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.

scholarly journals Revealed Traits: A Novel Method for Estimating Cross-Cultural Similarities and Differences in Personality

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 554-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cory K. Costello ◽  
Dustin Wood ◽  
William Tov
Keyword(s):  
Social Inclusion ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Revealed Preferences ◽  
Cultural Groups ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences ◽  
Country Level ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Or Groups ◽  
Novel Method

Cross-cultural research on personality has often led to surprising and countertheoretical findings, which have led to concerns over the validity of country-level estimates of personality (e.g., Heine, Buchtel, & Norenzayan, 2008). The present study explores how cross-cultural differences can be indexed via revealed trait estimates, which index the personality traits of individuals or groups indirectly through their likelihood of responding in particular ways to particular situations. In two studies, we measure self-reports of personality, revealed traits, and revealed preferences for different expected effects (e.g., experiencing excitement) of two cultural groups (U.S. and Singaporean participants). We found typical East–West differences in personality using self-report scales, such as lower levels of Conscientiousness- and Extraversion-related characteristics among Singaporean participants relative to U.S. participants. We found evidence of scale use extremity differences in self-report personality scales but not in revealed trait estimates. Using revealed traits, we found evidence of strikingly high levels of similarity in terms of overall action endorsement, revealed trait estimates, and revealed preferences. However, this was qualified by consistent differences in revealed trait estimates of Extraversion-related characteristics and less consistent differences in revealed trait estimates of Conscientiousness-related characteristics. We also found consistent differences in preferences for different expected effects; for example, Singaporean participants reported lower likelihood of performing actions expected to result in experiencing stimulation or excitement than U.S. participants. Results suggest that similarities in action endorsements and revealed traits may be driven by common preferences for social inclusion and benevolence, and differences may be driven by differing preferences for expending effort, experiencing stimulation, and social attention.

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.

scholarly journals Breaking ground in cross-cultural research on the fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia): A multi-national study involving 73 countries

2009 ◽  
Vol 22 (1-2) ◽  
Author(s):  
René T. Proyer ◽  
Willibald Ruch ◽  
Numan S. Ali ◽  
Hmoud S. Al-Olimat ◽  
Toshihiko Amemiya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Self Report ◽  
National Study ◽  
Scaling Analysis ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Swiss Journal ◽  
Multiple Samples ◽  
Different Cultures

AbstractThe current study examines whether the fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia) can be assessed reliably and validly by means of a self-report instrument in different countries of the world. All items of the GELOPH (Ruch and Titze, GELOPH〈46〉, University of Düsseldorf, 1998; Ruch and Proyer, Swiss Journal of Psychology 67:19–27, 2008b) were translated to the local language of the collaborator (42 languages in total). In total, 22,610 participants in 93 samples from 73 countries completed the GELOPH. Across all samples the reliability of the 15-item questionnaire was high (mean alpha of .85) and in all samples the scales appeared to be unidimensional. The endorsement rates for the items ranged from 1.31% through 80.00% to a single item. Variations in the mean scores of the items were more strongly related to the culture in a country and not to the language in which the data were collected. This was also supported by a multidimensional scaling analysis with standardized mean scores of the items from the GELOPH〈15〉. This analysis identified two dimensions that further helped explaining the data (i.e., insecure vs. intense avoidant-restrictive and low vs. high suspicious tendencies towards the laughter of others). Furthermore, multiple samples derived from one country tended to be (with a few exceptions) highly similar. The study shows that gelotophobia can be assessed reliably by means of a self-report instrument in cross-cultural research. This study enables further studies of the fear of being laughed at with regard to differences in the prevalence and putative causes of gelotophobia in comparisons to different cultures.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document