Dyadic measurement invariance and its importance for replicability in romantic relationship science

Comparisons of group means, variances, correlations, and/or regression slopes involving psychological variables rely on an assumption of measurement invariance—that the latent variables under investigation have equivalent meaning and measurement across group. When measures are noninvariant, replicability suffers, as comparisons are either conceptually meaningless, or hindered by inflated Type I error rates. We propose that the failure to account for interdependence among dyad members when testing measurement invariance may be a potential source of unreplicable findings in relationship research. We developed fully dyadic versions of invariance models, created an R package ( dySEM ) to make specifying dyadic invariance models easier and reporting more reproducible, and executed a Registered Report for gauging the extent of dyadic (non)invariance in romantic relationship research across measures of relationship well‐being, personality, and sexuality in a sample of 282 heterosexual couples. We found that although a number of popular measures display good evidence of dyadic invariance, a few display concerning levels and interesting patterns of noninvariance, while others appeared either noninvariant or poorly fitting for both men and women. We discuss our findings in terms of their meaning for the replicability dyadic close relationship research. We close by arguing that increased theorizing and research on dyadic invariance, and inclusive methods for analyzing invariance with indistinguishable dyads, are needed to capitalize on the opportunity to advance our field's understanding of dyadic constructions of relational concepts.