i-manager Publications

Examining Measurement Invariance of Different SWLS Measurement Models According to Gender

Sena Doğruyol*, Nezaket Bilge Uzun**, Bilge Bakir Aygar***, Asena Yücedağlar****

*-**** Mersin University, Turkey.

Periodicity:January - March'2024
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.17.3.19823

Abstract

The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), a popular and widely used measurement tool in cross-cultural research, evaluates life satisfaction. Even though numerous studies have demonstrated factorial validity across a range of samples and cultures, the topic of factorial invariance across various subgroups is still up for debate. There are inconsistencies regarding the structure of the life satisfaction scale in descriptive and relational studies. This study aimed to combine these contentious models' (Model 1: single-factor model, Model 2: modified single-factor model and Model 3: twofactor model) measurement invariance with the findings of Multi Group Confirmatory Factor Analyses (MGCFA) carried out among various gender subgroups in Turkish culture with a sample of 690 participants. As a result of the research, all models met the model data goodness of fit according to the gender subgroup. But measurement-invariance decisions carried out according to different models differed.

Keywords

Measurement Invariance, Satisfaction with Life Scale, Factorial Validity, Factorial Invariance, Multi Group Confirmatory Factor Analyses, Turkish Culture.

How to Cite this Article?

Doğruyol, S., Uzun, N. B., Aygar, B. B., and Yücedağlar, A. (2024). Examining Measurement Invariance of Different SWLS Measurement Models According to Gender. i-manager’s Journal on Educational Psychology, 17(3), 8-20. https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.17.3.19823

References

[1]. Appleton, S., & Song, L. (2008). Life satisfaction in urban China: Components and determinants. World Development, 36(11), 2325-2340.

[2]. Arrindell, W. A., Heesink, J., & Feij, J. A. (1999). The satisfaction with life scale (SWLS): Appraisal with 1700 healthy young adults in The Netherlands. Personality and Individual Differences, 26(5), 815-826.

[3]. Atienza, F. L., Balaguer, I., & Garcı’a-Merita, M. L. (2003). Satisfaction with life scale: Analysis of factorial invariance across sexes. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(6), 1255-1260.

[4]. Bai, X., Wu, C., Zheng, R., & Ren, X. (2011). The psychometric evaluation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale using a nationally representative sample of China. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12, 183-197.

[5]. Başusta, N.B., & Gelbal, S. (2015). Testing measurement invariance in intergroup comparisons: PISA student survey example. Hacettepe University Faculty of Education Journal, 30 (4), 80-90.

[6]. Baumgartner, H., & Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: A review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(2), 139-161.

[7]. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588-606.

[8]. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230-258.

[9]. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456 –466.

[10]. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464-504.

[11]. Chen, F. F., Sousa, K. H., & West, S. G. (2005). Teacher's corner: Testing measurement invariance of second-order factor models. Structural Equation Modeling, 12(3), 471-492.

[12]. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2000). Assessing extreme and acquiescence response sets in crosscultural research using structural equations modeling. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31(2), 187-212.

[13]. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233-255.

[14]. Çivitçi, A. (2012). Relationships between general life satisfaction and psychological needs in university students. Çukurova University Social Sciences Institute Journal, 21 (2), 321-336.

[15]. Clench-Aas, J., Nes, R. B., Dalgard, O. S., & Aarø, L. E. (2011). Dimensionality and measurement invariance in the Satisfaction with Life Scale in Norway. Quality of Life Research, 20, 1307-1317.

[16]. Dağli, A., & Baysal, N. (2016). Adaptation of the life satisfaction scale into Turkish: Validity and reliability study. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 15 (59), 1250-1262.

[17]. Diener, E. (2009). Introduction—The science of wellbeing: Reviews and theoretical articles by Ed Diener. In Diener, E. (Ed). The science of well-being: The collected works (pp. 1-10). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

[18]. Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75.

[19]. Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 403-425.

[20]. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276-302.

[21]. Dimitrov, D. M. (2010). Testing for factorial invariance in the context of construct validation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 43(2), 121- 149.

[22]. Emerson, S. D., Guhn, M., & Gadermann, A. M. (2017). Measurement invariance of the Satisfaction with Life Scale: Reviewing three decades of research. Quality of Life Research, 26, 2251-2264.

[23]. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.

[24]. Glaesmer, H., Grande, G., Braehler, E., & Roth, M. (2011). The German version of the satisfaction with life scale (SWLS). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27, 127-132.

[25]. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

[26]. Horn, J. L., & McArdle, J. J. (1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18(3), 117-144.

[27]. Horn, J. L., McArdle, J. J., & Mason, R. (1983). When is invariance not invarient: A practical scientist's look at the ethereal concept of factor invariance. Southern Psychologist. 1(4), 179–188.

[28]. Hultell, D., & Gustavsson, J. P. (2008). A psychometric evaluation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in a Swedish nationwide sample of university students. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(5), 1070-1079.

[29]. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS Command Language. Scientific software international, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

[30]. Jovanović, V. (2019). Adolescent life satisfaction: The role of negative life events and the Big Five personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109548.

[31]. Kim, E. S., Cao, C., Wang, Y., & Nguyen, D. T. (2017). Measurement invariance testing with many groups: A comparison of five approaches. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 24(4), 524-544.

[32]. Kline, P. (1994). An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis. Abingdon-on-Thames, Routledge.

[33]. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. Guilford publications.

[34]. Korkmaz, M., Somer, O., & Güngör, D. (2013). Measurement equivalence of the five-factor personality inventor y with mean and covariance structures according to gender in an adolescent sample. Education and Science, 38(170), 121-134.

[35]. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J., & Peschar, J. L. (2006). OECD's brief self-report measure of educational psychology's most useful affective constructs: Cross-cultural, psychometric comparisons across 25 countries. International Journal of Testing, 6(4), 311-360.

[36]. McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test Theory: A Unified Treatment. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

[37]. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58, 525-543.

[38]. Oishi, S. (2006). The concept of life satisfaction across cultures: An IRT analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(4), 411-423.

[39]. Önen, E. (2009). Examination of Measurement Invariance with Structural Equation Modelling Techniques (Master thesis, Ankara University, Ankara).

[40]. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5(2), 164-172.

[41]. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2008). The satisfaction with life scale and the emerging construct of life satisfaction. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(2), 137-152.

[42]. Raykov, T. (1998). Coefficient alpha and composite reliability with interrelated nonhomogeneous items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22(4), 375-385.

[43]. Sachs, J. (2003). Validation of the satisfaction with life scale in a sample of Hong Kong university students. Psychologia, 46(4), 225-234.

[44]. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.

[45]. Slocum-Gori, S. L., Zumbo, B. D., Michalos, A. C., & Diener, E. (2009). A note on the dimensionality of quality of life scales: An illustration with the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS). Social Indicators Research, 92(3), 489-496.

[46]. Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Drasgow, F. (2004). Examining the effects of differential item/test functioning (DIF/DTF) on selection decisions: When are statistically significant effects practically important. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 497-508.

[47]. Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Drasgow, F. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1292- 1306.

[48]. Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78-90.

[49]. Suh, E., Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Triandis, H. C. (1998). The shifting basis of life satisfaction judgments across cultures: Emotions versus norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 482-493.

[50]. Swami, V., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2009). Psychometric evaluation of the Malay satisfaction with life scale. Social Indicators Research, 92, 25-33.

[51]. Tucker, K. L., Ozer, D. J., Lyubomirsky, S., & Boehm, J. K. (2006). Testing for measurement invariance in the satisfaction with life scale: A comparison of Russians and North Americans. Social Indicators Research, 78, 341- 360.

[52]. Tucker, K. L., Ozer, D. J., Lyubomirsky, S., & Boehm, J. K. (2006). Testing for measurement invariance in the satisfaction with life scale: A comparison of Russians and North Americans. Social Indicators Research, 78, 341- 360.

[53]. Tümlü, G. Ü., & Recepoğlu, E. (2013). The relationship between psychological resilience and life satisfaction of university academic staff. Journal of Higher Education and Science, (3), 205-213.

[54]. Uzun, B., & Öğretmen, T. (2010). Evaluation of measurement invariance of some variables related to science achievement according to gender in the TIMSS-R Turkey sample. Education and Science, 35(155), 26-35.

[55]. 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.

[56]. Vara, Sh. (1999). Examining the Relationship between Job Satisfaction and General Life Satisfaction in Intensive Care Nurses (Master's Thesis, Ege University Institute of Health Sciences, Izmir).

[57]. Vassar, M. (2008). A note on the score reliability for the satisfaction with life scale: An RG study. Social Indicators Research, 86, 47-57.

[58]. Vautier, S., Mullet, E., & Jmel, S. (2004). Assessing the structural robustness of self-rated satisfaction with life: A SEM analysis. Social Indicators Research, 68, 235-249.

[59]. Vittersø, J., Røysamb, E., & Diener, E. (2002). The concept of life satisfaction across cultures: Exploring its divers meaning and relation to economic wealth. In E. Gullone & R. Cummins (Eds.). The Universality of Subjective Wellbeing Indicators a Multidiciplinary and Multi- National Perspective (pp.81–103). Kluwer Academic Publishers.

[60]. Wu, A. D., Li, Z., & Zumbo, B. D. (2019). Decoding the meaning of factorial invariance and updating the practice of multi-group confirmatory factor analysis: A demonstration with TIMSS data. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 12(3), 1-26.

[61]. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006). Analysis of factorial invariance across gender in the Taiwan version of the satisfaction with life scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(6), 1259-1268.

[62]. Yılmaz, E., & Altınok, V. (2009). Examining the loneliness and life satisfaction levels of school administrators. Educational Administration in Theory and Practice, 59 (59), 451-470.

[63]. Zumbo, B. D., Sireci, S. G., & Hambleton, R. K. (2003, April). Re-visiting exploratory methods for construct comparability: Is there something to be gained from the ways of old. In Annual Meeting of the National Council for Measurement in Education (NCME), Chicago, Illinois (pp. 1-25).

Examining Measurement Invariance of Different SWLS Measurement Models According to Gender

Abstract

Keywords

How to Cite this Article?

References

If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Options for accessing this content:

	North Americas,UK, Middle East,Europe		India	Rest of world
	USD	EUR	INR	USD-ROW
Pdf	35	35	200	20
Online	35	35	200	15
Pdf & Online	35	35	400	25