The mismeasure of culture : why measurement invariance is rarely appropriate for research in social, cultural, and political psychology

Abstract

My talk critiques the indiscriminate application of measurement invariance in psychology. Despite the growing recognition of the need for cross-cultural validation of measures in psychological studies, a tension persists between proponents of measurement invariance and practitioners frustrated with these stringent standards and ambiguous recommendations. I argue that cultural constructs need not be equivalent or invariant as long as they demonstrate external validity at the group level. Measurement invariance emerged from concerns about fairness in high-stakes individual selections; however, its meta-theoretical assumptions are irrelevant to many (if not most) cross-cultural studies, where researchers aim to uncover group differences. I illustrate my point using the General System Justification Scale, which has recently faced criticism for lacking invariance. I show that external validation can ensure meaningful group differences without establishing invariance criteria. I suggest that researchers determine the purpose of scale use and clarify ontological assumptions before applying measurement invariance methods. At its core, the debate over the use of measurement invariance overlooks philosophical questions regarding how to theorize and study culture. These questions, in my opinion, need to be addressed to advance the field