Dr. Calderon,

I should note that I have performed the sort of analysis you describe only during my coursework, not for a manuscript. To supplement my knowledge, I also consulted a researcher who is well-versed on the subject, and asked which resources they would recommend.

The two articles below have been widely cited to explain the rationale of establishing measurement invariance and structural invariance across cultures. Chen deals largely with what happens when we fail to establish measurement and structural invariance across cultures, while Vandenberg & Lance deals largely with suggesting a new standard sequence for conducting measurement invariance tests.

Chen, F. F. (2008). What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of personality and social psychology, 95(5), 1005.

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.

As far as a walkthrough for the procedure, I would suggest the following two articles. Both outline a standardized, step by step approach to testing for measurement invariance and structural invariance and include syntax- the first with R, and the second with LISREL.

Hirschfeld, Gerrit & von Brachel, Ruth (2014). Improving Multiple-Group confirmatory factor analysis in R – A tutorial in measurement invariance with continuous and ordinal indicators. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 19(7). Available online: http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=19&n=7

Milfont, T. L., & Fischer, R. (2010). Testing measurement invariance across groups: Applications in crosscultural research. International Journal of psychological research, 3(1).

Hope that helps!

-Seth Courrégé

Seth,

I really appreciate you taking time to recommend all the articles mentioned in your message...thank you.  I think most of them will be of help. 

I work mostly with SPSS and Amos so the R and LISREL may require to much of a learning curve at this time.  One other person mentioned to me that Smart PLS will handle formative variables in the measurement model unlike Amos which will only handle reflective variables. 

Your recommendations will no doubt provide the conceptual and logical basis that I'm looking for so that will be most useful.

All the best and thanks again,

Raul Calderon

Hi Raul,

this reference might help

Borsa, J. C., Damásio, B. F., & Bandeira, D. R. (2012). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of psychological instruments: Some considerations. Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto), 22(53), 423-432.

http://www.scielo.br/pdf/paideia/v22n53/en_14.pdf

Mplus is quite ease to use and there is a lot of tutorials for CFA

good lucky

Hi Euclides,

This looks like a good reference.  Thanks for your help.

Raul

EFA may lead to some changes in the structure of the scale.

It is preferred to do CFA, if the scale structure is supported by the indices of the CFA, then this confirm the validity of the scale with the new language and culture.

Dr. Ahmad,

Thanks for your response.  The original scale has identified six dimensions.  My initial EFA showed 17 factors.  However, this may be due to the items in each scale being formative instead of reflective in nature.  I was told that the EFA does not work on formative items.  And the CFA indices do not support the original model.  Do you see my situation?