Measurement issues across different cultures.

Juhee Lee, Duk Yoo Jung

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purposes of this methodologic paper are to (1) describe theoretical background in conducting research across different cultures; (2) address measurement issues related to instrument administration; and (3) provide strategies to deal with measurement issues. METHODS: A thorough review of the literature was conducted. A theoretical background is provided, and examples of administering instrument in studies are described. RESULTS: When applying an instrument to different cultures, both equivalence and bias need to be established. Three levels of equivalence, i.e., construct equivalence, measurement unit equivalence, and full score comparability, need to be explained to maintain the same concept being measured. In this paper, sources of bias in construct, method, and item are discussed. Issues related to instrument administration in a cross-cultural study are described. CONCLUSION: Researchers need to acknowledge various group differences in concept and/or language that include a specific set of symbols and norms. There is a need to question the philosophical and conceptual appropriateness of an assessment measure that has been conceptualized and operationalized in a different culture. Additionally, testing different response formats such as narrowing response range can be considered to reduce bias.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1295-1300
Number of pages6
JournalTaehan Kanho Hakhoe chi
Volume36
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2006 Jan 1

Fingerprint

Language
Research Personnel
Research

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Lee, Juhee ; Jung, Duk Yoo. / Measurement issues across different cultures. In: Taehan Kanho Hakhoe chi. 2006 ; Vol. 36, No. 8. pp. 1295-1300.
@article{94bacb2752284eeb800e7ea6ed0198d1,
title = "Measurement issues across different cultures.",
abstract = "PURPOSE: The purposes of this methodologic paper are to (1) describe theoretical background in conducting research across different cultures; (2) address measurement issues related to instrument administration; and (3) provide strategies to deal with measurement issues. METHODS: A thorough review of the literature was conducted. A theoretical background is provided, and examples of administering instrument in studies are described. RESULTS: When applying an instrument to different cultures, both equivalence and bias need to be established. Three levels of equivalence, i.e., construct equivalence, measurement unit equivalence, and full score comparability, need to be explained to maintain the same concept being measured. In this paper, sources of bias in construct, method, and item are discussed. Issues related to instrument administration in a cross-cultural study are described. CONCLUSION: Researchers need to acknowledge various group differences in concept and/or language that include a specific set of symbols and norms. There is a need to question the philosophical and conceptual appropriateness of an assessment measure that has been conceptualized and operationalized in a different culture. Additionally, testing different response formats such as narrowing response range can be considered to reduce bias.",
author = "Juhee Lee and Jung, {Duk Yoo}",
year = "2006",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4040/jkan.2006.36.8.1295",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
pages = "1295--1300",
journal = "Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing",
issn = "2005-3673",
publisher = "Korean Society of Nursing Science",
number = "8",

}

Measurement issues across different cultures. / Lee, Juhee; Jung, Duk Yoo.

In: Taehan Kanho Hakhoe chi, Vol. 36, No. 8, 01.01.2006, p. 1295-1300.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Measurement issues across different cultures.

AU - Lee, Juhee

AU - Jung, Duk Yoo

PY - 2006/1/1

Y1 - 2006/1/1

N2 - PURPOSE: The purposes of this methodologic paper are to (1) describe theoretical background in conducting research across different cultures; (2) address measurement issues related to instrument administration; and (3) provide strategies to deal with measurement issues. METHODS: A thorough review of the literature was conducted. A theoretical background is provided, and examples of administering instrument in studies are described. RESULTS: When applying an instrument to different cultures, both equivalence and bias need to be established. Three levels of equivalence, i.e., construct equivalence, measurement unit equivalence, and full score comparability, need to be explained to maintain the same concept being measured. In this paper, sources of bias in construct, method, and item are discussed. Issues related to instrument administration in a cross-cultural study are described. CONCLUSION: Researchers need to acknowledge various group differences in concept and/or language that include a specific set of symbols and norms. There is a need to question the philosophical and conceptual appropriateness of an assessment measure that has been conceptualized and operationalized in a different culture. Additionally, testing different response formats such as narrowing response range can be considered to reduce bias.

AB - PURPOSE: The purposes of this methodologic paper are to (1) describe theoretical background in conducting research across different cultures; (2) address measurement issues related to instrument administration; and (3) provide strategies to deal with measurement issues. METHODS: A thorough review of the literature was conducted. A theoretical background is provided, and examples of administering instrument in studies are described. RESULTS: When applying an instrument to different cultures, both equivalence and bias need to be established. Three levels of equivalence, i.e., construct equivalence, measurement unit equivalence, and full score comparability, need to be explained to maintain the same concept being measured. In this paper, sources of bias in construct, method, and item are discussed. Issues related to instrument administration in a cross-cultural study are described. CONCLUSION: Researchers need to acknowledge various group differences in concept and/or language that include a specific set of symbols and norms. There is a need to question the philosophical and conceptual appropriateness of an assessment measure that has been conceptualized and operationalized in a different culture. Additionally, testing different response formats such as narrowing response range can be considered to reduce bias.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34247860919&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34247860919&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4040/jkan.2006.36.8.1295

DO - 10.4040/jkan.2006.36.8.1295

M3 - Review article

VL - 36

SP - 1295

EP - 1300

JO - Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing

JF - Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing

SN - 2005-3673

IS - 8

ER -