Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Advanced

How harmful are survey translations? A test with Schwartz's human values instrument

Eldad Davidov and Alain De Beuckelaer UGent (2010) INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH. 22(4). p.485-510
abstract
One major challenge in international survey research is to ensure the equivalence of translated survey instruments across different cultures. In this study, we examine empirically the extent to which equivalence of survey instruments to measure human values can be established across cultures sharing the same language as opposed to cultures having a different language. We expect cultures using the same language to exhibit higher levels of equivalence. Our examination made use of a short (i.e., a 21-item) survey instrument to measure Schwartz's human values based on data from the second and the third rounds of the European Social Survey (ESS). The empirical results support our expectations.
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
year
type
journalArticle (original)
publication status
published
subject
keyword
MEASUREMENT INVARIANCE, MEASUREMENT EQUIVALENCE, OF-FIT INDEXES, CROSS-CULTURAL VALIDITY, CONFIRMATORY FACTOR-ANALYSIS, ITEM RESPONSE THEORY, MULTINATIONAL ORGANIZATION, 20 COUNTRIES, PERSPECTIVE, COVARIANCE
journal title
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH
Int. J. Public Opin. Res.
volume
22
issue
4
pages
485 - 510
Web of Science type
Article
Web of Science id
000284954200004
JCR category
COMMUNICATION
JCR impact factor
0.635 (2010)
JCR rank
43/67 (2010)
JCR quartile
3 (2010)
ISSN
0954-2892
DOI
10.1093/ijpor/edq030
language
English
UGent publication?
yes
classification
A1
copyright statement
I have transferred the copyright for this publication to the publisher
id
1972784
handle
http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-1972784
date created
2011-12-22 10:22:11
date last changed
2015-06-17 09:53:19
@article{1972784,
  abstract     = {One major challenge in international survey research is to ensure the equivalence of translated survey instruments across different cultures. In this study, we examine empirically the extent to which equivalence of survey instruments to measure human values can be established across cultures sharing the same language as opposed to cultures having a different language. We expect cultures using the same language to exhibit higher levels of equivalence. Our examination made use of a short (i.e., a 21-item) survey instrument to measure Schwartz's human values based on data from the second and the third rounds of the European Social Survey (ESS). The empirical results support our expectations.},
  author       = {Davidov, Eldad and De Beuckelaer, Alain},
  issn         = {0954-2892},
  journal      = {INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH},
  keyword      = {MEASUREMENT INVARIANCE,MEASUREMENT EQUIVALENCE,OF-FIT INDEXES,CROSS-CULTURAL VALIDITY,CONFIRMATORY FACTOR-ANALYSIS,ITEM RESPONSE THEORY,MULTINATIONAL ORGANIZATION,20 COUNTRIES,PERSPECTIVE,COVARIANCE},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {485--510},
  title        = {How harmful are survey translations? A test with Schwartz's human values instrument},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq030},
  volume       = {22},
  year         = {2010},
}

Chicago
Davidov, Eldad, and Alain De Beuckelaer. 2010. “How Harmful Are Survey Translations? A Test with Schwartz’s Human Values Instrument.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 22 (4): 485–510.
APA
Davidov, E., & De Beuckelaer, A. (2010). How harmful are survey translations? A test with Schwartz’s human values instrument. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH, 22(4), 485–510.
Vancouver
1.
Davidov E, De Beuckelaer A. How harmful are survey translations? A test with Schwartz’s human values instrument. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH. 2010;22(4):485–510.
MLA
Davidov, Eldad, and Alain De Beuckelaer. “How Harmful Are Survey Translations? A Test with Schwartz’s Human Values Instrument.” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH 22.4 (2010): 485–510. Print.