The Love of Money and Pay Level Satisfaction: Measurement and Functional Equivalence in 29 Geopolitical Entities around the World

Thomas Li-Ping Tang,Toto Sutarso,Adebowale Akande,Michael W. Allen,Abdulgawi Salim Alzubaidi,Mahfooz A. Ansari,Fernando Arias-Galicia,Mark G. Borg,Luigina Canova,Brigitte Charles-Pauvers,Bor-Shiuan Cheng,Randy K. Chiu,Linzhi Du,Ilya Garber,Consuelo Garcia De La Torre,Rosario Correia Higgs,Abdul Hamid Safwat Ibrahim,Chin-Kang Jen,Ali Mahdi Kazem,Kilsun Kim,Vivien Kim Geok Lim,Roberto Luna-Arocas,Eva Malovics,Anna Maria Manganelli,Alice S. Moreira,Anthony Ugochukwu Obiajulu Nnedum,Johnsto E. Osagie,AAhad M. Osman-Gani,Francisco Costa Pereira,Ruja Pholsward,Horia D. Pitariu,Marko Polic,Elisaveta Sardzoska,Petar Skobic,Allen F. Stembridge,Theresa Li-Na Tang,Thompson Sian Hin Teo,Marco Tombolani,Martina Trontelj,Caroline Urbain,Peter Vlerick
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2006.00051.x
IF: 3.776
2006-01-01
Management and Organization Review
Abstract:Demonstrating the equivalence of constructs is a key requirement for cross-cultural empirical research. The major purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how to assess measurement and functional equivalence or invariance using the 9-item, 3-factor Love of Money Scale (LOMS, a second-order factor model) and the 4-item, 1-factor Pay Level Satisfaction Scale (PLSS, a first-order factor model) across 29 samples in six continents (N = 5973). In step 1, we tested the configural, metric and scalar invariance of the LOMS and 17 samples achieved measurement invariance. In step 2, we applied the same procedures to the PLSS and nine samples achieved measurement invariance. Five samples (Brazil, China, South Africa, Spain and the USA) passed the measurement invariance criteria for both measures. In step 3, we found that for these two measures, common method variance was non-significant. In step 4, we tested the functional equivalence between the Love of Money Scale and Pay Level Satisfaction Scale. We achieved functional equivalence for these two scales in all five samples. The results of this study suggest the critical importance of evaluating and establishing measurement equivalence in cross-cultural studies. Suggestions for remedying measurement non-equivalence are offered.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?