Does Assessment Type Matter? A Measurement Invariance Analysis of Online and Paper and Pencil Assessment of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE)

Marloes Vleeschouwer; Chris D. Schubart; Cecile Henquet; Inez Myin-Germeys; Willemijn A. van Gastel; Manon H. J. Hillegers; Jim J. van Os; Marco P. M. Boks; Eske M. Derks

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0084011

Does Assessment Type Matter? A Measurement Invariance Analysis of Online and Paper and Pencil Assessment of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE)

Marloes Vleeschouwer^*, Chris D. Schubart, Cecile Henquet, Inez Myin-Germeys, Willemijn A. van Gastel, Manon H. J. Hillegers, Jim J. van Os, Marco P. M. Boks, Eske M. Derks

^*Corresponding author for this work

MHeNs - Mental Health

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

Background: The psychometric properties of an online test are not necessarily identical to its paper and pencil original. The aim of this study is to test whether the factor structure of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE) is measurement invariant with respect to online vs. paper and pencil assessment. Method: The factor structure of CAPE items assessed by paper and pencil (N = 796) was compared with the factor structure of CAPE items assessed by the Internet (N = 21,590) using formal tests for Measurement Invariance (MI). The effect size was calculated by estimating the Signed Item Difference in the Sample (SIDS) index and the Signed Test Difference in the Sample (STDS) for a hypothetical subject who scores 2 standard deviations above average on the latent dimensions. Results: The more restricted Metric Invariance model showed a significantly worse fit compared to the less restricted Configural Invariance model (chi(2)(23) = 152.75, p

Original language	English
Article number	e84011
Journal	PLOS ONE
Volume	9
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0084011
Publication status	Published - 22 Jan 2014

Access to Document

10.1371/journal.pone.0084011Licence: CC BY

Cite this

Vleeschouwer, M., Schubart, C. D., Henquet, C., Myin-Germeys, I., van Gastel, W. A., Hillegers, M. H. J., van Os, J. J., Boks, M. P. M., & Derks, E. M. (2014). Does Assessment Type Matter? A Measurement Invariance Analysis of Online and Paper and Pencil Assessment of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE). PLOS ONE, 9(1), Article e84011. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0084011

@article{26fdf5885c1d4de682dacdce53d86611,

title = "Does Assessment Type Matter? A Measurement Invariance Analysis of Online and Paper and Pencil Assessment of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE)",

abstract = "Background: The psychometric properties of an online test are not necessarily identical to its paper and pencil original. The aim of this study is to test whether the factor structure of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE) is measurement invariant with respect to online vs. paper and pencil assessment. Method: The factor structure of CAPE items assessed by paper and pencil (N = 796) was compared with the factor structure of CAPE items assessed by the Internet (N = 21,590) using formal tests for Measurement Invariance (MI). The effect size was calculated by estimating the Signed Item Difference in the Sample (SIDS) index and the Signed Test Difference in the Sample (STDS) for a hypothetical subject who scores 2 standard deviations above average on the latent dimensions. Results: The more restricted Metric Invariance model showed a significantly worse fit compared to the less restricted Configural Invariance model (chi(2)(23) = 152.75, p",

author = "Marloes Vleeschouwer and Schubart, {Chris D.} and Cecile Henquet and Inez Myin-Germeys and {van Gastel}, {Willemijn A.} and Hillegers, {Manon H. J.} and {van Os}, {Jim J.} and Boks, {Marco P. M.} and Derks, {Eske M.}",

year = "2014",

month = jan,

day = "22",

doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0084011",

language = "English",

volume = "9",

journal = "PLOS ONE",

issn = "1932-6203",

publisher = "Public Library of Science",

number = "1",

}

Vleeschouwer, M, Schubart, CD, Henquet, C, Myin-Germeys, I, van Gastel, WA, Hillegers, MHJ, van Os, JJ, Boks, MPM & Derks, EM 2014, 'Does Assessment Type Matter? A Measurement Invariance Analysis of Online and Paper and Pencil Assessment of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE)', PLOS ONE, vol. 9, no. 1, e84011. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0084011

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does Assessment Type Matter? A Measurement Invariance Analysis of Online and Paper and Pencil Assessment of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE)

AU - Vleeschouwer, Marloes

AU - Schubart, Chris D.

AU - Henquet, Cecile

AU - Myin-Germeys, Inez

AU - van Gastel, Willemijn A.

AU - Hillegers, Manon H. J.

AU - van Os, Jim J.

AU - Boks, Marco P. M.

AU - Derks, Eske M.

PY - 2014/1/22

Y1 - 2014/1/22

N2 - Background: The psychometric properties of an online test are not necessarily identical to its paper and pencil original. The aim of this study is to test whether the factor structure of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE) is measurement invariant with respect to online vs. paper and pencil assessment. Method: The factor structure of CAPE items assessed by paper and pencil (N = 796) was compared with the factor structure of CAPE items assessed by the Internet (N = 21,590) using formal tests for Measurement Invariance (MI). The effect size was calculated by estimating the Signed Item Difference in the Sample (SIDS) index and the Signed Test Difference in the Sample (STDS) for a hypothetical subject who scores 2 standard deviations above average on the latent dimensions. Results: The more restricted Metric Invariance model showed a significantly worse fit compared to the less restricted Configural Invariance model (chi(2)(23) = 152.75, p

AB - Background: The psychometric properties of an online test are not necessarily identical to its paper and pencil original. The aim of this study is to test whether the factor structure of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE) is measurement invariant with respect to online vs. paper and pencil assessment. Method: The factor structure of CAPE items assessed by paper and pencil (N = 796) was compared with the factor structure of CAPE items assessed by the Internet (N = 21,590) using formal tests for Measurement Invariance (MI). The effect size was calculated by estimating the Signed Item Difference in the Sample (SIDS) index and the Signed Test Difference in the Sample (STDS) for a hypothetical subject who scores 2 standard deviations above average on the latent dimensions. Results: The more restricted Metric Invariance model showed a significantly worse fit compared to the less restricted Configural Invariance model (chi(2)(23) = 152.75, p

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0084011

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0084011

M3 - Article

C2 - 24465389

SN - 1932-6203

VL - 9

JO - PLOS ONE

JF - PLOS ONE

IS - 1

M1 - e84011

ER -

Does Assessment Type Matter? A Measurement Invariance Analysis of Online and Paper and Pencil Assessment of the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences (CAPE)

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this