心理学进展  >> Vol. 2 No. 2 (April 2012)

跨文化研究中测量工具等价性操作流程初探:我们从积极心理学中学到了什么?
The Operation Procedure of Equivalence of Measuring Instruments in Cross-Cultural Researches: What Have We Learnt from the Positive Psychology?

DOI: 10.12677/ap.2012.22013, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 3,524  浏览: 13,097  科研立项经费支持

作者: 段文杰, 白羽, 何敏贤, 唐小晴

关键词: 跨文化研究测量等价性文化共通性文化特殊性积极心理学性格优势
Cross-Cultural Research; Measurement Equivalence; Etic Approach; Emic Approach; Positive Psychology; Character Strength

摘要: 本文以兼顾文化共通性与文化特殊性研究范式为逻辑起点,以跨文化研究中有关等价性原则为指导,有效整合世界卫生组织关于测量工具翻译和修订基本指导方针的相关内容,扩展传统回译法的基本步骤,提出“三方翻译程序”,同时从定性和定量两个角度获得参考资料,最终整合出含有7个步骤的跨文化研究测量工具等价性操作流程。
Abstract: With the logical starting point of Combined Etic-Emic Approach, and the guidance of rules related to equivalence in cross-cultural researches, this paper effectively integrates the relevant rules about measuring tool translation and modification developed by World Health Organization (WHO), expands the basic steps of traditional method of Back-translation, proposes a “Trilateral Translation Procedure”, and attains the reference materials from the perspectives of quantitive and qualitative, finally produces a measurement tool equivalence operation procedure of cross-cultural research including 7 steps.

文章引用: 段文杰, 白羽, 何敏贤, 唐小晴 (2012). 跨文化研究中测量工具等价性操作流程初探:我们从积极心理学中学到了什么?. 心理学进展, 2(2), 78-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.12677/ap.2012.22013

参考文献

[1] 段文杰, 白羽, 张永红, 唐小晴, 王志章, 李婷婷(2011). 优势行动价值问卷(VIA-IS)在中国大学生中的适用性研究. 中国临床心理学杂志, 4期, 473-475, 478.
[2] 段文杰, 李婷婷, 张永红(2011). 优势行动价值问卷及其应用研究进展. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2期, 205-208.
[3] 范为桥, 张妙清, 张建新, 张树辉(2011). 兼顾文化共通性与特殊性的人格研究: CPAI及其跨文化应用. 心理学报, 12期, 1418-1429.
[4] 方杰, 邱皓政, 张敏强(2011). 基于多层结构方程模型的情境效应分析——兼与多层线性模型比较. 心理科学进展, 2期, 284-292.
[5] 杨玉芳, 孙健敏(2011). 心理学的学科体系和方法论及其发展趋势. 中国科学院院刊, 6期, 611-619.
[6] Berry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A. M. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation: Theory, models and some new findings (pp. 9-25). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
[7] Brislin, R. (1970). Back translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 185-216.
[8] Byrne, B. M., Oakland, T., Leong, F. T. L., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Hambleton, R. K., Cheung, F. M., et al. (2009). A critical analysis of cross-cultural research and testing practices: Implications for improved education and training in psychology. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3, 94-105.
[9] Cheung, F. M. (2004). Use of Western and Indigenously Developed Personality Tests in Asia. Applied Psychology: An International Re- view, 53, 173-191.
[10] Cheung, F. M., Cheung, S. F., Leung, K., Ward, C., & Leong, F. (2003). The English version of the Chinese personality assessment inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 433-452.
[11] Cheung, F. M., Van de Vijver, F. J., & Leong, F. T. (2011). Toward a new approach to the study of personality in culture. American Psy-chologist, 66, 593-603.
[12] Duan, W. J., Bai, Y., Tang, X. Q., Wang, Z. Z., Zhang, Y. H., & Engineering Information, I. (2011). Construct validity of the values in action inventory of strengths in Chinese culture context-based on a Chinese sample of undergraduate students. Paper presented at the Conference on Psychology and Social Harmony. Retrieved from ://WOS:000298569200047
[13] Duan, W. J., Tang, X. Q., Wang, Z. Z., Zhang, Y. H., & Cceoc. (2011). Investigation and analysis of character strengths of Chinese college students a cross-cultural perspective. Paper presented at the Conference on Creative Education. Retrieved from ://WOS:000297713000132
[14] Fischer, R., Ferreira, M., Assmar, E. M. L., Redford, P., & Harb, C. (2005). Organisational behaviour across cultures: Theoretical and methodological issues for developing multi-level frameworks involving culture. Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 5, 27-48.
[15] Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25, 186-192.
[16] Headland, T. N. (1990). A dialogue between Kenneth Pike and Marvin Harris on emics and etics. In T. N. Headland, K. L. Pike & M. Harris (Eds.), Emics and etics: The insider/outsider debate (Vol. Frontiers of anthropology). Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications.
[17] Ho, S. M. Y., & Cheung, M. W. L. (2007). Using the Combined Etic-Emic approach to develop a measurement of interpersonal subjective well-being in Chinese populations. In A. D. Ong. & M. V. Dulmen (Eds.), Oxford handbook of methods in positive psychology (pp. 139-152). New York: Oxford University Press.
[18] Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
[19] Hui, C. H., & Triandis, H. (1985). Measurement in cross-cultural psychology: A review and comparison of strategies. Journal of Cross- Cultural Psychology, 16, 131-152.
[20] Johnson, T. P. (1998). Approaches to equivalence in cross-cultural and cross-national survey research. ZUMA-Nachrichten Spezial, 3, 1-40.
[21] Kankaraš, M., & Moors, G. (2010). Researching measurement equivalence in cross-cultural studies. Psihologija, 43, 121-135.
[22] Kim, H., & Markus, H. R. (1999). Deviance or uniqueness, harmony or conformity? A cultural analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 785-800.
[23] Leong, F. T., Leung, K., & Cheung, F. M. (2010). Integrating cross- cultural psychology research methods into ethnic minority psychol- ogy. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, 590- 597.
[24] Lett, J. (1990). Emics and etics: Notes on the epistemology of anthropology. In T. N. Headland, K. L. Pike, & M. Harris (Eds.), Emics and etics: The insider/outsider debate (Vol. Frontiers of anthropology). Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications.
[25] Leung, K. (1989). Cross-cultural differences: Individual-level vs culture-level analysis. International Journal of Psychology, 24, 703- 719.
[26] Leung, K., & Zhou, F. (2010). Cross-cultural research methods: Review and prospect. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 42, 41-47.
[27] Lonner, W. J., & Berry, J. W. (1986). Field methods in cross-cultural research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
[28] MacCallum, R. C., & Austin, J. T. (2000). Applications of structural equation modelling in psychological research. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 201-226.
[29] Maurer, T. J., Raju, N. S., & Collins, W. C. (1998). Peer and subordinate performance appraisal measurement equivalence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 693-702.
[30] Morris, M. W., Leung, K., Ames, D., & Lickel, B. (1999). Views from inside and outside: Integrating Emic and etic insights about culture and justice judgment. The Academy of Management Review, 24, 781.
[31] Organization, W. H. (2011). Process of translation and adaptation of instruments.
http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/
[32] Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assump- tions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3-72.
[33] Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54, 741-754.
[34] Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
[35] Steger, M. F., Hicks, B. M., Kashdan, T. B., Krueger, R. F., & Bouchard, T. J. (2007). Genetic and environmental influences on the positive traits of the values in action classification, and biometric covariance with normal personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 524-539.
[36] Usunier, J. C. (1998). International and cross-cultural management research. London: Sage.
[37] Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[38] Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (2000). Methodological issues in psychological research on cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 33-51.
[39] Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4-70.