Measurement invariance in the social sciences: Historical development, methodological challenges, state of the art, and future perspectives.

This review summarizes the current state of the art of statistical and (survey) methodological research on measurement (non)invariance, which is considered a core challenge for the comparative social sciences. After outlining the historical roots, conceptual details, and standard procedures for measurement invariance testing, the paper focuses in particular on the statistical developments that have been achieved in the last 10 years. These include Bayesian approximate measurement invariance, the alignment method, measurement invariance testing within the multilevel modeling framework, mixture multigroup factor analysis, the measurement invariance explorer, and the response shift-true change decomposition approach. Furthermore, the contribution of survey methodological research to the construction of invariant measurement instruments is explicitly addressed and highlighted, including the issues of design decisions, pretesting, scale adoption, and translation. The paper ends with an outlook on future research perspectives.

Using Machine Translation and Post-Editing in the TRAPD Approach: Effects on the Quality of Translated Survey Texts.

A highly controlled experimental setting using a sample of questions from the European Social Survey (ESS) and European Values Study (EVS) was used to test the effects of integrating machine translation and post-editing into the Translation, Review, Adjudication, Pretesting, and Documentation (TRAPD) approach in survey translation. Four experiments were conducted in total, two concerning the language pair English-German and two in the language pair English-Russian. The overall results of this study are positive for integrating machine translation and post-editing into the TRAPD process, when translating survey questionnaires. The experiments show evidence that in German and Russian languages and for a sample of ESS and EVS survey questions, the effect of integrating machine translation and post-editing on the quality of the review outputs-with quality understood as texts output with the fewest errors possible-can hardly be distinguished from the quality that derives from the setting with human translations only.