American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, NationalCouncil on Mea¬surement in Education [AERA/APA/NCME]. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington: American Psychological Association. Arıcı, F., Yıldırım, P., Çalıklar, Ş., & Yılmaz, R. M. (2019). Research trends in the use of augmentedreality in science education: Content and bibliometric mapping analysis. Computers & Education, 142(December), 103647. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103647
  3. Arık, R. S., & Türkmen, M. (2009). Eğitim bilimleri alanında yayınlanan bilimsel dergilerde yer alan makalelerin incelenmesi. Retrieved November 11, 2019, from http://www.eab.org.tr/eab/2009/pdf/488.pdf
  4. Aslan, C., & Özkubat, U. (2019). Ulusal özel eğitim kongresi bildirilerindeki araştırma eğilimleri: Bir İçerik analizi. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 23(2), 535-554.
  5. Aydın, A., Erdağ, C., & Sarıer, Y. (2010). Eğitim yönetimi alanında yayınlanan makalelerin konu, yöntem ve sonuçlar açısından karşılaştırılması. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 39, 37-58.
  6. Aypay, A., Coruk, A., Yazgan, D., Kartal, O., Çağatay, M., Tuncer, B., & Emran, B. (2010). The status of research in educational administration: An analysis of educationaladministrationjournals, 1999-2007. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 39, 59-77.
  7. Aztekin, S., & Taşpınar Şener, Z. (2015). Türkiye’de matematik eğitimi alanındaki matematiksel modelleme araştırmalarının içerik analizi: Bir meta-sentez çalışması, Eğitim ve Bilim, 40(178), 139-161. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.4125
  8. Bacanak, A., Karamustafaoğlu, S., Değirmenci, S., & Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2011). E-dergilerde yayınlanan fen eğitimi makaleleri: Yöntem analizi. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 8(1), 119 132. Baki, A., Güven, B., Karataş, İ., Akkan, Y., & Çakıroğlu, Ü. (2011). Türkiye'deki matematik eğitimi araştırmalarındaki eğitimler:1998 ile 2007 yılları arası. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40, 57-68.
  9. Bastos, J. L., Celeste, R. K., Faerstein, E., & Barros, A. J. D. (2010). Racial discr