Abstract:Individualism and collectivism are some of the most widely applied concepts in cultural and cross-cultural research. They are commonly applied by scholars who use arithmetic means or sum indexes of items on a scale to examine the potential similarities and differences in samples from various countries. For many reasons, cross-cultural research implicates numerous methodological and statistical pitfalls. The aim of this article is to summarize some of those pitfalls, particularly the problem of measurement non-invariance, which stems from the different understandings of questionnaire items or even different character of constructs between countries. This potential bias is reduced by latent mean comparisons performed with Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis and the Measurement Invariance procedure within a Structural Equation Modeling framework. These procedures have been neglected by many researchers in the field of cross-cultural psychology, however. In this article, we compare ‘traditional’ (comparison of arithmetic means) and ‘invariant’ (latent mean comparison) approaches and provide necessary R source codes for replications of measurement invariance and latent mean comparisons within other scales. Both approaches are demonstrated with real data gathered on an Independent and Interdependent Self-Scale from 1386 participants across six countries (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Macedonia and Albania). Our results revealed considerable differences between the ‘invariant’ and ‘traditional’ approaches, especially in post-hoc analyses. Since ‘invariant’ results can be considered less biased, this finding suggests that the currently prevalent method of comparing the arithmetic means of cross-cultural scales of individualism and collectivism can potentially cause biased results.

Measurement Issues in Tests of the Socioecological Complexity Hypothesis

What Explains Personality Covariation? A Test of the Socioecological Complexity Hypothesis

Testing the Measurement Equivalence of Personality Adjective Items Across Cultures

The dominance of introspective measures and what this implies: The example of environmental attitude

Niche diversity effects on personality measurement – evidence from large national samples during the COVID-19 pandemic

Hidden Invalidity Among 15 Commonly Used Measures in Social and Personality Psychology

Sociability across Eastern-Western cultures: Is it the same underlying construct?

Toward Integration of the Niche Diversity Hypothesis With Other Explanations for Personality Covariation: Reply to Međedović's (2019) Commentary on Lukaszewski et al. (2017)

Measurement of Environmental Concern: A Review and Analysis

Niche Diversity Predicts Personality Structure Across 115 Nations

The Necessity of Testing Measurement Invariance in Cross-Cultural Research: Potential Bias in Cross-Cultural Comparisons With Individualism– Collectivism Self-Report Scales

Niche diversity influences psychometric properties of a brief personality scale – evidence from representative samples during the COVID-19 pandemic

The Structure Among Measures of Personality, Social Attitudes, Values, and Social Norms

Difficulties of Measuring Culture in Privacy Studies

What is wrong with individual differences research?

An Evolutionary Ecological Framework for Understanding Human Behavioral Syndromes: Commentary on Lukaszewski et al. 2017

Mind the (Construct-Measurement) Gap

On Personality Measures and Their Data: A Classification of Measurement Approaches and Their Recommended Uses

Causal complexity and psychological measurement

On the Psychometric Study of Human Life History Strategies

Are Biasing Factors Idiosyncratic to Measures? A Comparison of Interpersonal Conflict, Organizational Constraints, and Workload