Schmalbach Bjarne, Schmalbach Ileana, Hardt Jochen
Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany.
Behav Res Methods. 2025 Mar 19;57(4):122. doi: 10.3758/s13428-025-02639-w.
Social sciences of all kinds are interested in latent variables, their measurement, and how they differ between groups. The present study argues the importance of analyzing mean differences between groups using the latent variable approach. Using an open-access repository of widely applied personality questionnaires (N = 999,033), we evaluate the extent to which the commonly used observed sum score is susceptible to measurement error. Our findings show that Cohen's d values based on the observed variance significantly misestimate the true group difference (based on just the factor score variance) in 33 of the 70 studied cases, and by an average of 25.0% (or 0.048 standard deviations). There was no meaningful relationship between the effect size discrepancy and scale reliability as measured by McDonald's ω. We discuss the implications of these results and outline concrete steps that applied researchers can take to improve their analyses.
各类社会科学都对潜在变量、其测量方法以及不同群体之间的差异感兴趣。本研究论证了使用潜在变量方法分析群体间均值差异的重要性。利用一个广泛应用的人格问卷的开放获取数据库(N = 999,033),我们评估了常用的观测总分受测量误差影响的程度。我们的研究结果表明,在70个研究案例中的33个案例中,基于观测方差的科恩d值显著高估了真实的群体差异(仅基于因子得分方差),平均高估了25.0%(或0.048个标准差)。效应大小差异与用麦克唐纳ω测量的量表信度之间没有有意义的关系。我们讨论了这些结果的含义,并概述了应用研究人员可以采取的具体步骤以改进他们的分析。