Construct validity in cross-cultural, developmental research: challenges and strategies for improvement.

IF 2.2 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Evolutionary Human Sciences Pub Date : 2025-02-21 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1017/ehs.2025.3
Nicole J Wen, Dorsa Amir, Jennifer M Clegg, Helen E Davis, Natalia B Dutra, Michelle A Kline, Sheina Lew-Levy, Tanya MacGillivray, Gairan Pamei, Yitong Wang, Jing Xu, Bruce S Rawlings
{"title":"Construct validity in cross-cultural, developmental research: challenges and strategies for improvement.","authors":"Nicole J Wen, Dorsa Amir, Jennifer M Clegg, Helen E Davis, Natalia B Dutra, Michelle A Kline, Sheina Lew-Levy, Tanya MacGillivray, Gairan Pamei, Yitong Wang, Jing Xu, Bruce S Rawlings","doi":"10.1017/ehs.2025.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The recent expansion of cross-cultural research in the social sciences has led to increased discourse on methodological issues involved when studying culturally diverse populations. However, discussions have largely overlooked the challenges of construct validity - ensuring instruments are measuring what they are intended to - in diverse cultural contexts, particularly in developmental research. We contend that cross-cultural developmental research poses distinct problems for ensuring high construct validity owing to the nuances of working with children, and that the standard approach of transporting protocols designed and validated in one population to another risks low construct validity. Drawing upon our own and others' work, we highlight several challenges to construct validity in the field of cross-cultural developmental research, including (1) lack of cultural and contextual knowledge, (2) dissociating developmental and cultural theory and methods, (3) lack of causal frameworks, (4) superficial and short-term partnerships and collaborations, and (5) culturally inappropriate tools and tests. We provide guidelines for addressing these challenges, including (1) using ethnographic and observational approaches, (2) developing evidence-based causal frameworks, (3) conducting community-engaged and collaborative research, and (4) the application of culture-specific refinements and training. We discuss the need to balance methodological consistency with culture-specific refinements to improve construct validity in cross-cultural developmental research.</p>","PeriodicalId":36414,"journal":{"name":"Evolutionary Human Sciences","volume":"7 ","pages":"e17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12179541/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evolutionary Human Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ehs.2025.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The recent expansion of cross-cultural research in the social sciences has led to increased discourse on methodological issues involved when studying culturally diverse populations. However, discussions have largely overlooked the challenges of construct validity - ensuring instruments are measuring what they are intended to - in diverse cultural contexts, particularly in developmental research. We contend that cross-cultural developmental research poses distinct problems for ensuring high construct validity owing to the nuances of working with children, and that the standard approach of transporting protocols designed and validated in one population to another risks low construct validity. Drawing upon our own and others' work, we highlight several challenges to construct validity in the field of cross-cultural developmental research, including (1) lack of cultural and contextual knowledge, (2) dissociating developmental and cultural theory and methods, (3) lack of causal frameworks, (4) superficial and short-term partnerships and collaborations, and (5) culturally inappropriate tools and tests. We provide guidelines for addressing these challenges, including (1) using ethnographic and observational approaches, (2) developing evidence-based causal frameworks, (3) conducting community-engaged and collaborative research, and (4) the application of culture-specific refinements and training. We discuss the need to balance methodological consistency with culture-specific refinements to improve construct validity in cross-cultural developmental research.

跨文化发展研究的效度建构:挑战与改善策略。
近年来,社会科学领域的跨文化研究的扩展,导致了对研究文化多样性人群所涉及的方法论问题的讨论增加。然而,讨论在很大程度上忽视了结构效度的挑战——确保工具在不同的文化背景下测量它们的目的,特别是在发展研究中。我们认为,由于与儿童一起工作的细微差别,跨文化发展研究在确保高结构效度方面存在明显的问题,并且将在一个人群中设计和验证的协议转移到另一个人群的标准方法存在低结构效度的风险。根据我们自己和其他人的工作,我们强调了在跨文化发展研究领域构建有效性的几个挑战,包括(1)缺乏文化和语境知识,(2)分离发展和文化理论和方法,(3)缺乏因果框架,(4)肤浅和短期的伙伴关系和合作,以及(5)文化上不合适的工具和测试。我们提供了应对这些挑战的指导方针,包括(1)使用人种学和观察方法,(2)开发基于证据的因果框架,(3)开展社区参与和合作研究,以及(4)应用特定文化的改进和培训。我们讨论了在跨文化发展研究中平衡方法一致性和文化特异性改进以提高结构有效性的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Evolutionary Human Sciences
Evolutionary Human Sciences Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
11.50%
发文量
49
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信