Translating Tests

1996 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fons Van de Vijver ◽  
Ronald K. Hambleton
Keyword(s):  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Item Bias ◽  
Word Choice ◽  
Cultural Group ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
The Common ◽  
Psychological Instruments ◽  
Method Bias

With the increasing interest in cross-cultural research, there is a growing need for standard and validated practices for translating psychological instruments. Developing a psychologically acceptable instrument for another cultural group almost always requires more effort than a literal translation, which all too often is the common practice. The adequacy of translations can be threatened by various sources of bias. Three types of bias are distinguished in this paper: (1) construct bias (related to nonequivalence of constructs across cultural groups), (2) method bias (resulting from instrument administration problems), and (3) item bias (often a result of inadequate translations such as incorrect word choice). Ways in which bias can affect the adequacy of instruments are illustrated and possible remedies are discussed.

Developing New Instruments

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thanh V. Tran ◽  
Tam Nguyen ◽  
Keith Chan
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Measurement Development ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Shared Meanings ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Cultural Experts ◽  
New Instruments

Developing new cross-cultural research instruments is an enormous task, and it requires careful consideration from the researchers to ensure that the instruments measure what they are designed to measure and that they can also capture cultural differences and similarities among the comparative groups. It is always challenging to develop an “etic” instrument that captures the shared meanings among the comparative cultural groups and an “emic” instrument that can measure the unique aspects of each cultural group. Constructing cross-cultural research instruments must be a collaborative endeavor of the research team and the stakeholders. Inputs from cultural experts, prospective research respondents or clients, and service providers should be an integral part of every step or phase in cross-cultural measurement development and construction. This chapter focuses on the foundation of measurement and the process of cross-cultural instrument development.

Data Management and Cross-Cultural Descriptive Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 27-56
Author(s):  
Thanh V. Tran ◽  
Keith T. Chan
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Cultural Analysis ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Descriptive Statistics ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Practical Applications ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

Quantitative cross-cultural analysis requires the application of statistics to study the variability of a phenomenon (variable,) across cultural groups. This chapter aims to provide practical applications of descriptive statistics to describe the variables used in a cross-cultural research/evaluation project. We use statistical methods to describe the variables of interests and to test the hypotheses derived from theories for understanding cross-cultural comparisons. More specifically, we address the importance of examine the variables of interest across selected comparative groups. It is our position that in order to describe and to test hypotheses, we need first to know how the variables of interest are measured. We illustrate the use of STATA for data management and descriptive statistics throughout the chapter.

scholarly journals Towards an Integrated Analysis of Bias in Cross-Cultural Assessment

1997 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fons J. R. van de Vijver ◽  
Ype H. Poortinga
Keyword(s):  
Integrated Treatment ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Item Bias ◽  
Integrated Analysis ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Item Functioning ◽  
Cultural Assessment ◽  
Cultural Comparisons ◽  
Meaning Equivalence ◽  
Method Bias

A central methodological aspect of cross-cultural assessment is the interpretability of intergroup differences: Do scores obtained by subjects from different cultural groups have the same psychological meaning? Equivalence (or the absence of bias) is required in making valid cross-cultural comparisons. As cross-cultural comparisons are becoming increasingly popular and important, the problem of bias and its detection is receiving increased attention from researchers. Three kinds of bias are discussed and illustrated, namely construct bias, method bias, and item bias (or differential item functioning). Methods to identify bias are reviewed. An overview is given of common sources of each kind of bias. It is argued that an integrated treatment of all forms of bias is needed to enhance the validity of cross-cultural comparisons. The predominant focus on item bias techniques has the unfortunate implication that construct and method bias are examined insufficiently.

What Cognitive Interviews Tell Us about Bias in Cross-cultural Research

Field Methods ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 277-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel Benítez ◽  
José Luis Padilla ◽  
Fons van de Vijver ◽  
Amaya Cuevas
Keyword(s):  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Issues ◽  
Response Options ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Item Level ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Study Support ◽  
Key Terms ◽  
Method Bias

This study illustrates how the cognitive interviewing (CI) method can provide qualitative evidence of item, construct, and method bias in cross-cultural research. CI was conducted with participants from the Netherlands and Spain, who responded to quality-of-life (QoL) items included in international survey research projects. Qualitative findings indicate that, at the construct level, Spanish participants were more affected by the particular wording of the item stems, which made them modify their understanding of the intended constructs while answering, whereas Dutch participants were more focused on being consistent in their responses. At the item level, differences in the interpretation of key terms in QoL items were mainly related to translation and cultural issues. Method bias was manifested in the differential use of response options and anchor labels. Results of the study support the contribution and usefulness of CI to informing about the three types of bias from a qualitative approach.

A Central Question in Cross-Cultural Research: Do Employees of Different Cultures Interpret Work-related Measures in an Equivalent Manner?

1994 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 643-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine M. Riordan ◽  
Robert J. Vandenberg
Keyword(s):  
Culturally Diverse ◽  
Covariance Structure ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Work Related ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Diverse Groups

Within the present research, a covariance structure analytic procedure is applied to test the stability and transferability of organizational measures between groups in cross-cultural research. Findings support the need to establish the equivalency of constructs and measures prior to interpreting differences in means of self-report variables between culturally diverse groups. Indeed, for two measures, the cultural groups were using different conceptual frames of reference when responding to the items. For a third measure, the groups were calibrating the true scores differently. However, the source of the calibration difference was identified and subsequently accounted for in later analyses. Thus, differences between latent means for the culturally diverse groups were calculated and interpreted. The approach outlined in this paper is proffered as yielding valuable insights regarding the appropriateness of comparative cross-cultural studies.

Reflections on Cross-Cultural Research

1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Glover ◽  
Dasia Black-Gutman
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Studies ◽  
Comparative Research ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Study Participants

Cross-cultural research, like all other research, is multi-dimensional. It includes both comparative research, as opposed to research conducted in a single society, and research in which researchers and participants belong to different cultural groups. As a process, it presents numerous challenges. In cross-cultural or comparative studies there are questions related to the validity of the constructs being employed, the appropriateness of measures, and the suitability of methodologies for specific contexts. When researchers and study participants belong to different groups, questions about who determines and defines the research, who owns it, and how the research data is used, all need to be addressed.

scholarly journals Child-directed and overheard input from different speakers in two distinct cultures

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgia Loukatou ◽  
Camila Scaff ◽  
Katherine Demuth ◽  
Alejandrina Cristia ◽  
Naomi Havron
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Urban Regions ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

Despite the fact that in most communities interaction occurs between the child and multiple speakers, most previous research on input to children focused on input from mothers. We annotated recordings of Sesotho-learning toddlers living in non-industrial Lesotho in South Africa, and French-learning toddlers living in urban regions in France. We examined who produced the input (mothers, other children, adults), how much input was child directed, and whether and how it varied across speakers. As expected, mothers contributed most of the input in the French recordings. However, in the Sesotho recordings, input from other children was more common than input from mothers or other adults. Child-directed speech from all speakers in both cultural groups showed similar qualitative modifications. Our findings suggest that input from other children is prevalent and has similar features as child-directed from adults described in previous work, inviting cross-cultural research into the effects of input from other children.

Applied Multiple Regression Analysis in Cross-Cultural Comparisons

2021 ◽  
pp. 57-130
Author(s):  
Thanh V. Tran ◽  
Keith T. Chan
Keyword(s):  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Multiple Regression Analysis ◽  
Multiple Regression ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Moderation Effect ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Regression Techniques ◽  
Cultural Comparisons

This chapter focuses on the application of multiple regression analysis in cross-cultural comparisons using the Stata statistical package. We explain the assumptions and uses of multiple regression and relevant techniques for examining the applicability of the data for analysis. We briefly discuss reliability analysis across culture groups and provide a step-by-step approach for analyzing and interpreting real world examples of cross-cultural research suing multiple regression techniques. We explain and provide examples of mediation and moderation effect, and conclude with techniques to test the equivalence of effects across different cultural groups.

Process and Critical Tasks of Cross-Cultural Research

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thanh V. Tran ◽  
Tam Nguyen ◽  
Keith Chan
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Instrument Development ◽  
Comparative Research ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Research Instrument ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
New Instrument ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Racial Ethnic

The overall process of cross-cultural instrument development and assessment are discussed in this chapter. Research instrument is defined as a systematic and standardized tool for data collection. It includes all types of research questionnaires and standardized scales. There are three methods of cross-cultural research instrument development: adopting an existing instrument, adapting or modifying an existing instrument, and developing a new instrument. In order to develop a cross-culturally valid questionnaire or instrument, the concepts or constructs selected for the investigation must be clearly defined and bear the same meanings across the selected cultural groups. No good questionnaire can be developed without clear definitions. This is a matter of utmost importance for all levels of cultural comparative research and evaluation whether it is a gender or racial/ethnic comparison within one society or across nations.

scholarly journals Child-directed and overheard input from different speakers in two distinct cultures

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Georgia LOUKATOU ◽  
Camila SCAFF ◽  
Katherine DEMUTH ◽  
Alejandrina CRISTIA ◽  
Naomi HAVRON
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Urban Regions ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

Abstract Despite the fact that in most communities interaction occurs between the child and multiple speakers, most previous research on input to children focused on input from mothers. We annotated recordings of Sesotho-learning toddlers living in non-industrial Lesotho in South Africa, and French-learning toddlers living in urban regions in France. We examined who produced the input (mothers, other children, adults), how much input was child directed, and whether and how it varied across speakers. As expected, mothers contributed most of the input in the French recordings. However, in the Sesotho recordings, input from other children was more common than input from mothers or other adults. Child-directed speech from all speakers in both cultural groups showed similar qualitative modifications. Our findings suggest that input from other children is prevalent and has similar features as child-directed from adults described in previous work, inviting cross-cultural research into the effects of input from other children.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document