Cross‐cultural Studies in Psychology

Holtzman, Wayne H.

doi:10.1080/00207596808247230

Cited by 26 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, linguistic differences among cross-cultural samples may affect the semantic equivalence of multiple versions of a research instrument. The task of translating instruments across different languages often presents problems for cross-cultural researchers (Holtzman, 1968). Second, researchers need to ensure that there is conceptual equivalence of measures across the samples.…”

Section: Stage 3: Validation Of the Research Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Review of Cross-Cultural Methodologies for Organizational Research: A Best- Practices Approach

Schaffer¹,

Riordan²

2003

Organizational Research Methods

671

454

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cross-cultural studies that use self-report instruments can present researchers with a variety of challenges. This article reviews the organizational research literature between the years of 1995 and 2001 to identify common practices prevalent in this type of research. Key methodological issues are examined within the context of a three-stage framework: (a) the development of the research question, (b) the alignment of the research contexts, and (c) the validation of the research instruments. This examination serves as a basis for the identification of best-practice recommendations for cross-cultural researchers.

show abstract

Section: Stage 3: Validation Of the Research Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is rarely an easy task. Even in situations where researchers and linguists work together to produce a common version of an instrument, it is still possible that remaining underlying differences in meaning will present threats to the interpretation of findings (Holtzman, 1968).…”

Section: Semantic Equivalencementioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Cross-Cultural Methodologies for Organizational Research: A Best- Practices Approach

Schaffer¹,

Riordan²

2003

Organizational Research Methods

671

454

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the need to strive for equivalence of measures has long been recognized and general procedures have been suggested by several writers (Berrien, 1967;Berry, 1969;Brislin, Lonner & Thorndike, 1973;Frijda & lahoda, 1966;Holtzman, 1968;Sears, 1961), a precise algorithm with definite criteria for decisions at various stages has still to be worked out and agreed upon. Such a flow diagram would presumably incorporate three sequential phases interlinked by feedback and feedforward loops: A. Formulation, construction, translation and establishment of administration procedures (above authors, plus Irvine, 1973); B.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rotter Internal-External Scale in an African Context: Problems of Construct and Equivalence

Munro

1979

South African Journal of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is argued, in relation to the cross-cultural equivalence of personality measures, that of the three phases of test development namely construction, establishment of reliability and of validity, the second tends to receive too little attention. Accordingly, Rotter I-E Scale data from black and white students in Zambia and Rhodesia were compared with each other and with data collected in other countries. It is concluded that the Rotter I-E Scale is not a reliable instrument even for American groups; that responses may reflect manifest item content more than underlying cognitions about control; and that while locus-of-control seems a valuable and perhaps valid construct for cross-cultural personality and motivation research, we need better scales to measure reliability. s. Atr. J. Psychol. 1979, 9: 61 -66 Met betrekking tot die tussenkulturele ekwivalensie van persoonlikheidsmetinge, word dit aangevoer dat daar in die drie fases van toetsontwikkeling (konstruksie, betroubaarheidsbepaling en geldigheidsbepaling) te min aandag gegee word aan betroubaarheidsbepaling. Gegewens wat met behulp van die Rotter I-E Scale van swart en wit studente in Zamble en Hhodeale verkry is, is vergelyk. Vergelykings is ook get ref met gegewens wat in ander lande versamel is. Op grand van die bevindings word die gevolgtrekking gemaak dat die Rotter I-E Scale nie 'n betroubare meet instrument is nie -nie eens vir Amerikaanse groepe nie en dat waar die konstruk tokus-van-kontrole waardevol en moontlik geldig blyk te wees vir tussenkulturele persoonlikheidsen motiveringsnavorsing, daar tog 'n behoefte is aan beter skale om hierdie konstruk betroubaar te meet.

show abstract

“…Factors inherent to the Rorschach technique limit its applicability for crosscultural research (unreliability of wring, the timeconsuming nature of administration and scoring, difficulties with the statistical analysis of scores, the notorious lack of reliability and the absence of demonstrated crosscultural validity). It should, however, be noted that Holtzman's (1968) criticisms are levelled at these and other aspects, and he consequently (Holtzman, 1980) developed a more objective scoring system for crosscultural contexts. Holtrman (1980: 256) mentions that the same problems that hold for projective testing in general also apply for thematic apperception techniques.…”

Section: Methodological Problems In Cross-cultural Projective Testingmentioning

confidence: 98%

Thematic Apperception Testing across Cultures: Tests of Selection versus Tests of Inclusion

Retief¹

1987

South African Journal of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A review of international and local research on projective personality testing across cultures is given. It is concluded that thematic apperception tests have been used more frequently, and the possible reasons for this are discussed. Features common to the adaptations of various projective techniques for cross-cultural use are pointed out, and discussed in terms of a distinction between the more traditional 'tests of inclusion' and the more recent 'tests of selection' that are useful in cross-cultural testing contexts. The conclusion is drawn that this reconceptualization elucidates a centrally important aspect of testing across cultures, namely, the transmission of meanings.'n Oorsig word gegee van internasionale en plaaslike navorsing oor projektiewe persoonlikheidstoetsing oor kulture. Dit blyk dat tematiese appersepsietoetse meer dikwels gebruik is, en die moontlike redes hiervoor word bespreek. Gemeenskaplike eienskappe van die verskillende aanpassings van kruiskulturele projektiewe tegnieke word uitgewys, en bespreek aan die hand van 'n onderskeid tussen die meer tradisionele 'toetse van insluiting', en die meer onlangse 'toetse van seleksie' wat van nut is in kruiskulturele taksering. Die gevolgtrekking word gernaak dat hierdie herkonseptualisering 'n sentrale aspek van kruiskulturele toetsing, die oordrag van betekenis, verhelder. Some basic theoretical problems of cross-cultural research: Tests as systems of meaning'The concept of culture I espouse . . . is essentially a semiotic one. Believing, with Max Weber, that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun, I take culture to be those webs, and the analysis of it to be therefore not an experimental science in search of law but an interpretive one in search of meaning (Geertz, 1971: 5). Apart from serving as a definition of culture, these remarks by Geertz also illustrate the different approaches to the study of cultures adopted by anthropologists and psychologists. The conception of culture as a system of meanings has been implicit or explicit in the majority of research traditions in anthropology, and has been associated with a more qualitative methodological emphasis. In practice, this normally consists of a detailed description of the behaviours, customs, and activities of other cultural groups, from which inferences about cultural values and rules are drawn.Psychological approaches, however, have placed a strong emphasis on the use of psychometric methods. Associated with the use of these methods has been the use of the theoretical frameworks underlying them to explain behavioural similarities and differences among cultures. The testing context was used as a basis for drawing inferences about related cultural factors. The role played by meanings in this process has received very little attention in psychology due to the difference in methods and explanatory focus of the two disciplines. Geertz uses his conception of culture to criticize operationalism in the social sciences and to form a basis for an argument in favour o...

show abstract

Cross‐cultural Studies in Psychology

Cited by 26 publications

References 10 publications

A Review of Cross-Cultural Methodologies for Organizational Research: A Best- Practices Approach

A Review of Cross-Cultural Methodologies for Organizational Research: A Best- Practices Approach

Rotter Internal-External Scale in an African Context: Problems of Construct and Equivalence

Thematic Apperception Testing across Cultures: Tests of Selection versus Tests of Inclusion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About