TY  - JOUR
A1  - He, Jia
A1  - Van de Vijver, Fons J. R.
A1  - Fetvadjiev, Velichko H.
A1  - Dominguez Espinosa, Alejandra de Carmen
A1  - Adams, Byron
A1  - Alonso-Arbiol, Itziar
A1  - Aydinli-Karakulak, Arzu
A1  - Buzea, Carmen
A1  - Dimitrova, Radosveta
A1  - Fortin, Alvaro
A1  - Hapunda, Given
A1  - Ma, Sang
A1  - Sargautyte, Ruta
A1  - Sim, Samantha
A1  - Schachner, Maja Katharina
A1  - Suryani, Angela
A1  - Zeinoun, Pia
A1  - Zhang, Rui
T1  - On Enhancing the Cross-Cultural Comparability of Likert-Scale Personality and Value Measures: A Comparison of Common Procedures
JF  - European journal of personality
N2  - This study aims to evaluate a number of procedures that have been proposed to enhance cross-cultural comparability of personality and value data. A priori procedures (anchoring vignettes and direct measures of response styles (i.e. acquiescence, extremity, midpoint responding, and social desirability), a posteriori procedures focusing on data transformations prior to analysis (ipsatization and item parcelling), and two data modelling procedures (treating data as continuous vs as ordered categories) were compared using data collected from university students in 16 countries. We found that (i) anchoring vignettes showed lack of invariance, so they were not bias-free; (ii) anchoring vignettes showed higher internal consistencies than raw scores where all other correction procedures, notably ipsatization, showed lower internal consistencies; (iii) in measurement invariance testing, no procedure yielded scalar invariance; anchoring vignettes and item parcelling slightly improved comparability, response style correction did not affect it, and ipsatization resulted in lower comparability; (iv) treating Likert-scale data as categorical resulted in higher levels of comparability; (v) factor scores of scales extracted from different procedures showed similar correlational patterning; and (vi) response style correction was the only procedure that suggested improvement in external validity of country-level conscientiousness. We conclude that, although no procedure resolves all comparability issues, anchoring vignettes, parcelling, and treating data as ordered categories seem promising to alleviate incomparability. We advise caution in uncritically applying any of these procedures. Copyright (c) 2017 European Association of Personality Psychology
KW  - personality
KW  - values
KW  - anchoring vignettes
KW  - response styles
KW  - score standardization
KW  - parcelling
Y1  - 2017
U6  - https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2132
SN  - 0890-2070
SN  - 1099-0984
VL  - 31
SP  - 642
EP  - 657
PB  - Wiley
CY  - Hoboken
ER  -