Translating Tests
Abstract
With the increasing interest in cross-cultural research, there is a growing need for standard and validated practices for translating psychological instruments. Developing a psychologically acceptable instrument for another cultural group almost always requires more effort than a literal translation, which all too often is the common practice. The adequacy of translations can be threatened by various sources of bias. Three types of bias are distinguished in this paper: (1) construct bias (related to nonequivalence of constructs across cultural groups), (2) method bias (resulting from instrument administration problems), and (3) item bias (often a result of inadequate translations such as incorrect word choice). Ways in which bias can affect the adequacy of instruments are illustrated and possible remedies are discussed.
References
References
Amirkhan, J.H. (1990). A factor-analytically derived measure of coping: The Coping Strategy Indicator. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1066– 1074 1991-11477-001Barrett, P. (1986). Factor comparison: An examination of three methods. Personality and Individual Differences, 7, 327– 340 1987-14497-001Brislin, R.W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In H.C. Triandis & J.W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 389-444). Boston: Allyn & BaconBrislin, R.W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In W.J. Lonner & J.W. Berry (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research (pp. 137-164). Newbury Park, CA: SageCampbell, D.T. Fiske, D.W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait—multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81– 105 1960-00103-001Cattell, R.B. (1940). A culture-free intelligence test, I. Journal of Educational Psychology, 31, 176– 199Cattell, R.B. Cattell, A.K.S. (1963). Culture Fair Intelligence Test . Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability TestingFioravanti, M. Gough, H.G. Frere, L.J. (1981). English, French, and Italian adjective check lists: A social desirability analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 12, 461– 472 1982-22496-001Hambleton, R.K. (1993). Translating achievement tests for use in cross-national studies. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 9, 57– 68 1994-35864-001Hambleton, R.K. (1994). Guidelines for adapting educational and psychological tests: A progress report. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 10, 229– 244 1995-39303-001Hambleton, R.K. Swaminathan, H. Rogers, H.J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory . Newbury Park, CA: Sage PublicationsHo, D.Y.F. in press Filial piety and its psychological consequences. In M.H. Bond (Ed.), Handbook of Chinese psychology. Hong Kong: Oxford University PressHolland, P.W. Thayer, D.T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H.I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumHolland, P.W. Wainer, H. (1993). Differential item functioning . Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumHui, C.H. Triandis, H.C. (1989). Effects of culture and response format on extreme response style. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 20, 296– 309 1990-04529-001Jensen, A.R. (1980). Bias in mental testing . New York: Free PressLipson, J.G. Meleis, A.I. (1989). Methodological issues in research with immigrants. Special Issue: Cross-cultural nursing: Anthropological approaches to nursing research. Medical Anthropology, 12, 103– 115 1992-19636-001Marsh, H.W. Byrne, B.M. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis of multigroup-multimethod self-concept data: Between-group and within-group invariance constraints. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28, 313– 349 1994-16053-001Poortinga, Y.H. Malpass, R.S. (1986). Making inferences from cross-cultural data. In W.J. Lonner & J.W. Berry (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 17-46). Beverly Hills, CA: SageScheuneman, J.D. (1987). An experimental, exploratory study of causes of bias in test items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 97– 118 1988-34309-001Serpell, R. (1993). The significance of schooling. Life-journeys in an African society . Cambridge: Cambridge University PressShepard, L. Camilli, G. Averill, M. (1981). Comparisons of procedures for detecting test-item bias with both internal and external ability criteria. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6, 317– 375 1982-08901-001Sternberg, R.J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607– 627 1986-03771-001Super, C.M. (1983). Cultural variation in the meaning and uses of children's “intelligence.”. In J.B. Deregowski, S. Dziurawiec, & R.C. Annis (Eds.), Expiscations in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 199-212). Lisse: Swets & ZeitlingerVan de Vijver, F.J.R. Leung, K. in press Methods and data analysis of comparative research. In J.W. Berry, Y.H. Poortinga, & J. Pandey (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology. Boston: Allyn & BaconVan de Vijver, F.J.R. Lonner, W. (1995). A bibliometric analysis of the Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology . Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 591– 602Van de Vijver, F.J.R. Poortinga, Y.H. in press Towards an integrated analysis of bias in cross-cultural assessment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment,Van Haaften, E.H. Van de Vijver, F.J.R. in press Psychological consequences of environmental degradation. Journal of Health Psychology,Watkins, D. (1989). The role of confirmatory factor analysis in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychology, 24, 685– 701 1990-13789-001Werner, O. Campbell, D.T. (1970). Translating, working through interpreters, and the problem of decentering. In R. Naroll & R. Cohen (Eds.), A handbook of cultural anthropology (pp. 398-419). New York: American Museum of Natural History
