Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Similarities and Differences Among the Taiwan, China, and Hong-Kong Versions of the WHOQOL Questionnaire

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To facilitate comparison across cultures, the World Health Organization (WHO) has been developing a universal measure of quality of life (QOL) called the WHOQOL Questionnaire. This questionnaire contains 24 facets organized into six broad domains: physical, psychological, level of independence, social relationships, environment, and spirituality/religion/personal beliefs. The standard WHOQOL is designed for cross-cultural comparison. However, to obtain a valid QOL measure that can be applied in diverse populations, cultural adaptation of the WHOQOL has been encouraged. Each culture is permitted to add culture-specific questions, called national items, so that the questionnaire can also reflect cultural attributes. Three Chinese versions of the WHOQOL have been developed for China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. National items were selected for each version according to the criteria proposed by the WHOQOL Group. The purpose of this paper is to compare the Taiwan version to the China and Hong Kong versions. The questionnaire development process, response scale generation, psychometric properties (reliability and validity), national items, and population means were all examined. Results indicated that not only is cultural adaptation of WHOQOL measures necessary for individual cultures, but also for sub-cultures, as these differences must be considered in order to provide effective health care and treatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Fang, J. Q. (2000). Quality of life: Evaluation methods and applications (pp. 113–143). Beijing: Peiking University Medical Press (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang, J. Q., Hao, Y. T., & Li, C. (1999a). Reliability and validity for the Chinese version of WHO quality of life scale. Chinese Mental Health Journal, 13, 203–205 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang, J. Q., Shi, M. L., Zhou, F. Q., & Hao, Y. T. (1999b). Cultural adaptation of WHOQOL-100 from English to Chinese. Unpublished report. Guangzhou, China: Sun Yat-Sen University of Medical Sciences.

  • Fang, J. Q., Li, C. X., Hao, Y. T., et al. (1998). The development of the WHOQOL-100 China version. Statistics and Prediction, suppl., 40–41 (in Chinese).

  • Forgas, J. P., Kagan, C., & Frey, D. (1977). The cognitive representation of political personalities: A cross-cultural comparison. International Journal of Psychology, 12, 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuh, J. L., Wang, S. J., Lu, S. R., Juang, K. D., & Lee, S. J. (2000). Psychometric evaluation of a Chinese (Taiwanese) version of the SF-36 health survey amongst middle-aged women from a rural community. Quality of Life Research, 9, 675–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagerty, M. R., Cummins, R. A., Ferriss, A. L., Land, K., Michalos, A. C., Peterson, M., et al. (2001). Quality of life indexes for national policy: Review and agenda for research. Social Indicators Research, 55, 1–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herdman, M., Fox-Rushby, J., & Badia, X. (1997). ‘Equivalence’ and the translation and adaptation of health-related quality of life questionnaires. Quality of Life Research, 6, 237–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermann, D. J., & Raybeck, D. (1981). Similarities and differences in meaning in six cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 12, 194–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, D. Y. F. (1993). Relational orientation in Asian social psychology. In U. Kim & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context (pp. 240–259). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hui, C. H., & Triandis, H. C. (1985). Measurement in cross-cultural psychology: A review and comparison of strategies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16, 131–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, K. K. (1987). Face and favor: The Chinese power game. American Journal of Sociology, 92, 944–974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, K. K. (1995). Knowledge and action: The socio-psychological explanation on traditional Chinese Culture. Taipei: Psychology Publishing (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, K. K. (1997/1998). Guanxi and Mientze: Conflict resolution in Chinese Society. Intercultural Communication Studies, 7, 17–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, R. C., & Bu, N. (2005). Perceptions of the mutual obligations between employees and employers: A comparative study of new generation IT professionals in China and the United States. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16, 46–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E. (1989). Assessment and treatment of Chinese–American immigrant families. Journal of Psychotherapy & the Family, 6, 99–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leung, K. F., Chan, C. C. H., & Lin, F. (1997a). Cultural adaptation of the WHOQOL-100 and the development of national questions for the Hong Kong Chinese version WHOQOL. Unpublished report. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Hospital Authority.

  • Leung, K. F., Chu, M. M. L. & Lau, J. T. F. (1997b). Cultural relevancy of WHOQOL structure in Hong Kong Chinese. Unpublished report. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Hospital Authority.

  • Leung, K. F., & Lin, F. (1997). Development of Hong Kong chinese response scales for the WHOQOL (HK). Unpublished report. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Hospital Authority.

  • Leung, K. F., Tay, M., Cheng, S. W., & Lin, F. (1997c). Hong Kong Chinese version World Health Organization quality of life measure—Abbreviated version (WHOQOL-BREF(HK). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Hospital Authority.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao, P. S., Fu, Y. C., & Yi, C. C. (2005). Perceived quality of life in Taiwan and Hong Kong: An intra-culture comparison. Journal of Happiness Studies, 6, 43–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, M. R., Yao, K. P., Hwang, J. S., & Wang, J. D. (1999). Scale descriptor selection for Taiwan-version of questionnaire of World Health Organization quality of life. Chinese Journal of Public Health, 18, 262–270 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implication for cognition, emotions, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1994). A collective fear of the collective: Implication for selves and the theory of selves. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 569–579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oishi, S., Diener, E. F., Lucas, R. E., & Suh, E. M. (1999). Cross-cultural variations in predictors of life satisfaction: Perspectives from needs and values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 980–990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, M., Harper, A., & Bullinger, M. (1999). The World Health Organization WHOQOL-100: Tests of the universality of quality of life in 15 different cultural groups worldwide. Health Psychology, 18, 495–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudmin, F. W. (1994). Cross-cultural psycholinguistic field research: Verbs of ownership and possession. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25, 114–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sartorius, N., & Kuyken, W. (1994). Translation of health status instruments. In J. Orley & W. Kuyken (Eds.), Quality of life assessment: International perspectives (pp. 3–18). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shih, F. J. (1996). Concepts related to Chinese patients’ perceptions of health, illness and person: Issues of conceptual clarity. Accident and Emergency Nursing, 4, 208–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skevington, S. M., Bradshaw, J., & Saxena, S. (1999). Selecting national items for the WHOQOL: Conceptual and psychometric considerations. Social Science and Medicine, 48, 473–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skevington, S. M., Lotfy, M., & O’Connell, K. A. (2004a). The World Health Organization’s WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: Psychometric properties and results of the international field trial, a Report from the WHOQOL Group. Quality of Life Research, 13, 299–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skevington, S. M., Sartorius, N., & Amir, M. (2004b). Developing methods for assessing quality of life in different cultural settings. The history of the WHOQOL instruments. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 39, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skevington, S. M., & Tucker, C. (1999). Designing response scales for cross-cultural use in health care: Data from the development of the UK WHOQOL. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 72, 51–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sprecher, S., & Toro-Morn, M. (2002). A study of men and women from different sides of earth to determine if men are from Mars and women are from Venus in their beliefs about love and romantic relationships. Sex Roles, 46, 131–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szabo, S. (1996). The World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL) assessment instrument. In B. Spiker (Ed.), Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials (pp. 355–362). Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szabo, S., Orley, J., & Saxena, S. (1997). An approach to response scale development for cross-cultural questionnaires. European Psychologist, 2, 270–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, D. M., Simard, L. M., & Aboud, F. E. (1972). Ethnic identification in Canada: A cross-cultural investigation. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 4, 13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • The WHOQOL Group. (1994a). The development of the World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment instrument (the WHOQOL). In J. Orley & W. Kuyen (Eds.), Quality of life assessment: International perspectives (pp. 41–57). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • The WHOQOL Group. (1994b). Development of the WHOQOL: Rationale and current status. International Journal of Mental Health, 23, 24–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • The WHOQOL Group. (1995). The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL): Position paper from the World Health Organization. Social Science and Medicine, 41, 1403–1409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The WHOQOL Group. (1998a). The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL): Development and general psychometric properties. Social Science and Medicine, 46, 1569–1585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The WHOQOL Group. (1998b). Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychological Medicine, 28, 551–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The WHOQOL-Taiwan Group. (2000). Introduction to the development of the WHOQOL-Taiwan version. Chinese Journal of Public Health, 19, 315–324 (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • The WHOQOL-Taiwan Group. (2005). The user’s manual of the development of the WHOQOL-100 Taiwan version (2nd ed.). Taipei: The WHOQOL-Taiwan Group (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Triandis, H. C. (1994). Individualism and collectivism: Conceptual clarification and elaboration. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications (pp. 41–51). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzeng, O. C., & Everett, A. V. (1985). A cross-cultural perspective of self-related conceptions in adolescence. International Journal of Psychology, 20, 329–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzeng, O. C., Osgood, C. E., & May, W. H. (1976). Idealized cultural differences in kinship conceptions. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 55, 1–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, A. (2002). Validation of a self-control rating scale in a Chinese preschool. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 16, 189–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., Gandek, B., Aaronson, N. K., Apolone, G., Bech, P., et al. (1998). The factor structure of the SF-36 health survey in ten countries: Results from the IQOLA project. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 1159–1165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. (1992). WHOQOL focus group moderator training. Geneva: WHO (MNH/PSF/92.9).

  • World Health Organization. (1993). WHOQOL study protocol. Geneva: WHO (MNH/PSF/93.9).

  • World Health Organization. (1994). WHOQOL protocol for new centers. Geneva: WHO (MNH/PSF/94.4).

  • World Health Organization (1995a). Field trial WHOQOL-100: Introduction and background. Geneva: WHO (MNH/PSF/95.1.A).

  • World Health Organization. (1995b). Resources for new WHOQOL centers. Geneva: WHO (MNH/PSF/95.2).

  • World Health Organization. (1995c). Field trial WHOQOL-100: The 100 questions with response scales. Geneva: WHO (MNH/PSF/95.1.D.Rev.1).

  • World Health Organization. (1995d). Field trial WHOQOL-100: Scoring the WHOQOL. Geneva: WHO (MNH/PSF/95.1. F).

  • World Health Organization. (1996). WHOQOL-BREF: Introduction, administration, scoring and generic version of the assessment—Field trial version. Geneva: WHO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xia, G., & Qian, M. (2001). The relationship of parenting style to self-reported mental health among two subcultures of Chinese. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 251–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao, G., Chung, C. W., Yu, C. F., & Wang, J. D. (2002). Development and verification of validity and reliability of the WHOQOL-BREF Taiwan version. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, 101, 342–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yao, G., Lee, P. C., Chen, C. M., & Wang, J. D. (2007a). Applicability of the WHOQOL-BREF to the general population. Unpublished report. Department of Psychology, National Taiwan University.

  • Yao, G., Wang, J. D., & Chung, C. W. (2007b). Cultural adaptation of the WHOQOL questionnaire for Taiwan. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, 106, 592–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao, G., & Wu, C. H. (2005). Factorial invariance study among disease groups using the WHOQOL-BREF Taiwan. Quality of Life Research, 14, 1881–1888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J. B. (1997). Leisure participation frequencies, preferences and perceived barriers among adult Chinese immigrants from three subcultures in New York City: A comparative study. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences. 58(1–A), 288.

Download references

Acknowledgement

The study was supported by grants from the National Science Council. (NSC 87-2312-B-002-001, NSC 88-2314-B-002-344, NSC 89-2312-B-002-001, NSC 95-2413-H-002-002, NSC 96-2413-H-002-001-MY3). Special thanks to Dr. Fang Jiqian and Mr. Leung Kwok Fai for providing the WHOQOL research papers and documents from the China and Hong Kong versions respectively.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, National Taiwan University, No. 1, Sect. 4, Roosevelt Rd, 10617, Taipei, Taiwan, China

    Grace Yao & Chia-huei Wu

Authors
  1. Grace Yao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chia-huei Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grace Yao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yao, G., Wu, Ch. Similarities and Differences Among the Taiwan, China, and Hong-Kong Versions of the WHOQOL Questionnaire. Soc Indic Res 91, 79–98 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9326-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9326-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation