Measurement Equivalence/Invariance

A Requirement to Conducting Cross-Groups Comparisons

Authors

  • Wahyuningsih Tadulako University, Palu – Sulawesi Selatan
  • Johnny Tanamal Tadulako University, Palu – Sulawesi Selatan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21632/

Keywords:

measurement equivalence/invariance, customer satisfaction

Abstract

The establishment of Measurement Equivalence/Invariance (ME/I) is a logical prerequisite to conducting substantive cross-groups comparisons, for example tests of group mean differences, invariance of structural parameter estimates. In agreement with this argument, this paper aims to (1) demonstrate the stages to establish ME/I test, (2) provide an example of ME/I application on customer satisfaction survey across three groups of consumer, (3) demonstrate the steps should be carried out if the measurement were not perceived equivalently by respondents. Conclusions and future research directions are presented. 

References

Athanassopoulos, A. D. (2000). Customer satisfaction cues to support market segmentation and explain switching behavior. Journal of Business Research, 47(3), 191–207.

Bodet, G. (2008). Customer satisfaction and loyalty in service: Two concepts, four constructs, several relationships. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 15, 156–162.

Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. John Wiley & Sons.

Hayduk, L. A. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL: Essentials and advances. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Luo, X., & Homburg, C. (2007). Neglected outcomes of customer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing, 71(April), 133–149.

Mavondo, F., & Farrell, M. A. (2000). Measuring market orientation: Are there differences between business marketers and consumer marketers? Australian Journal of Management, 25(2), 223–244.

Mavondo, F., Gabbott, M., & Tsarenko, Y. (2004). Measurement invariance of marketing instruments: An implication across countries. Journal of Marketing Management, 19, 523–540.

Oliver, R. L. (1981). Measurement and evaluation of satisfaction processes in retail settings. Journal of Retailing, 57(3), 25–48.

Pearo, L. K., Widener, S. K., & Anderson, S. (2008). Drivers of service satisfaction: Linking customer satisfaction to the service concept and customer characteristics. Journal of Retailing, 10(4), 365–381.

Spreng, R. A., MacKenzie, S. B., & Olshavsky, R. W. (1996). A reexamination of the determinants of consumer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 15–32.

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.

Widaman, K. F., & Reise, S. P. (1997). Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: Applications in the substance use domain. In B. J. Kendall, M. T. Windle, & S. G. West (Eds.), The science of prevention: Methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research. American Psychological Association.

Downloads

Submitted

11/25/2025

Published

12/01/2008

How to Cite

Wahyuningsih, W., & Tanamal, J. (2008). Measurement Equivalence/Invariance: A Requirement to Conducting Cross-Groups Comparisons. International Research Journal of Business Studies, 1(3), 291-303. https://doi.org/10.21632/

How to Cite

Wahyuningsih, W., & Tanamal, J. (2008). Measurement Equivalence/Invariance: A Requirement to Conducting Cross-Groups Comparisons. International Research Journal of Business Studies, 1(3), 291-303. https://doi.org/10.21632/