1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior
  4. Volume 2, 2015
  5. Article

Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior

Volume 2, 2015

Methodological and Substantive Issues in Conducting Multinational and Cross-Cultural Research

Abstract

The rising importance of multinational and cross-cultural research has spurred the development of methodologies to adequately study human phenomena in organizations across culture and place. Disentangling culture and location from potential confounding variables is an underlying issue in conducting comparative studies. Research designs allow comparisons of countries and culture groups, as well as isolate the potential impact of cultural variables. Sampling methods must be chosen to control for differences that confound the cultural variables of interest with other characteristics of samples. Translation and back-translation are necessary when studies cross linguistic boundaries. Measures that compare cultural and national groups should be checked for measurement equivalence/invariance using one or more tools based on confirmatory factor analysis or item response theory. Some sources of invariance can be found in culturally determined response biases. In the same investigation, it is advisable to pair qualitative methods, which help characterize culture-specific factors, with quantitative methods, which help disentangle their confounds.

Keyword(s): cross-cultural research, measurement equivalence, multinational research, research design, response style
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111310
2015-04-10
2024-04-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/orgpsych/2/1/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111310.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111310&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Aguinis H, Gottfredson RK. 2010. Best-practice recommendations for estimating interaction effects using moderated multiple regression. J. Organ. Behav. 31:6776–86 doi:10.1002/job.686 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aycan Z, Kanungo RN. 2002. Cross-cultural industrial and organizational psychology: a critical appraisal of the field and future directions. Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology Vol. 1, Personnel Psychology, ed. N Anderson, DS Ones, H Keper Sinangil, C Viswesvaran, pp. 385–408. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  3. Banville D, Desrosiers P, Genet-Volet Y. 2000. Translating questionnaires and inventories using a cross-cultural translation technique. J. Teach. Phys. Educ. 19:3374–87 [Google Scholar]
  4. Benet-Martinez V. 2007. Cross-cultural personality research: conceptual and methodological issues. In Handbook of Research Methods in Personality Psychology, ed. RW Robins, RC Fraley, RF Krueger, pp. 170–89. New York: Guilford
  5. Berry JW. 1969. On cross-cultural comparability. Int. J. Psychol. 4:2119–28 doi:10.1080/00207596908247261 [Google Scholar]
  6. Birnbaum PH, Farh JL, Wong GYY. 1986. The job characteristics model in Hong Kong. J. Appl. Psychol. 71:4598–605 [Google Scholar]
  7. Boehnke K, Lietz P, Schreier M, Wilhelm A. 2011. Sampling: the selection of cases for culturally comparative psychological research. In Cross-Cultural Research Methods in Psychology, ed. D Matsumoto, FJR van de Vijver, pp. 101–29. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  8. Bollen KA. 1989. Structural Equations with Latent Variables New York: Wiley
  9. Boyacigiller NA, Adler NJ. 1991. The parochial dinosaur: organizational science in a global context. Acad. Manag. Rev. 16:2262–90 doi:10.2307/258862 [Google Scholar]
  10. Brislin RW. 1986. The wording and translation of research instruments. Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research Lonner WJ, Berry JW. 137–64 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  11. Buchanan T, Smith JL. 1999. Using the Internet for psychological research: personality testing on the World Wide Web. Br. J. Psychol. 90:1125–44 doi:10.1348/000712699161189 [Google Scholar]
  12. Byrne BM, Stewart SM. 2006. Teacher’s corner: the MACS approach to testing for multigroup invariance of a second-order structure—a walk through the process. Struct. Equ. Modeling 13:2287–321 doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1302_7 [Google Scholar]
  13. Camerino D, Estryn-Behar M, Conway PM, van Der Heijden BIJM, Hasselhorn H-M. 2008. Work-related factors and violence among nursing staff in the European NEXT study: a longitudinal cohort study. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 45:135–50 doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2007.01.013 [Google Scholar]
  14. Candell GL, Hulin CL. 1986. Cross-language and cross-cultural comparisons in scale translations: independent sources of information about item nonequivalence. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 17:4417–40 doi:10.1177/0022002186017004003 [Google Scholar]
  15. Chan D. 2000. Detection of differential item functioning on the Kirton Adaption-Innovation Inventory using multiple-group mean and covariance structure analyses. Multivar. Behav. Res. 35:2169–99 doi:10.1207/S15327906MBR3502_2 [Google Scholar]
  16. Chen X-P, Eberly MB, Chiang T-J, Farh J-L, Cheng B-S. 2014. Affective trust in Chinese leaders: linking paternalistic leadership to employee performance. J. Manag. 40:3796–819 doi:10.1177/0149206311410604 [Google Scholar]
  17. Cheng B-S, Chou L-F, Wu T-Y, Huang M-P, Farh J-L. 2004. Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian J. Soc. Psychol. 7:189–117 doi:10.1111/j.1467-839X.2004.00137.x [Google Scholar]
  18. Cheung GW. 2008. Testing equivalence in the structure, means, and variances of higher-order constructs with structural equation modeling. Organ. Res. Methods 11:3593–613 doi:10.1177/1094428106298973 [Google Scholar]
  19. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. 1999. Testing factorial invariance across groups: a reconceptualization and proposed new method. J. Manag. 25:11–27 doi:10.1177/014920639902500101 [Google Scholar]
  20. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. 2000. Assessing extreme and acquiescence response sets in cross-cultural research using structural equations modeling. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 31:2187–212 doi:10.1177/0022022100031002003 [Google Scholar]
  21. Chinta R, Capar N. 2007. Comparative analysis of managerial values in the USA and China. J. Technol. Manag. China 2:3212–24 doi:10.1108/17468770710825151 [Google Scholar]
  22. Cole MS, Bedeian AG, Feild HS. 2006. The measurement equivalence of web-based and paper-and-pencil measures of transformational leadership: a multinational test. Organ. Res. Methods 9:3339–68 doi:10.1177/1094428106287434 [Google Scholar]
  23. Cronbach LJ, Gleser GC, Nanda H, Rajaratnam N. 1972. The Dependability of Behavioral Measurements: Theory of Generalizability Scores and Profiles New York: Wiley
  24. De Beuckelaer A, Lievens F. 2009. Measurement equivalence of paper-and-pencil and Internet organisational surveys: a large scale examination in 16 countries. Appl. Psychol. 58:2336–61 doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00350.x [Google Scholar]
  25. de Lange AH, Taris TW, Kompier MA, Houtman IL, Bongers PM. 2003. “The very best of the millennium”: longitudinal research and the demand-control-(support) model. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 8:4282–305 [Google Scholar]
  26. Dorfman PW, Howell JP. 1988. Dimensions of national culture and effective leadership patterns: Hofstede revisited. In Advances in International Comparative Management, A Research Annual, Vol. 3, ed. RN Farmer, EG McGoun, pp. 127–49. Greenwich, CN: JAI
  27. Drasgow F, Chernyshenko OS, Stark S. 2010. 75 years after Likert: Thurstone was right. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 3:465–76 [Google Scholar]
  28. Ellis BB. 1989. Differential item functioning: implications for test translations. J. Appl. Psychol. 74:6912–21 doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.6.912 [Google Scholar]
  29. Ellis BB. 1990. Assessing intelligence cross-nationally: a case for differential item functioning detection. Intelligence 14:161–78 doi:10.1016/0160-2896(90)90014-K [Google Scholar]
  30. Fan X. 1998. Item response theory and classical test theory: an empirical comparison of their item/person statistics. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 58:3357–81 doi:10.1177/0013164498058003001 [Google Scholar]
  31. Farh J-L, Cheng B-S. 2000. A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. Management and Organizations in the Chinese Context Li JT, Tsui AS, Weldon E. 84–127 London: Macmillan [Google Scholar]
  32. Farh J-L, Dobbins GH, Cheng B-S. 1991. Cultural relativity in action: a comparison of self-rating made by Chinese and U.S. workers. Person. Psychol. 44:1129–47 doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00693.x [Google Scholar]
  33. Farh J-L, Earley P, Lin S-C. 1997. Impetus for action: a cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society. Adm. Sci. Q. 42:3421–44 doi:10.2307/2393733 [Google Scholar]
  34. Ferris GR, Treadway DC, Kolodinsky RW, Hochwarter WA, Kacmar CJ et al. 2005a. Development and validation of the political skill inventory. J. Manag. 31:1126–52 [Google Scholar]
  35. Ferris GR, Treadway DC, Kolodinsky RW, Hochwarter WA, Kacmar CJ et al. 2005b. Development and validation of the political skill inventory. Erratum. J. Manag. 31:4642–43 [Google Scholar]
  36. Fischer R. 2004. Standardization to account for cross-cultural response bias: a classification of score adjustment procedures and review of research in JCCP. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 35:3263–82 doi:10.1177/0022022104264122 [Google Scholar]
  37. Fontaine JRJ. 2008. Traditional and multilevel approaches in cross-cultural research: an integration of methodological frameworks. See van de Vijver et al. 2008, pp. 65–92
  38. Geisinger KF. 1994. Cross-cultural normative assessment: translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychol. Assess. 6:4304–12 doi:10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.304 [Google Scholar]
  39. Gelfand MJ, Raver JL, Ehrhart KH. 2002. Methodological issues in cross-cultural organizational research. Handbook of Research Methods in Industrial and Organizational Psychology Rogelberg SG. 216–46 Malden, MA: Blackwell [Google Scholar]
  40. Graen GB, Uhl-Bien M. 1995. Relationship-based approach to leadership: development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. Leadersh. Q. 6:2219–47 doi:10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5 [Google Scholar]
  41. Greene JC, Caracelli VJ, Graham WF. 1989. Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educ. Eval. Policy Anal. 11:3255–74 doi:10.3102/01623737011003255 [Google Scholar]
  42. Gregorich SE. 2006. Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. Med. Care 44:11Suppl. 3S78–94 doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000245454.12228.8f [Google Scholar]
  43. Griffin B. 2010. Multilevel relationships between organizational-level incivility, justice and intention to stay. Work Stress 24:4309–23 doi:10.1080/02678373.2010.531186 [Google Scholar]
  44. Hall ET. 1989. Beyond Culture New York: Random House
  45. Hambleton RK, Swaminathan H. 1985. Item Response Theory: Principles and Applications Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff332
  46. Hays RD, Brown J, Brown LU, Spritzer KL, Crall JJ. 2006. Classical test theory and item response theory analyses of multi-item scales assessing parents’ perceptions of their children’s dental care. Med. Care 44:11Suppl. 3S60–68 doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000245144.90229.d0 [Google Scholar]
  47. Heeren A, Douilliez C, Peschard V, Debrauwere L, Philippot P. 2011. Cross-cultural validity of the Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire: adaptation and validation in a French-speaking sample. Rev. Eur. Psychol. Appl. 61:3147–51 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2011.02.001 [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  48. Ho J, Nesbit PL, Jepsen D, Demirian S. 2012. Extending self-leadership research to the East: measurement equivalence of the Chinese and English versions of the MSLQ. Asian J. Soc. Psychol. 15:2101–11 doi:10.1111/j.1467-839X.2011.01366.x [Google Scholar]
  49. Hofstede G. 1983. National cultures in four dimensions: a research-based theory of cultural differences among nations. Intl. Stud. Manag. Organ. 13:1/246–74 doi:10.2307/40396953 [Google Scholar]
  50. Hofstede G. 2001. Culture’s Consequences Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2nd ed.
  51. Holland PW, Thayer DT. 1988. Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In Test Validity, ed. H Wainer, HI Braun, pp. 129–45. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
  52. Holland PW, Wainer H. 1993. Differential Item Functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 453 pp
  53. Hong Y-Y, Morris MW, Chiu C-Y, Benet-Martínez V. 2000. Multicultural minds: a dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. Am. Psychol. 55:7709–20 doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.7.709 [Google Scholar]
  54. Huang X, van de Vliert E. 2003. Comparing work behaviors across cultures: a cross-level approach using multilevel modeling. Int. J. Cross Cult. Manag. 3:2167–82 doi:10.1177/14705958030032002 [Google Scholar]
  55. Hui CH, Triandis HC. 1989. Effects of culture and response format on extreme response style. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 20:3296–309 doi:10.1177/0022022189203004 [Google Scholar]
  56. Hulin CL, Drasgow F, Komocar J. 1982. Applications of item response theory to analysis of attitude scale translations. J. Appl. Psychol. 67:6818–25 doi:10.1037/0021-9010.67.6.818 [Google Scholar]
  57. Hulin CL, Drasgow F, Parsons CK. 1983. Item Response Theory: Applications to Psychological Measurement Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin
  58. Iwata N, Buka S. 2002. Race/ethnicity and depressive symptoms: a cross-cultural/ethnic comparison among university students in East Asia, North and South America. Soc. Sci. Med 55:122243–52 [Google Scholar]
  59. Iwata N, Roberts CR, Kawakami N. 1995. Japan-U.S. comparison of responses to depression scale items among adult workers. Psychiatry Res. 58:3237–45 [Google Scholar]
  60. Iwata N, Umesue M, Egashira K, Hiro H, Mizoue T et al. 1998. Can positive affect items be used to assess depressive disorders in the Japanese population?. Psychol. Med. 28:1153–58 [Google Scholar]
  61. Jager AO. 1963. The Wilde-test, new diagnostic test of intelligence. Z. Exp. Angew. Psychol. 10:2260–78 [Google Scholar]
  62. James LR, Demaree RG, Wolf G. 1993. rwg: an assessment of within-group interrater agreement. J. Appl. Psychol. 78:2306–9 doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.306 [Google Scholar]
  63. Javidan M, House RJ, Dorfman PW. 2004. A nontechnical summary of GLOBE findings. Culture, Leadership, and Organizations House RJ, Hanges PJ, Javidan M, Dorfman PW. , pp. 29-48 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  64. Johnson T, Kulesa P, Cho YI, Shavitt S. 2005. The relation between culture and response styles: evidence from 19 countries. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 36:2264–77 doi:10.1177/0022022104272905 [Google Scholar]
  65. Jones RN. 2006. Identification of measurement differences between English and Spanish language versions of the Mini-Mental State Examination: detecting differential item functioning using MIMIC modeling. Med. Care 44:11 Suppl. 3S124–33 [Google Scholar]
  66. Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. 1993. LISREL 8: Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS Command Language. Chicago: Sci. Softw. Intl
  67. Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. 1989. LISREL 7 User’s Reference Guide Chicago: Sci. Softw.
  68. Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. 1996. LISREL 8 User’s Reference Guide Chicago: Sci. Softw.
  69. Karasek RA. 1979. Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain-implications for job redesign. Adm. Sci. Q. 24:2285–308 [Google Scholar]
  70. Karasz A, Singelis TM. 2009. Qualitative and mixed methods research in cross-cultural psychology. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 40:6909–16 doi:10.1177/0022022109349172 [Google Scholar]
  71. Katerberg R, Smith FJ, Hoy S. 1977. Language, time, and person effects on attitude scale translations. J. Appl. Psychol. 62:4385–91 doi:10.1037/0021-9010.62.4.385 [Google Scholar]
  72. Kirkman BL, Chen G, Farh J-L, Chen ZX, Lowe KB. 2009. Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: a cross-level, cross-cultural examination. Acad. Manag. J. 52:4744–64 doi:10.5465/AMJ.2009.43669971 [Google Scholar]
  73. Kirkman BL, Lowe KB, Gibson CB. 2006. A quarter century of Culture’s Consequences: a review of empirical research incorporating Hofstede’s cultural values framework. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 37:285–320 doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400202 [Google Scholar]
  74. Knapp-Lee L, Knapp RR. 1976. Career Ability Placement Survey San Diego, CA: EdITS
  75. Law KS, Chi-Sum W, Mobley WM. 1998. Toward a taxonomy of multidimensional constructs. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23:4741–55 doi:10.5465/AMR.1998.1255636 [Google Scholar]
  76. Leung K, Bond MH. 1989. On the empirical identification of dimensions for cross-cultural comparisons. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 20:2133–51 doi:10.1177/0022022189202002 [Google Scholar]
  77. Little L. 1999. Risk factors for assaults on nursing staff: childhood abuse and education level. J. Nurs. Adm. 29:1222–29 [Google Scholar]
  78. Liu C, Borg I, Spector PE. 2004. Measurement equivalence of the German job satisfaction survey used in a multinational organization: implications of Schwartz’s culture model. J. Appl. Psychol. 89:61070–82 doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1070 [Google Scholar]
  79. Liu C, Nauta MM, Spector P, Li C. 2008. Direct and indirect conflicts at work in China and the US: a cross-cultural comparison. Work Stress 22:4295–313 doi:10.1080/02678370802573984 [Google Scholar]
  80. Liu C, Spector PE, Shi L. 2007. Cross-national job stress: a quantitative and qualitative study. J. Organ. Behav. 28:2209–39 doi:10.1002/job.435 [Google Scholar]
  81. Lord FM. 1980. Applications of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
  82. Lvina E, Johns G, Treadway DC, Blickle G, Liu Y et al. 2012. Measure invariance of the Political Skill Inventory (PSI) across five cultures. Int. J. Cross Cult. Manag. 12:2171–91 [Google Scholar]
  83. Lyons BJ, Leong FT, Ryan AM. 2012. Ethical challenges to conducting multinational organizational research. Conducting Multinational Research: Applying Organizational Psychology in the Workplace Ryan AM, Leong FT, Oswald FL. 149–77 Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc. [Google Scholar]
  84. Lytle AL, Brett JM, Barsness ZI, Tinsley CH, Janssens J. 1995. A paradigm for confirmatory cross-cultural research in organizational behavior. Res. Organ. Behav. 17:167–214 [Google Scholar]
  85. Maas CJM, Hox JJ. 2005. Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology 1:386–92 doi:10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.86 [Google Scholar]
  86. Magidson J, Vermunt JK. 2004. Latent class models. SAGE Handbook of Quantitative Methodology for the Social Sciences Kaplan D. 175–98 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  87. Marian V, Spivey M, Hirsch J. 2003. Shared and separate systems in bilingual language processing: converging evidence from eyetracking and brain imaging. Brain Lang. 86:170–82 doi:10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00535-7 [Google Scholar]
  88. Marin G, Gamba RJ, Marin BV. 1992. Extreme response style and acquiescence among Hispanics: the role of acculturation and education. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 23:4498–509 doi:10.1177/0022022192234006 [Google Scholar]
  89. Matsumoto D, Yoo SH. 2006. Toward a new generation of cross-cultural research. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 1:3234–50 doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00014.x [Google Scholar]
  90. McDonald RP. 1999. Test Theory: A Unified Treatment Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
  91. Meade AW, Lautenschlager GJ. 2004a. A comparison of item response theory and confirmatory factor analytic methodologies for establishing measurement equivalence/invariance. Organ. Res. Methods 7:4361–88 doi:10.1177/1094428104268027 [Google Scholar]
  92. Meade AW, Lautenschlager GJ. 2004b. A Monte-Carlo study of confirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement equivalence/invariance. Struct. Equ. Modeling 11:160–72 doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM1101_5 [Google Scholar]
  93. Meredith W. 1993. Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika 58:4525–43 doi:10.1007/BF02294825 [Google Scholar]
  94. Mutschink JM. 2008. Managers’ national culture and its impact on response styles in a global multinational company. Diss. Abstr. Int. B Sci. Eng. 68:12-B8438 [Google Scholar]
  95. Niblo DM, Jackson MS. 2004. Model for combining the qualitative emic approach with the quantitative derived etic approach. Aust. Psychol. 39:2127–33 doi:10.1080/00050060410001701843 [Google Scholar]
  96. Peng K, Nisbett RE, Wong NYC. 1997. Validity problems comparing values across cultures and possible solutions. Psychol. Methods 2:4329–44 doi:10.1037/1082-989x.2.4.329 [Google Scholar]
  97. Pennell B-E, Harkness JA, Levenstein R, Quaglia M. 2010. Challenges in cross-national data collection. In Survey Methods in Multinational, Multiregional, and Multicultural Contexts, ed. JA Harkness, M Braun, B Edwards, TP Johnson, LE Lyberg, et al., pp. 269–98. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
  98. Peterson MF, Smith PB, Akande A, Ayestaran S, Bochner S et al. 1995. Role conflict, ambiguity, and overload: a 21-nation study. Acad. Manag. J. 38:2429–52 [Google Scholar]
  99. Radloff LS. 1977. The CES-D Scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 1:3385–401 [Google Scholar]
  100. Raju NS, van der Linden WJ, Fleer PF. 1995. IRT-based internal measures of differential functioning of items and tests. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 19:4353–68 doi:10.1177/014662169501900405 [Google Scholar]
  101. Ralston DA, Cunniff MK, Gustafson DJ. 1995. Cultural accommodation: the effect of language on the responses of bilingual Hong Kong Chinese managers. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 26:6714–27 doi:10.1177/002202219502600612 [Google Scholar]
  102. Ratner C. 2008. Cultural psychology and qualitative methodology: scientific and political considerations. Cult. Psychol. 14:3259–88 doi:10.1177/1354067X08088557 [Google Scholar]
  103. Ratner C, Hui L. 2003. Theoretical and methodological problems in cross-cultural psychology. J. Theory Soc. Behav. 33:167–94 doi:10.1111/1468-5914.00206 [Google Scholar]
  104. Reise SP, Widaman KF, Pugh RH. 1993. Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychol. Bull. 114:3552–66 [Google Scholar]
  105. Rensvold RB, Cheung GW. 2001. Testing for metric invariance using structural equation models: solving the standardization problem. Res. Manag. 1:21–50 [Google Scholar]
  106. Riordan CM, Vandenberg RJ. 1994. A central question in cross-cultural research: Do employees of different cultures interpret work-related measures in an equivalent manner?. J. Manag. 20:3643–71 [Google Scholar]
  107. Rockstuhl T, Dulebohn JH, Ang S, Shore LM. 2012. Leader-member exchange (LMX) and culture: a meta-analysis of correlates of LMX across 23 countries. J. Appl. Psychol. 97:61097–130 doi:10.1037/a0029978 [Google Scholar]
  108. Romani L, Primecz H, Topçu K. 2011. Paradigm interplay for theory development: a methodological example with the Kulturstandard Method. Organ. Res. Methods 14:3432–55 doi:10.1177/1094428109358270 [Google Scholar]
  109. Roster C, Albaum G, Rogers R. 2006. Can cross-national/cultural studies presume etic equivalency in respondents’ use of extreme categories of Likert rating scales?. Int. J. Mark. Res. 48:6741–59 [Google Scholar]
  110. Rotter JB. 1966. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychol. Monogr. Gen. Appl. 80:11–28 [Google Scholar]
  111. Rybowiak V, Garst H, Frese M, Batinic B. 1999. Error orientation questionnaire (EOQ): reliability, validity, and different language equivalence. J. Organ. Behav. 20:4527–47 doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199907)20:4<527:AID-JOB886>3.0.CO;2-G [Google Scholar]
  112. Samejima F. 1969. Estimation of Latent Ability Using a Response Pattern of Graded Scores. Psychom. Monogr. No. 17. Richmond, VA: Psychom. Soc [Google Scholar]
  113. Schaffer BS, Riordan CM. 2003. A review of cross-cultural methodologies for organizational research: a best-practices approach. Organ. Res. Methods 6:2169–215 doi:10.1177/1094428103251542 [Google Scholar]
  114. Scherbaum CA, Ferreter JM. 2009. Estimating statistical power and required sample sizes for organizational research using multilevel modeling. Organ. Res. Methods 12:2347–67 doi:10.1177/1094428107308906 [Google Scholar]
  115. Schilpzand MC, Martins LL, Kirkman BL, Lowe KB, Chen ZX. 2013. The relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviour: the role of cultural value orientations. Manag. Organ. Rev. 9:2345–74 doi:10.1111/more.12014 [Google Scholar]
  116. Schimmack U, Oishi S, Diener E. 2005. Individualism: a valid and important dimension of cultural differences between nations. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 9:117–31 doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0901_2 [Google Scholar]
  117. Schmit MJ, Kihm JA, Robie C. 2000. Development of a global measure of personality. Pers. Psychol. 53:1153–93 doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.tb00198.x [Google Scholar]
  118. Schmitt N, Kuljanin G. 2008. Measurement invariance: review of practice and implications. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 18:4210–22 doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.03.003 [Google Scholar]
  119. Schwartz SH. 1999. A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Appl. Psychol. 48:123–47 [Google Scholar]
  120. Smircich L. 1983. Concepts of culture and organizational analysis. Adm. Sci. Q. 28:3339–58 doi:10.2307/2392246 [Google Scholar]
  121. Smith PB. 2004. Acquiescent response bias as an aspect of cultural communication style. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 35:150–61 doi:10.1177/0022022103260380 [Google Scholar]
  122. Smith PB. 2011. Communication styles as dimensions of national culture. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 42:2216–33 doi:10.1177/0022022110396866 [Google Scholar]
  123. Smith PB, Dugan S, Trompenaars F. 1996. National culture and the values of organizational employees: a dimensional analysis across 43 nations. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 27:2231–64 doi:10.1177/0022022196272006 [Google Scholar]
  124. Smith PB, Fischer R. 2008. Acquiescence, extreme response bias and culture: a multilevel analysis See van de Vijver et al. 2008, pp. 285–314 [Google Scholar]
  125. Snijders TA, Bosker RJ. 1999. Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  126. Soin K, Scheytt T. 2006. Making the case for narrative methods in cross-cultural organizational research. Organ. Res. Methods 9:155–77 doi:10.1177/1094428105283297 [Google Scholar]
  127. Sörbom D. 1974. A general method for studying differences in factor means and factor structure between groups. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 27:2229–39 doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1974.tb00543.x [Google Scholar]
  128. Sörbom D. 1982. Structural equation models with structured means. Systems Under Indirect Observation, Part 1, ed. KG Jöreskog, H Wold, pp. 183–95. Amsterdam: North-Holland
  129. Sparks K, Cooper CL. 1999. Occupational differences in the work-strain relationship: towards the use of situation-specific models. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 72:2219–29 [Google Scholar]
  130. Spector PE, Allen TD, Poelmans SA, Lapierre LM, Cooper CL et al. 2007. Cross-national differences in relationships of work demands, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions with work-family conflict. Pers. Psychol. 60:4805–35 doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00092.x [Google Scholar]
  131. Spector PE, Cooper CL, Sanchez JI, O’Driscoll M, Sparks K et al. 2002. Locus of control and well-being at work: How generalizable are Western findings?. Acad. Manag. J. 45:2453–66 [Google Scholar]
  132. Spector PE, Cooper CL, Sparks K. 2001. An international study of the psychometric properties of the Hofstede Values Survey Module 1994: a comparison of individual and country/province level results. Appl. Psychol. 50:2269–81 doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00058 [Google Scholar]
  133. Spector PE, Sanchez JI, Siu OL, Salgado J, Ma J. 2004. Eastern versus Western control beliefs at work: an investigation of secondary control, socioinstrumental control, and work locus of control in China and the US. Appl. Psychol. 53:138–60 doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00160.x [Google Scholar]
  134. Spirrison CL, Choi S. 1998. Psychometric properties of a Korean version of the revised NEO-Personality Inventory. Psychol. Rep. 83:1263–74 doi:10.2466/pr0.1998.83.1.263 [Google Scholar]
  135. Stanton JM. 1998. An empirical assessment of data collection using the Internet. Pers. Psychol. 51:3709–25 doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1998.tb00259.x [Google Scholar]
  136. Stark S, Chernyshenko OS, Drasgow F, Williams BA. 2006. Examining assumptions about item responding in personality assessment: Should ideal point methods be considered for scale development and scoring?. J. Appl. Psychol. 91:125–39 doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.25 [Google Scholar]
  137. Swaminathan H, Rogers HJ. 1990. Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. J. Educ. Meas. 27:4361–70 doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1990.tb00754.x [Google Scholar]
  138. Taras V, Rowney J, Steel P. 2009. Half a century of measuring culture: review of approaches, challenges, and limitations based on the analysis of 121 instruments for quantifying culture. J. Int. Manag. 15:4357–73 doi:10.1016/j.intman.2008.08.005 [Google Scholar]
  139. Taras V, Steel P, Kirkman BL. 2011. Three decades of research on national culture in the workplace: Do the differences still make a difference?. Organ. Dyn. 40:3189–98 doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2011.04.006 [Google Scholar]
  140. Teresi JA. 2006. Overview of quantitative measurement methods: equivalence, invariance, and differential item functioning in health applications. Med. Care 44:11S39–49 [Google Scholar]
  141. Toderi S, Balducci C, Edwards JA, Sarchielli G, Broccoli M, Mancini G. 2013. Psychometric properties of the UK and Italian versions of the HSE Stress Indicator Tool: a crosscultural investigation. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 29:172–79 doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000122 [Google Scholar]
  142. Triandis HC. 1995. Individualism and Collectivism Boulder, CO: Westview
  143. Tsui AS, Nifadkar SS, Ou AY. 2007. Cross-national, cross-cultural organizational behavior research: advances, gaps, and recommendations. J. Manag. 33:3426–78 doi:10.1177/0149206307300818 [Google Scholar]
  144. Tsui AS, Nifadkar SS, Ou AY. 2009. Nagging problems and modest solutions in cross-cultural research: illustrations from organizational behavior literature. In Understanding Culture: Theory, Research, and Application, ed. RS Wyer, C Chiu, Y Hong, pp. 163–86. New York: Psychology
  145. Usunier J-C. 1998. International and Cross-Cultural Management Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  146. Vallerand RJ. 1989. Toward a methodology for the transcultural validation of psychological questionnaires: implications for research in the French language. Can. Psychol. 30:4662–80 doi:10.1037/h0079856 [Google Scholar]
  147. van de Vijver FJR, Leung K. 1997. Methods and Data Analysis for Cross-Cultural Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  148. van de Vijver FJR, Leung K. 2000. Methodological issues in psychological research on culture. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 31:133–51 doi:10.1177/0022022100031001004 [Google Scholar]
  149. van de Vijver FJR, van Hemert DA, Poortinga YH. 2008. Multilevel Analysis of Individuals and Cultures New York: Erlbaum
  150. Vandenberg RJ, Lance CE. 2000. A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organ. Res. Methods 3:14–70 doi:10.1177/109442810031002 [Google Scholar]
  151. Vispoel WP, Boo J, Bleiler T. 2001. Computerized and paper-and-pencil versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: a comparison of psychometric features and respondent preferences. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 61:3461–74 doi:10.1177/00131640121971329 [Google Scholar]
  152. Wang M, Russell SS. 2005. Measurement equivalence of the Job Descriptive Index across Chinese and American workers: results from confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 65:4709–32 doi:10.1177/0013164404272494 [Google Scholar]
  153. Werner O, Campbell D. 1970. Translating, working through interpreters, and the problem of decentering. Handbook of Methods in Cultural Anthropology Carroll R, Cohen R. 398–420 New York: Nat. Hist [Google Scholar]
  154. Widaman KF, Reise SP. 1997. Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: applications in the substance use domain. In The Science of Prevention: Methodological Advances from Alcohol and Substance Abuse Research, ed. KJ Bryant, M Windle, SG West, pp. 281–324. Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc
  155. Wong N, Rindfleisch A, Burroughs JE. 2003. Do reverse-worded items confound measures in cross-cultural consumer research? The case of the Material Values Scale. J. Consum. Res. 30:172–91 doi:10.1086/374697 [Google Scholar]
  156. Wu M, Huang X, Li C, Liu W. 2012. Perceived interactional justice and trust-in-supervisor as mediators for paternalistic leadership. Manag. Organ. Rev. 8:197–121 doi:10.1111/j.1740-8784.2011.00283.x [Google Scholar]
  157. Xie JL. 1996. Karasek’s model in the People’s Republic of China: effects of job demands, control, and individual differences. Acad. Manag. J. 39:61594–618 doi:10.2307/257070 [Google Scholar]
  158. Xie JL, Roy J-P, Chen Z. 2006. Cultural and individual differences in self-rating behavior: an extension and refinement of the cultural relativity hypothesis. J. Organ. Behav. 27:3341–64 doi:10.1002/job.375 [Google Scholar]
  159. Yang L-Q, Levine EL, Xu X, Lopez-Rivas GE. 2009. Surveying via the net vs. hard copy: a cautionary note. Ergometrika 6:120–39 [Google Scholar]
  160. Yang L-Q, Spector PE, Sanchez JI, Allen TD, Poelmans S et al. 2012. Individualism-collectivism as a moderator of the work demands-strains relationship: a cross-level and cross-national examination. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 43:4424–43 doi:10.1057/jibs.2011.58 [Google Scholar]
  161. Yauch CA, Steudel HJ. 2003. Complementary use of qualitative and quantitative cultural assessment methods. Organ. Res. Methods 6:4465–81 doi:10.1177/1094428103257362 [Google Scholar]
  162. Yu J, Murphy KR. 1993. Modesty bias in self-ratings of performance: a test of the cultural relativity hypothesis. Pers. Psychol. 46:2357–63 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111310
Loading
Methodological and Substantive Issues in Conducting Multinational and Cross-Cultural Research
Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 2, 101 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111310
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111310
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111310
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error