2003
DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8116(03)00038-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing generalizability of scales used in cross-national research

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
66
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(71 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
4
66
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In other words, ideally, a GC should be high but smaller than one. Sharma and Weathers (2003) suggest .90 as the optimum GC level and find GCs close to that value, among others, for a 17-item scale measuring Consumer Ethnocentrism. The GCs for our brand personality factors range from .70 to .91.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 77%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In other words, ideally, a GC should be high but smaller than one. Sharma and Weathers (2003) suggest .90 as the optimum GC level and find GCs close to that value, among others, for a 17-item scale measuring Consumer Ethnocentrism. The GCs for our brand personality factors range from .70 to .91.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…We based the G study on Sharma and Weathers (2003). G theory provides information on how the total variance of the items can be assigned to different sources of variance, some of which are desirable (individuals and countries) and others of which are undesirable (error and cross-cultural item bias).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The applications of G theory in the marketing literature are also scarce. Sharma and Weathers 50 were one of the fi rst to use G theory to assess the cross-national applicability of a scale. More recently, Durvasula et al 51 extended this work and offered a procedure for conducting this analysis.…”
Section: Suggestions and Recommendationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, a strategic and rigorous process was followed in the development and construction of the original instrument [8,9] as prescribed by [4,12] and as exemplified by [1,3,15] . Another explanation may be the timeline system itself.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%