Equivalence of Cross‐cultural Data: An Overview of Basic Issues

Abstract

The logic of comparison is taken as a starting point. It is argued that any cross-cultural comparison presupposes a comparison scale, i.e. a scale that is identical across the populations included in a study. Scale identity can be Specified for various levels of measurement. In the second section a simple classification is presented for inferences about cross-cultural differences derived from psychological measurements. Two questions are asked for various categories of inferences, viz., whether they are logically feasible and whether they can be validated empirically. In the third section the statistical analysis of psychometric conditions for equivalence is discussed. The fourth section deals with the problem what alternatives for meaningful interpretation a researcher has if data turn out to be lacking in equivalence. In the fifth section a conceptual problem is raised. namely whether the basic assumption of this article is realistic that psychological concepts are identical across cultures.

An investigation of the approach to learning of Nepalese tertiary students

“…To date the great majority of this research has been conducted in Europe, America, and Australia. Cross-cultural researchers have often warned of the dangers of assuming that social science theories and research findings derived in one culture are applicable to other cultures (Hui and Triandis 1985;Poortinga 1989). Developing countries around the world are currently struggling to ensure that they can provide a reasonable quality of higher education.…”

What Can Cross-Cultural Correlations Teach Us about Human Nature?

“…However, the validity of inferences based on these instruments entails multiple, non-trivial assumptions that are not always tested (see Byrne and Campbell 1999;Poortinga 1989;Van de Vijver and Leung 1997;Van de Vijver and Tanzer 2004). These issues include the degree to which group-level data are acquired using similar sampling techniques (e.g., if estimates of some nations' scores are inferred from samples of college students, whereas estimates of other nations' scores are inferred from foragers), the degree to which methods of data collection vary across groups (e.g., paper-pencil questionnaire versus interview), the degree to which the same assessment method may produce different demand characteristics across groups, and the degree to which factor structures, factor loadings, and item intercepts are equivalent across groups.…”

Cross-Cultural Equivalence of HSCL-25 and WHO (ten) Wellbeing Index: Findings From a Population-Based Survey of Immigrants and Non-Immigrants in Sweden

“…A few researchers have addressed this confusion and shed some much needed light on the issue by distinguishing between different concepts of cross-cultural equivalence and how these concepts relate to each other (Poortinga 1989;van de Vijver and Leung 1997a, b;van de Vijver and Tanzer 1997). Hui and Triandis (1985) suggest a hierarchic framework including four levels, where more fundamental concepts of equivalence are a presumption for conducting meaningful tests on a lower level of abstraction.…”