Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dealing with Methodological Pitfalls in Cross-Cultural Studies of Stress

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbuch Stress und Kultur

  • 19k Accesses

Abstract

This chapter deals with assessment of stress in different groups, across or within societies, and the comparison of scores. It is argued that scores on scales can be subject to various kinds of cultural bias. Three sources are distinguished: construct bias, method bias, and item bias. Bias can be avoided, in part, through careful development and transfer of instruments. Bias can be identified through various forms of analysis of equivalence.

Regrettably, Fons van de Vijver passed away shortly after completion of this chapter.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16, 397–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Backs, R. W., & Boucsein, W. (Eds.). (2000). Engineering psychophysiology. Issues and applications. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bancila, D., & Mittelmark, M. B. (2009). Measuring interpersonal stress with the Bergen Social Relationships Scale: Psychometric properties in studies in Norway, Romania, and Russia. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 25, 260–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benítez, I., José-Luis Padilla, J.-L., Hidalgo Montesinos, M. D., & Sireci, S. G. (2014). Using mixed methods to interpret differential item functioning. Applied Measurement in Education, 29, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Breugelmans, S. M., Chasiotis, A., & Sam, D. L. (2011). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications (3. Aufl.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boer, D., Hanke, K., & He, J. (2018). On detecting systematic measurement error in cross-cultural research: A review and critical reflection on equivalence and invariance tests. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49, 713–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, M. H. (1983). How language variation affects inter-cultural differentiation of values by Hong Kong bilinguals. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 2, 57–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 (pp. 137–164). Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castillo L. G., Cano M. A., Yoon M., Jung E., Brown E. J., Zamboanga B. L., Kim S. Y., Schwartz S. J., Huynh Q. L., Weisskirch R. S., & Whitbourne S. K. (2015). Factor structure and factorial invariance of the Multidimensional Acculturative Stress Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 27, 915-924.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couper, M. P., & De Leeuw, E. D. (2003). Non-response in cross-cultural and cross-national surveys. In J. A. Harkness, F. J. R. Van de Vijver, & P. Ph. Mohler (Eds.), Cross-cultural survey methods (pp. 179–193). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Datta, P., Marcoen, A., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2005). Recalled early maternal bonding and mother- and self-related attitudes in young adult daughters: A cross-cultural study in India and Belgium. International Journal of Psychology, 40, 324–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Boo, G. M., & Wicherts, J. M. (2009). Assessing cognitive and behavioral coping strategies in children. Cognitive Therapy Research, 33, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, J., & D. Hinton (2018). Traumascape: An ecological–cultural–historical model for extreme stress. In D. Bhugra & K. Bhui (Eds.), Textbook of cultural psychiatry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, J., Komproe, I., & Van Ommeren, M. (2003). Common mental disorders in postconflict settings. Lancet, 361(9375), 2128–2130.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, J., Reis, R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2010). Onderzoeksmethodologie. In J. De Jong & S. Colijn (Eds.), Handboek culturele psychiatrie en psychotherapie (pp. 269–286). Urecht: De Tijdstroom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fetvadjiev, V., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2015). Measures of personality across cultures. In G. J. Boyle, D. H. Saklofske, & G. Matthews (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological constructs (pp. 752–776). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of coping behavior in a middle-aged community sample. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21, 219–239.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez, R., Summers, M., Summers, A., Wolf, A., & Summers, J. (2014). Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21: Measurement and structural invariance across ratings of men and women. Assessment, 21, 418–426.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M. (2006). Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 646–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M., & Peytcheva, E. (2008). The impact of nonresponse rates on nonresponse bias: A meta-analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, 167–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harkness, J. (2003). Questionnaire translation. In J. Harkness, F. J. R. Van de Vijver, & P. Ph. Mohler (Eds.), Cross-cultural survey methods (pp. 35–56). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A.-W. (2006). Response styles in cross-national survey research. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 6, 243–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He, J., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2015). Effects of a General Response Style on cross-cultural comparisons: Evidence from the Teaching and Learning International Survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 79, 267–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland P. W., & Wainer, H. (Eds.) (1993). Differential item functioning. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudek-Knežević, J., Kardum, I., & Vukmirović, Ž. (1999). The structure of coping styles: A comparative study of Croatian sample. European Journal of Personality, 13, 149–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Test Commission. (2017). The ITC guidelines for translating and adapting tests (2. Aufl.). Retrieved from https://www.intestcom.org/files/guideline_test_adaptation_2ed.pdf

  • John, P., & Tang, C. S. (Eds.). (2007). Cross-cultural assessment of psychological trauma and PTSD. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavoie, J. A., & Douglas, K. S. (2012). The Perceived Stress Scale: Evaluating configural, metric and scalar invariance across mental health status and gender. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 34, 48–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, S. (2005). Stress: An historical perspective. In T. Steckler, N. H. Kalin, & J. M. H. M. Reul (Eds.), Handbook of stress and the brain (Bd. 15, pp. 1–23). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malda, M., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Srinivasan, K., Transler, C., Sukumar, P., & Rao, K. (2008). Adapting a cognitive test for a different culture: An illustration of qualitative procedures. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50, 451–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, G. N., Schell, T. L., & Miles, J. N. V. (2009). Ethnic differences in posttraumatic distress: Hispanics’ symptoms differ in kind and degree. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 1169–1178.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Terraciano, A. (2008). The five-factor model and its correlates in individuals and cultures. In F. J. R. Van de Vijver, D. A. Van Hemert, & Y. H. Poortinga (Eds.), Multilevel analysis of individuals and cultures (pp. 249–283). New York: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mollica, R., McDonald, L., Massagli, M., & Silove, D. (2004). Measuring trauma, measuring torture: Instructions and guidance on the utilization of the Harvard Program in Refugee Trauma’s versions of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25) and the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire (HTQ). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Program in Refugee Trauma.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naidu, R. K. (1983). A developing program of stress research. Paper presented at the seminar on Stress, Anxiety and Mental Health. Allahabad, December 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, K. (2006). Survey participation, nonresponse bias, measurement error bias, and total bias. International Journal of Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 737–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlando, M., & Marshall, G. N. (2002). Differential item functioning in a Spanish translation of the PTSD Checklist: Detection and evaluation of impact. Psychological Assessment, 14, 50–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pande, N., & Naidu, R. K. (1992). Anasakti and health: A study of non-attachment. Psychology and Developing Societies, 4, 91–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poortinga, Y. H. (1995). Cultural bias in assessment: Historical and thematic issues. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 11, 140–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poortinga, Y. H., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Van Hemert, D. A. (2002). Cross-cultural equivalence of the Big Five: A tentative interpretation of the evidence. In R. R. McCrae & J. Allik (Eds.), The Five-Factor Model across cultures (pp. 271–293). New York: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutkowski, L., & Svetina, D. (2013). Assessing the hypothesis of measurement invariance in the context of large-scale international surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 74, 31–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryder, A. G., Yang, J., Zhu, X., Yao, S., Yi, J., Heine, S. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2008). The cultural shaping of depression: Somatic symptoms in China, psychological symptoms in North America? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 300–313.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sawang, S., Oei, T. P. S., Goh, Y. W., Mansoer, W., Markhum, E., & Ranawake, D. (2010). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Way of Coping Checklist-Revised (WCCL-R) in the Asian context. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 59, 202–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selye, H. (1936). A syndrome produced by diverse nocuous agents. Nature, 38, 32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selye, H. (1956). The stress of life. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seo, S., Chung, S., & Shumway, M. (2014). How good is “very good”? Translation effect in the racial/ethnic variation in self-rated health status. Quality of Life Research, 23, 593–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shoeb, M., Weinstein, H., & Mollica, R. (2007). The Harvard Trauma Questionnaire: Adapting a cross-cultural instrument for measuring torture, trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder in Iraqi refugees. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 53, 447–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sireci, S. (2011). Evaluating test and survey items for bias across languages and cultures. In D. Matsumoto & F. J. R. van de Vijver (Eds.), Cross-cultural research methods in psychology (pp. 216–243). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smits, C. H. M., De Vries, W. M., & Beekman, A. T. F. (2005). The CIDI as an instrument for diagnosing depression in older Turkish and Moroccan labour migrants: An exploratory study into equivalence. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 20, 436–445.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spielberger, C. D. (1988). State-trait anger expression inventory research edition. Professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2015). Methodological aspects of cross-cultural research. In M. Gelfand, Y. Hong, & C. Y. Chiu (Eds.), Handbook of advances in culture & psychology (Bd. 5, pp. 101–160). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2016). Test adaptations. In F. T. L. Leong, D. Bartram, F. M. Cheung, K. F. Geisinger, & D. Iliescu (Eds.), The ITC international handbook of testing and assessment (pp. 364–376). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2018). Capturing bias in structural equation modeling. In E. Davidov, P. Schmidt, J. Billiet, & B. Meuleman (Eds.), Cross-cultural analysis. Methods and applications (2. Aufl., pp. 3–43). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Chasiotis, A. (2010). Making methods meet: Mixed designs in cross-cultural research. In J. A. Harkness, M. Braun, B. Edwards, T. P. Johnson, L. Lyberg, P. P. Mohler, B. E. Pennell, & T. W. Smith (Eds.), Survey methods in multinational, multiregional, and multicultural contexts (pp. 455–473). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Hambleton, R. K. (1996). Translating tests: Some practical guidelines. European Psychologist, 1, 89–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (1982). Cross-cultural generalization and universality. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 13, 387–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2005). Conceptual and methodological issues in adapting tests. In R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment (pp. 39–63). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Tanzer, N. (2004). Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: An overview. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, 54, 119–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Avvisati, F., Davidov, E., Eid, M., Fox, J-P., Le Donné, N., Lek, K., Meuleman, B., Paccagnella, M., & Van de Schoot, R. (2019). Invariance analyses in large-scale studies. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Herk, H., Poortinga, Y. H., & Verhallen, T. M. M. (2004). Response styles in rating scales: Evidence of method bias in data from 6 EU countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 346–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ommeren, V., Sharma, B., Makaju, R., Thapa, S., & De Jong, J. T. V. M. (2000). Limited cultural validity of the composite international diagnostic interview’s flow chart. Transcultural Psychiatry, 37, 119–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenberg, R. J. (2002). Toward a further understanding of and improvement in measurement invariance methods and procedures. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 2, 4–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ventevogel, P., De Vries, G., Scholte, W. F., Shinwari, N. R., Faiz, H., Nassery, N., Van den Brink, W., & Olff, M. (2007). Properties of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25) and the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20) as screening instruments used in primary care in Afghanistan. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 42, 328–335.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M., Elhai, J. D., Dai, X., & Yao, S. (2012). Longitudinal invariance of posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in adolescent earthquake survivors. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 26, 263–270.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • WHO. (1990). Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Geneva: World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, P. T. P., & Wong, L. C. J. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of multicultural perspectives on stress and coping. Dallas: Spring Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zegers, F. E., & Ten Berge, J. M. F. (1985). A family of association coefficients for metric scales. Psychometrika, 50, 17–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russland

    Fons J. R. van de Vijver

  2. Tilburg University, Tilburg, Niederlande

    Fons J. R. van de Vijver

  3. Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Universiteit van Tilburg, Tilburg, Niederlande

    Ype H. Poortinga

Authors
  1. Fons J. R. van de Vijver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ype H. Poortinga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ype H. Poortinga .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Berlin School of Economics and Law, Berlin, Deutschland

    Tobias Ringeisen

  2. Wirtschaftspsychologie, Hochschule Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Deutschland

    Petia Genkova

  3. Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA

    Frederick T. L. Leong

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

van de Vijver, F.J.R., Poortinga, Y.H. (2021). Dealing with Methodological Pitfalls in Cross-Cultural Studies of Stress. In: Ringeisen, T., Genkova, P., Leong, F.T.L. (eds) Handbuch Stress und Kultur. Springer, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27789-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27789-5_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-27788-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-27789-5

  • eBook Packages: Psychology (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation