Читать книгу Multicultural Psychology - Jennifer T. Pedrotti - Страница 16

Even the type of measurement used may make a difference in outcome for different races and other groups. Most surveys, scales, and diagnostic tools have been created by accessing the experiences of people in the majority culture. IQ tests, for example, were originally developed by testing boys and girls in a variety of intellectual areas. In some of the original norming studies of these tests, girls scored higher than boys in several areas. At the time, stereotypes existed that promoted male intelligence as superior, and so to combat this “obviously incorrect” result, test makers took out the questions in which girls consistently scored higher than boys. Seems fair, right? Except that these test makers did not remove the questions in which boys consistently scored higher than girls. Gender was only taken as a problematic factor when it favored girls. This was later corrected in future versions of the test, but is another example of how seemingly objective measurements have been skewed by cultural dynamics.

Another important area to consider with regard to measurement involves equivalence (Ho et al., 2014). There are four types of measurement equivalence that are important to our study. First, conceptual equivalence refers to a particular construct having the same meaning in both cultural groups. For example, the construct of wisdom is primarily thought to be a cognitive trait in the United States. Psychologists who are interested in measuring wisdom within a particular population in the United States might use a Likert scale to ask questions about flexibility of thought, creativity of ideas, and use of cognition in making decisions. However, in some other countries, such as Taiwan, wisdom is thought to also include an affective or emotional component (Yang, 2008) in addition to a cognitive component In others, such as Slovakia, wisdom has been found to be thought of as solely affective in nature (Benedikovičová & Ardelt, 2008). Imagine using a measure designed in Slovakia, with questions only about affective wisdom, to measure wisdom in the United States. What would the outcome be? Likely it would be that people in the United States are not particularly wise, but is this a fair assessment? A better way to say this is that people in the United States would not be seen as wise as defined by Slovakians; this is true for many different constructs, and therein lies the importance of making sure that we pay attention to culture when measuring various traits.

In addition to conceptual equivalence, linguistic equivalence, metric equivalence, and functional equivalence must also be assessed when measuring characteristics across cultural groups (Ho et al., 2014). Linguistic equivalence is more than just translating a measure from one language to another and includes the necessity of making sure that it is translated in such a way as to mean the same thing in both languages. When translating a measure in English to Spanish, for example, a psychologist must pay attention to nuances in the different languages to make sure that the same meaning is transmitted. Linguistic equivalence is assisted by back translation of a measure, that is, making sure a bilingual individual is able to translate the Spanish version back to English in such a way that the translated version mirrors the original English meaning.

Metric equivalence refers to equivalence in the way response items are used in different cultural groups. Consider the traditional “scale of 1 to 10” that we often use in US contexts. Some cultures are more risk averse and may not use the entirety of that scale. If one culture is using the full range to describe their experiences, while another is only comfortable using 2–9 and avoiding extremes, metric equivalence cannot be established. It is surprising to some that even when using pure numbers, we cannot guarantee equivalence culturally.

Lastly, functional equivalence refers to the use and function of the particular construct in daily life within the different cultural groups (Ho et al., 2014). Some constructs or traits may be viewed as positive by women, but not by men or transgender individuals, for example. As an example, the trait of gratitude has been found to be more beneficial to women as compared to men (Kashdan, Mishra, Breen, & Froh, 2009). Other cultural characteristics, such as belief in a certain religion, may be used differently in different cultural groups and may serve different functions in daily life. Forgiveness, for example, is a trait often assigned a high value in those groups who are religious, though this may not be the case in those who do not subscribe to a religion. These four different types of equivalence are summarized in Figure 1.3.

When we use our own cultural lens to make decisions about what is positive and what is negative, and how to best measure it, without considering the cultural context of others, we run the risk of setting up a deficit model. The term deficit model refers to the fact that when we use only our own cultural frame of reference to decide what is a positive outcome in a research study, we set all other cultural groups up to potentially perform at a deficit (Song & Pyon, 2008). An example might include a study to investigate the development of independence in children. Western cultures value strongly the constructs of independence and competition and believe them to be top strengths (Triandis, 1995). Across the world, however, there are many more cultures that believe that interdependence and cooperation should be valued over independence and competition. If a researcher from a Western cultural group asks the question, “Which cultural group has more successful parenting outcomes?” and decides to categorize independence as a marker of this successful parenting, it is likely that the parents from Western cultural groups will score the highest, with children who are most independent. Without attention to cultural values, this research might then declare that Western children are parented more successfully toward healthy development than those other children whose parents do not appear to impart independence to their children. In looking at this finding from a multicultural standpoint, however, one might note that parents of non-Western children do not promote independence in their children because they do not value this construct as strongly. In fact, they may purposefully promote interdependence instead, believing this to be a more successful parenting outcome. In ignoring culture, the researcher is setting up a deficit model: Those who act in ways that my culture thinks are beneficial are healthy, and those that do not are thought to have a deficit. This leads, then, to potential pathologicalization of cultures that do not fit within our own cultural framework. Though this type of pathologicalization can occur in any direction (i.e., any group can think that another is less healthy than their own), it matters most when a particular social group has power or privilege behind them.

Figure 1.3 Measurement and Equivalence