The Practical Effects of Measurement Invariance: Gender Invariance in Two Big Five Personality Measures
Abstract
The essence of measurement invariance (MI) analysis is to test the assumption that observed scores on a scale accurately reflect respondents’ standings on a measured construct. Based on exploratory structural equation modeling, the current study examines gender-based MI in two Big Five measures of personality: the Mini-IPIP, and the Big Five Inventory (BFI) facet scales. We report results for MI based on both model fit indices and a practical significance index that quantifies the extent of noninvariance (i.e., d MACS ). From the latter, we partition the observed group mean differences in scale scores into construct-irrelevant group differences versus construct-relevant group differences. In measures of Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, and Neuroticism across instruments, results supported metric invariance but not scalar invariance. That said, findings of statistical noninvariance were generally small in terms of practical effects, although some notable variability in the effects was evident. Overall, the current results provide evidence regarding gender-based MI of Big Five personality measures that are more detailed than that provided in past work. More generally, this study also provides useful guidance for future researchers investigating both the statistical and practical significance of measurement invariance.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A gender invariance measurement was conducted to ensure that the tool is equally valid and interpretable for males and females.
“A gender invariance measurement was conducted to ensure that the tool is equally valid and interpretable for males and females [55].”
Cites
The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007 · Cited by 3,185 · see citing works
The Sources of Four Commonly Reported Cutoff Criteria: What Did They Really Say?
Lance, C. E., Butts, M. M., & Michels, L. C. (2006) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428105284919 · Cited by 2,053 · see citing works
Power and sensitivity of alternative fit indices in tests of measurement invariance.
Meade, A. W., Johnson, E. C., & Braddy, P. W. (2008) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.568 · Cited by 1,668 · see citing works
Schmitt, D. P., Realo, A., Voracek, M., & Allik, J. (2008) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.1.168 · Cited by 1,391 · see citing works
Structural equation modelling in perspective
Kelloway, E. K. (1995) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.4030160304 · Cited by 495 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Henchiri, H., Tannoubi, A., Harrathi, C., Boussayala, G., Quansah, F., Hagan, J. E., Mechergui, H., Chaabeni, A., Chebbi, T., Lakhal, T. B., et al. (2025) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare13020173 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ock, J., McAbee, S. T., Mulfinger, E., & Oswald, F. L.
- Affiliations
- Pusan National University (KR)
- Bowling Green State University (US)
- Rice University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ock, Jisoo
- Venue
- Assessment
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-11-05
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 657-674
- ISSN
- 1073-1911 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3489
- OpenAlex
- W2985922885
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 3.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Assessment (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Keywords
- measurement invariance, gender differences, Big Five personality traits, Big Five Inventory, metric invariance, scalar invariance, agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, neuroticism
- MeSH terms
- Extraversion, Psychological, Humans, Personality, Personality Disorders, Personality Inventory, Psychometrics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review