Replication and Reproducibility in Cross-Cultural Psychology

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 735-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taciano L. Milfont ◽  
Richard A. Klein

Replication is the scientific gold standard that enables the confirmation of research findings. Concerns related to publication bias, flexibility in data analysis, and high-profile cases of academic misconduct have led to recent calls for more replication and systematic accumulation of scientific knowledge in psychological science. This renewed emphasis on replication may pose specific challenges to cross-cultural research due to inherent practical difficulties in emulating an original study in other cultural groups. The purpose of the present article is to discuss how the core concepts of this replication debate apply to cross-cultural psychology. Distinct to replications in cross-cultural research are examinations of bias and equivalence in manipulations and procedures, and that targeted research populations may differ in meaningful ways. We identify issues in current psychological research (analytic flexibility, low power) and possible solutions (preregistration, power analysis), and discuss ways to implement best practices in cross-cultural replication attempts.

Author(s):  
Pawel Boski

To counterbalance the predominantly verbal measures and psychometric orientation in cross-cultural psychology, this chapter proposes the concept of cultural experiment. It is a method of sampling normative behavioral scripts, exploring their inner structures of meaning, and finally designing reversals, with the expectation of disconfirmation as their ultimate validity test. Pictorial materials (videos) are the preferred methods in this approach as contextualized models of existing cultural arrangements or their modifications. Empirical evidence comes from five cross-cultural research projects spanned over 30 years. These experiments illustrate contrasts in psychological adaptation to congruent and incongruent scenarios. They provide answers when new cultural ways meet with resistance and when novelty is appreciated or tolerated. Three experiments focus on dynamics of gender role prescriptions from Polish and Scandinavian perspectives. Another study investigates person perception of culturally familiar and remote African actors. The last study explores tolerance priming through religious icons from in-group and out-group cultures.


Author(s):  
Kostas Mylonas

Accumulated cross-cultural research has shown that its methods can also apply within countries, especially as more and more different immigrants or sojourners flow into host countries and the need to deal at least with acculturation issues is pressing. Cross-cultural methodology approximates research on intra-country issues, since comparinggroups with different characteristics within countries may also reflect different “cultures” represented by each of the differential groups. A question of bias elimination is raised when such comparisons areattempted either under a Cross-Cultural or an intra-country scope. Taking the van de Vijver and Leung and the Poortinga and van de Vijver theories on bias in terms of culture as a starting point, a triple-fold paradigm employing factor analysis and other techniques is presented on: (a) the application of simple congruence coefficients in estimating factor similarity –that is, basic factor equivalence testing– along with a proposed method of taking advantage of the Tucker coefficient matrix for a set of two or more factor structures, (b) the within-country application of multilevel covariance structure analysis and Procrustean rotations for a set of between groups and pooled-within correlation matrices, and (c) the reduction of “bias in terms of culture” by eliminating variance components through multivariate methods. By incorporating some of these methods in standard -within country- psychological research, we should be able to gain on theoretical andpsychometric grounds and we may finally question the degree of construct similarity among groups within a country, which cannot be necessarily taken for granted. These considerations are closely related to the use of multilevel analyses, as these stem from Cross-Cultural Psychology through most forms of intracountry and/or inter-country comparisons.


2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Le Vy Phan ◽  
Nick Modersitzki ◽  
Kim Karen Gloystein ◽  
Sandrine Müller

The ubiquity of mobile devices allows researchers to assess people’s real-life behaviors objectively, unobtrusively, and with high temporal resolution. As a result, psychological mobile sensing research has grown rapidly. However, only very few cross-cultural mobile sensing studies have been conducted to date. In addition, existing multi-country studies often fail to acknowledge or examine possible cross-cultural differences. In this chapter, we illustrate biases that can occur when conducting cross-cultural mobile sensing studies. Such biases can relate to measurement, construct, sample, device type, user practices, and environmental factors. We also propose mitigation strategies to minimize these biases, such as the use of informants with expertise in local culture, the development of cross-culturally comparable instruments, the use of culture-specific recruiting strategies and incentives, and rigorous reporting standards regarding the generalizability of research findings. We hope to inspire rigorous comparative research to establish and refine mobile sensing methodologies for cross-cultural psychology.


Author(s):  
Fons J.R. Van de Vijver ◽  
Jia He

Bias and equivalence provide a framework for methodological aspects of cross-cultural studies. Bias is a generic term for any systematic errors in the measurement that endanger the comparability of cross-cultural data; bias results in invalid comparative conclusions. The demonstration of equivalence (i.e., absence of bias) is a prerequisite for any cross-cultural comparison. Based on the source of incomparability, three types of bias, namely construct, method, and item bias, can be distinguished. Correspondingly, three levels of equivalence, namely, construct, metric, and scalar equivalence, can be distinguished. One of the goals in cross-cultural research is to minimize bias and enhance comparability. The definitions and manifestations of these types of bias and equivalence are described and remedies to minimize bias and enhance equivalence at the design, implementation, and statistical analysis phases of a cross-cultural study are provided. These strategies involve different research features (e.g., decentering and convergence), extensive pilot and pretesting, and various statistical procedures to demonstration of different levels of equivalence and detections of bias (e.g., factor analysis based approaches and differential item functioning analysis). The implications of bias and equivalence also extend to instrument adaptation and combining etic and emic approaches to maximize the ecological validity. Instrument choices in cross-cultural research and the categorization of adaptations stemming from considerations of the concept, culture, language, and measurement are outlined. Examples from cross-cultural research of personality are highlighted to illustrate the importance of combining etic and emic approaches. The professionalization and broadening of the field is expected to increase the validity of conclusions regarding cross-cultural similarities and differences.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 703-711
Author(s):  
Michael W. Morris ◽  
Zhen Xiong (George) Chen ◽  
Lorna Doucet ◽  
Yaping Gong

This is a special issue in honor of Kwok Leung, whose path-breaking career in social psychology, cross-cultural psychology, organizational behavior, and international management was cut short by his untimely death in 2015. Newton said, ‘If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants’. In cultural research, it's Kwok's shoulders that enable us to see further.


2012 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jüri Allik ◽  
Koorosh Massoudi ◽  
Anu Realo ◽  
Jérôme Rossier

A review of nearly three decades of cross-cultural research shows that this domain still has to address several issues regarding the biases of data collection and sampling methods, the lack of clear and consensual definitions of constructs and variables, and measurement invariance issues that seriously limit the comparability of results across cultures. Indeed, a large majority of the existing studies are still based on the anthropological model, which compares two cultures and mainly uses convenience samples of university students. This paper stresses the need to incorporate a larger variety of regions and cultures in the research designs, the necessity to theorize and identify a larger set of variables in order to describe a human environment, and the importance of overcoming methodological weaknesses to improve the comparability of measurement results. Cross-cultural psychology is at the next crossroads in it’s development, and researchers can certainly make major contributions to this domain if they can address these weaknesses and challenges.


2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taciano L. Milfont ◽  
Ronald Fischer

Researchers often compare groups of individuals on psychological variables. When comparing groups an assumption is made that the instrument measures the same psychological construct in all groups. If this assumption holds, the comparisons are valid and differences/similarities between groups can be meaningfully interpreted. If this assumption does not hold, comparisons and interpretations are not fully meaningful. The establishment of measurement invariance is a prerequisite for meaningful comparisons across groups. This paper first reviews the importance of equivalence in psychological research, and then the main theoretical and methodological issues regarding measurement invariance within the framework of confirmatory factor analysis. A step-by-step empirical example of measurement invariance testing is provided along with syntax examples for fitting such models in LISREL.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document