Frequently Ignored Methodological Issues in Cross-Cultural Stress Research

  • Juan I. Sanchez
  • Paul E. Spector
  • Cary L. Cooper

5. Conclusion

In summary, several research design features are advocated here as potentially instrumental in establishing the absence of the kind of language and selection biases that are often confounded with culture effects. First, the use of bilinguals with similar levels of acculturation and reading comprehension in both the source and the target language reduces the likelihood of selection bias introduced by differences in language proficiency. Second, the use of a within-participant design eliminates the threat of selection bias that plagues non-equivalent groups in cross-cultural research. Third, the manipulation of language order can help rule out order effects such as recall of the source (e.g., English) version when responding to the target (e.g., Spanish) version. The kind of research design advocated here can test the cultural accommodation hypothesis, which predicts that when bilinguals respond to a measurement instrument, the language in which the instrument is taken influences the responses.

Problems of measurement calibration and sample equivalence are but two of the major issues involved in CC/CN. They provide challenges to researchers interested in comparing people across countries. With the globalization of the economy, cross-cultural comparisons are becoming more important than ever. Research procedures and measurement tools that minimize measurement and sampling error in cross-cultural comparisons are needed if we are to draw valid inferences about culture and nationality effects.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Berry, J. (1969). On cross-cultural comparability. International Journal of Psychology, 4:119–128.Google Scholar
  3. Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Bond, M. H. & Yang, R. (1982). Ethnic affirmation versus cross-cultural accommodation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 13: 169–185.Google Scholar
  5. Boyacigiller, N. A., & Adler, N. J. (1991). The parochial dinosaur: Organizational science in a global context. Academy of Management Journal, 16, 262–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In W. J. Lonner & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Byrne, B. M. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS Windows. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Candell, G. L., & Hulin, C. L. (1987). Cross-language and cross-cultural comparisons in scale translations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 17: 417–440.Google Scholar
  10. Church, A. T. & Lonner, W. J. (1998). The cross-cultural perspective in the study of personality: Rationale and current research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 32–62.Google Scholar
  11. Geisinger, K. F. (1994). Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 6(4): 304–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ghorpade, J., Hattrup, K., & Lackritz, J. R. (1999). The use of personality measures in cross-cultural research: A test of three personality scales across two countries. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 670–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hulin, C. L. (1987). A psychometric theory of evaluations of item and scale translations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 18: 115–142.Google Scholar
  14. Hulin, C. L., & Mayer, L. J. (1986). Psychometric equivalence of a translation of the Job Descriptive Index into Hebrew. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71: 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hulin, C. L., Drasgow, F., & Komocar, J. (1982). Application of item response theory to analysis of attitude scale translations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 818–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Iwata, N., Umesue, M., Egashira, K., Hiro, H., Mizoue, T., Mishima, N., & Nagata, S. (1998). Can positive affect items be used to assess depressive disorder in the Japanese populations? Psychological Medicine, 28, 153–158.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Katerberg, R., Smith, F. J., & Hoy, S. (1977). Language, time, and person effects on attitude scale translations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62: 385–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological Stress and the Coping Process. New York: McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu, C. (2003). A comparison of job stressors and job strains among employees holding comparable jobs in Western and Eastern societies. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of South Florida, Tampa.Google Scholar
  20. Liu, C., Borg, I., & Spector, P. E. (2004). Measurement equivalence of a German job satisfaction survey used in a multinational organization: Implications of Schwartz’s culture model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1070–1082.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lonner, W. J. (1990). An overview of cross-cultural testing and assessment. In R. W. Brislin (Ed.), Applied Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol 14. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Lytle, A. L., Brett, J. M., Barsness, Z. I., Tinsley, C. H., & Janssens, M. (1995). A paradigm for confirmatory cross-cultural research in organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 17:167–214.Google Scholar
  23. Maruyama, M. (1984). Alternative concepts of management: Insights from Asia and Africa. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1(1): 100–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Narayanan, L., Menon, S., & Spector, P. E. (1999). A cross-cultural comparison of job stressors and reactions among employees holding comparable jobs in two countries. International Journal of Stress Management, 6, 197–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ralston, D. A., Cunnif, M. K., Gustafson, D. J. (1995). Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 26: 714–727.Google Scholar
  26. Raju, N. S., Laffitte, L. J., & Byrne, B. M. (2002). Measurement equivalence: A comparison of methods based on confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 517–529.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Riordan, C. M., & Vandenberg, R. J. (1994). A central question in cross-cultural research: Do employees of different cultures interpret work-related measures in an equivalent manner? Journal of Management, 20(3): 643–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ross, N. (2004). Culture & cognition: Implications for theory and method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Ryan, A. M., Chan, D., Ployhart, R. E., & Slade, L. A. (1999). Employee attitude surveys in a multinational organization: Considering language and culture in assessing measurement equivalence. Personnel Psychology, 52: 37–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rybowiak, V., Garst, H., Frese, M., & Batinic, B. (1999). Error orientation questionnaire (EOQ): Reliability, validity, and different language equivalence. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20: 527–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schaffer, B. S., & Riordan, C. M. (2003). A review of cross-cultural methodologies for organizational research: A best-practices approach. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 169–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Siu, O. L., & Cooper, C. L. (1998). A study of occupational stress, job satisfaction and quitting intention in Hong Kong firms: The role of locus of control and organizational commitment. Stress Medicine, 14: 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). Measurement satisfaction in work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  34. Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction. Application, assessment, causes, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Spector, P. E (1988). Development of the Work locus of Control Scale. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61: 335–340.Google Scholar
  36. Spector, P. E., Sanchez, J. I., Siu, O. L., Salgado, J., & Ma, J. (2004). Secondary control, socioinstrumental control, and work locus of control in China and the U.S. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53, 38–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Spector, P. E., Van Katwyk, P. T., Brannick, M. T., & Chen, P. Y. (1997). When two factors don’t reflect two constructs: How item characteristics can produce artifactual factors. Journal of Management, 23, 659–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Spirrison, C. L., & Choi, S. (1998). Psychometric properties of a Korean version of the revised NEO-personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 83: 263–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Triandis, H. C. (1994a). Cross-cultural industrial and organizational psychology. In H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnette, and Leatta M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 103–172). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  40. Triandis, H. C. (1994b). Culture and social behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  41. Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4–69.Google Scholar
  42. Van de Vijver, F., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Viswesvaran, C., Sanchez, J. I., & Fisher, J. (1999). The role of social support in the process of work stress: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 314–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Weisz, J. R., Rothbaum, F. M., & Blackburn, T. C. (1984). Standing out and standing in: The psychology of control in America and Japan. American Psychologist, 39: 955–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Werner, O., & Campbell, D. (1970). Translating, working through interpreters, and the problem of decentering. In R. Carroll and R. Cohen (Eds.), A handbook of method in cultural anthropology, New York: Natural History Press, 398–420.Google Scholar
  46. West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 56–75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  47. Wong, P. T. P. (1993). Effective management of life stress: The resource-congruence model. Stress Medicine, 9, 51–60.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan I. Sanchez
    • 1
  • Paul E. Spector
    • 2
  • Cary L. Cooper
    • 3
  1. 1.Florida International UniversityUSA
  2. 2.University of South FloridaUSA
  3. 3.Lancaster UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations