Testing for Measurement Invariance of the Employment Hope Scale: A Comparison of U.S. and Korean Low-Income Jobseekers

Purpose:The Employment Hope Scale (EHS) has been developed to assess individual’s level of psychological self-sufficiency (SS), a complementary measure to the widely used economic SS in workforce development programs.  This study aims to examine the comparability of the EHS across the U.S. and South Korean low-income jobseeker groups, using a multi-sample confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).  From its original conceptualization from qualitative study (Hong, Sheriff, & Naeger, 2009), a 24-item six-factor EHS was constructed.  This measure was initially validated using an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (Hong, Polanin, & Pigott, 2012), resulting in a 14-item two-factor structure with factor 1 representing ‘psychological empowerment’ and Factor 2 representing ‘goal-oriented pathways’.  The following multi-sample CFA study (Hong, Choi, & Polanin, 2014) modified a two-factor model into a four-factor model based on the original theoretical suggestion by the qualitative study.  The purpose of the study is to confirm the recently revalidated four-factor structure and test the cross-national applicability of EHS.

Methods: This study uses two distinct samples from the U.S and South Korea. The U.S. sample consists of 390 low-income jobseekers collected from a local social service agency in Chicago, Illinois.  The South Korean sample was collected from 458 participants from 35 job training centers in Korea.  Prior to testing measurement invariance of the EHS, the study assessed the proposed dimensionality of the recently validated four-factor EHS on two independent samples using a CFA.  This measurement is composed of 14 items that was grouped into four factors; four items loaded on to the first factor labeled ‘psychological empowerment’, two items loaded on to the second factor labeled ‘futuristic self-motivation, four items loaded on to the third factor labeled ‘utilization of skills and resources’, and four items loaded on to the forth factor labeled ‘goal-orientation’.  After verifying the factor structure, we proceeded to test for measurement equivalence across the U.S. and South Korean samples.  We utilized a multi-sample CFA, comparing a series of increasingly restrictive models.  The configural, metric, scalar, factor covariance, and factor variance invariance were tested in the hierarchical order, using several goodness-of-fit indices and x² difference between models.

Results: CFAs on both the U.S. and South Korean samples verified the four-factor structure of EHS, proving the superiority of four-factor model over baseline one-factor and the initial two-factor models.  The multi-sample CFA results (reported for U.S./South Korea) are as follows—one factor: 1206.880/980.716(77), RMSEA=.194/.160, CFI=.816/.834, TLI =.750/.774; two factor: 374.975/699.684(76), RMSEA=.101/.134, CFI=.951/.886, TLI =.933/.842; four factor: 249.781/362.560(71), RMSEA=.080/.095, CFI=.971/.947, TLI =.957/.921).  The study also found evidence for cross-national equivalence, based on satisfying configural, metric, scalar, and factor covariance invariance.

Implications: These results confirm that the EHS is stable and valid across the two international samples in comparison, indicating the potential utility of this scale cross-culturally in the contexts other than those where they were developed.  This measure can be used to benchmark the client empowerment process and monitor individualized human development paths to employment success.  EHS can help promote social change toward an inclusive labor market to build upon individual strengths.