SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • English 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Login
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • About SSOAR
  • Guidelines
  • Publishing in SSOAR
  • Cooperating with SSOAR
    • Cooperation models
    • Delivery routes and formats
    • Projects
  • Cooperation partners
    • Information about cooperation partners
  • Information
    • Possibilities of taking the Green Road
    • Grant of Licences
    • Download additional information
  • Operational concept
Browse and search Add new document OAI-PMH interface
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Download full text

(external source)

Citation Suggestion

Please use the following Persistent Identifier (PID) to cite this document:
https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2020.v14i4.7416

Exports for your reference manager

Bibtex export
Endnote export

Display Statistics
Share
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

Investigating the Relative Impact of Different Sources of Measurement Non-Equivalence in Comparative Surveys: An Illustration with Scale Format, Data Collection Mode and Cross-National Variations

[journal article]

Roberts, Caroline
Sarrasin, Oriane
Stähli, Michèle Ernst

Abstract

Different factors are known to affect the comparability of multinational, multicultural and multiregional ('3MC') survey data. These include factors relevant to the design of the questionnaire in different contexts (such as cultural differences in how a concept is understood, inaccurate or approxima... view more

Different factors are known to affect the comparability of multinational, multicultural and multiregional ('3MC') survey data. These include factors relevant to the design of the questionnaire in different contexts (such as cultural differences in how a concept is understood, inaccurate or approximate translations of concepts, and variant adaptations to question formats). Others include factors relating to the survey design in general and how it is implemented across contexts (such as sample design, choice of mode(s), and contact strategies). Together, they contribute item, method and construct biases that can affect the invariance of composite measures. While research to date has looked at the effects of these factors on measurement invariance individually, there have been few attempts to compare them directly and assess their relative impact. To illustrate how this can be done, the present paper tests for measurement invariance in a subjective wellbeing measure across question formats, modes, languages, and countries, combining European Social Survey data from designed and natural experiments (resulting from the use of variant question formulations and translations) from Germany, Switzerland and France. Overall, we find translation errors, language and culture to be bigger sources of non-equivalence than question format and mode. The findings have implications for both survey designers making decisions about optimal resource allocation in the design of 3MC studies, as well as for comparative analysts interested in comparing countries with shared languages and interpreting cross-group differences.... view less

Keywords
survey research; survey; comparative research; international comparison; intercultural comparison; measurement instrument; data capture; questionnaire; European Social Survey; well-being

Classification
Methods and Techniques of Data Collection and Data Analysis, Statistical Methods, Computer Methods

Free Keywords
measurement invariance; mixed mode

Document language
English

Publication Year
2020

Page/Pages
p. 399-415

Journal
Survey Research Methods, 14 (2020) 4

Issue topic
Measurement Equivalence: Testing for It and Explaining Why It is Absent

ISSN
1864-3361

Status
Published Version; peer reviewed

Licence
Deposit Licence - No Redistribution, No Modifications


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.