Benefits of a Pragmatic Approach: Rethinking Measurement Invariance and Composite Scores in Cross-Cultural Research

Can aggregated composite scores be used to compare countries or other groups despite measurement non-invariance? We propose a pragmatic approach, emphasizing that measurement invariance is valuable but not strictly necessary for all such comparisons. For descriptive analyses of group differences, composite scores may outperform factor-analytic approaches, because they are more intuitive and can capture multiple dimensions. Using data from the European Social Survey (39 countries, 11 measurement occasions, 546,954 respondents), we examined social and political trust. Composite scores aggregated to the country level were practically indistinguishable from countries’ factor scores based on approximate measurement invariance testing. We conclude that composite scores can suffice for simple group comparisons, though their suitability depends on the data. They can, however, underestimate uncertainty, producing overly narrow confidence intervals. We further show that measurement invariance does not guarantee measurement equivalence. Finally, we highlight how researchers can leverage data even if measurement invariance fails.