Further Validating the VAIAK: Defining a Psychometric Model, Configural Measurement Invariance, Reliability, and Practical Guidelines

Art interest and art knowledge are central constructs in empirical aesthetics and specifically the psychology of art. Therefore, valid measurement of these constructs is essential. To this aim the Vienna Art Interest Art Knowledge (VAIAK; Specker, Forster, Brinkmann, Boddy, Pelowski, et al., 2020) questionnaire has recently been introduced. Here, I present further validation evidence for this questionnaire in several ways. First, I define a psychometric model for the VAIAK which I consequently test by way of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), which indicated good model fit and thus provided evidence for my theoretical model. To substantiate the CFA results, I also use exploratory factor analysis (EFA) models. Second, I address measurement invariance-specifically configural measurement invariance-between a group of art experts and non experts. In this case, too, the multigroup CFA indicated good fit and thus provides evidence for configural measurement invariance. Third, I address the issue of reliability from a theoretical standpoint and an empirical standpoint, specifically providing evidence that the VAIAK shows good test-retest reliability. Finally, I address some practical issues in using the VAIAK ("How long does it take?", "Can I shorten the VAIAK?") that researchers might encounter when using the VAIAK in their own work. In sum, the article presents a crucial next step in the validation process of the VAIAK.