不同的路径,相同的目的地?跨文化能力情境判断测试两种方法的比较

IF 4.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Xiaowen Chen, Gary N. Burns
{"title":"不同的路径,相同的目的地?跨文化能力情境判断测试两种方法的比较","authors":"Xiaowen Chen,&nbsp;Gary N. Burns","doi":"10.1111/apps.70024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Assessing cross-cultural competence (3C) remains a challenge, as traditional self-report measures often fail to capture the complexity of intercultural interactions and are vulnerable to validity concerns. Situational judgment tests (SJTs) offer a promising alternative by simulating real-world decision-making in intercultural contexts. This study develops and evaluates two distinct SJTs via two item development methods, work-sampling and construct-based, in measuring 3C. Using a within-person design, we examine their psychometric properties, including reliability, internal structure, face validity, susceptibility to social desirability bias, and criterion validity. Both SJTs demonstrate acceptable reliability and correlations with a self-report 3C measure, overseas life satisfaction, and sociocultural adaptation. However, the construct-based SJT appears more susceptible to social desirability and has lower face validity compared to the work-sampling SJT. Only the work-sampling SJT explained peer-rated multicultural team performance. We contribute to the refinement of 3C assessment by developing the SJTs that could serve as viable alternatives to self-report scales. Our findings also suggest that work sampling SJTs may offer certain advantages over construct-based SJTs in measuring 3C.</p>","PeriodicalId":48289,"journal":{"name":"Applied Psychology-An International Review-Psychologie Appliquee-Revue Internationale","volume":"74 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/apps.70024","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Different paths, same destination? Comparison of two approaches to developing situational judgment tests for cross-cultural competence\",\"authors\":\"Xiaowen Chen,&nbsp;Gary N. Burns\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/apps.70024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Assessing cross-cultural competence (3C) remains a challenge, as traditional self-report measures often fail to capture the complexity of intercultural interactions and are vulnerable to validity concerns. Situational judgment tests (SJTs) offer a promising alternative by simulating real-world decision-making in intercultural contexts. This study develops and evaluates two distinct SJTs via two item development methods, work-sampling and construct-based, in measuring 3C. Using a within-person design, we examine their psychometric properties, including reliability, internal structure, face validity, susceptibility to social desirability bias, and criterion validity. Both SJTs demonstrate acceptable reliability and correlations with a self-report 3C measure, overseas life satisfaction, and sociocultural adaptation. However, the construct-based SJT appears more susceptible to social desirability and has lower face validity compared to the work-sampling SJT. Only the work-sampling SJT explained peer-rated multicultural team performance. We contribute to the refinement of 3C assessment by developing the SJTs that could serve as viable alternatives to self-report scales. Our findings also suggest that work sampling SJTs may offer certain advantages over construct-based SJTs in measuring 3C.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48289,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Psychology-An International Review-Psychologie Appliquee-Revue Internationale\",\"volume\":\"74 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/apps.70024\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Psychology-An International Review-Psychologie Appliquee-Revue Internationale\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://iaap-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apps.70024\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Psychology-An International Review-Psychologie Appliquee-Revue Internationale","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://iaap-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apps.70024","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

评估跨文化能力(3C)仍然是一个挑战,因为传统的自我报告方法往往无法捕捉跨文化互动的复杂性,并且容易受到有效性问题的影响。情景判断测试(sjt)通过模拟跨文化背景下的现实决策提供了一个很有前途的选择。本研究通过两种项目开发方法,即工作抽样和基于构建的方法,开发和评估了两种不同的sjt测量3C。采用人内设计,我们检查了他们的心理测量特性,包括信度、内部结构、面部效度、对社会期望偏差的易感性和标准效度。两种sjt在自我报告3C测量、海外生活满意度和社会文化适应方面都表现出可接受的可靠性和相关性。然而,与工作抽样相比,基于结构的SJT更容易受到社会期望的影响,并且具有较低的面孔效度。只有工作抽样SJT解释了同伴评价的多元文化团队绩效。通过开发可作为自我报告量表的可行替代方案的sjt,我们为改进3C评估做出了贡献。我们的研究结果还表明,在测量3C方面,工作抽样sjt可能比基于构建的sjt具有一定的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Different paths, same destination? Comparison of two approaches to developing situational judgment tests for cross-cultural competence

Different paths, same destination? Comparison of two approaches to developing situational judgment tests for cross-cultural competence

Different paths, same destination? Comparison of two approaches to developing situational judgment tests for cross-cultural competence

Different paths, same destination? Comparison of two approaches to developing situational judgment tests for cross-cultural competence

Assessing cross-cultural competence (3C) remains a challenge, as traditional self-report measures often fail to capture the complexity of intercultural interactions and are vulnerable to validity concerns. Situational judgment tests (SJTs) offer a promising alternative by simulating real-world decision-making in intercultural contexts. This study develops and evaluates two distinct SJTs via two item development methods, work-sampling and construct-based, in measuring 3C. Using a within-person design, we examine their psychometric properties, including reliability, internal structure, face validity, susceptibility to social desirability bias, and criterion validity. Both SJTs demonstrate acceptable reliability and correlations with a self-report 3C measure, overseas life satisfaction, and sociocultural adaptation. However, the construct-based SJT appears more susceptible to social desirability and has lower face validity compared to the work-sampling SJT. Only the work-sampling SJT explained peer-rated multicultural team performance. We contribute to the refinement of 3C assessment by developing the SJTs that could serve as viable alternatives to self-report scales. Our findings also suggest that work sampling SJTs may offer certain advantages over construct-based SJTs in measuring 3C.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
84
期刊介绍: "Applied Psychology: An International Review" is the esteemed official journal of the International Association of Applied Psychology (IAAP), a venerable organization established in 1920 that unites scholars and practitioners in the field of applied psychology. This peer-reviewed journal serves as a global platform for the scholarly exchange of research findings within the diverse domain of applied psychology. The journal embraces a wide array of topics within applied psychology, including organizational, cross-cultural, educational, health, counseling, environmental, traffic, and sport psychology. It particularly encourages submissions that enhance the understanding of psychological processes in various applied settings and studies that explore the impact of different national and cultural contexts on psychological phenomena.
×
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