Bias and real differences in cross-cultural differences: neither friends nor foes

Vijver, van de; Fons, J R

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511974090.011

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They did not ‘idealize’ measures that show little variation between groups, as suggested by Welzel et al (2021, p. 15). In fact, van de Vijver (2011) emphasized that bias (i.e., lack of equivalence) and valid differences should not be seen as antithetical but as complementary sources of observed cross-cultural differences in measured scores. Van de Vijver mentioned a study by Fontaine et al (2008) that demonstrated a good average representation of the Schwartz value theory across samples, but at the same time showed a pattern of systematic deviations from this structure.…”

Section: Previous Research On Bias In Scores On Psychometric Tests An...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence of Validity Does not Rule out Systematic Bias: A Commentary on Nomological Noise and Cross-Cultural Invariance

Fischer

Karl

Fontaine

et al. 2022

Sociological Methods & Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We comment on the argument by Welzel, Brunkert, Kruse and Inglehart (2021) that theoretically expected associations in nomological networks should take priority over invariance tests in cross-national research. We agree that narrow application of individual tools, such as multi-group confirmatory factor analysis with data that violates the assumptions of these techniques, can be misleading. However, findings that fit expectations of nomological networks may not be free of bias. We present supporting evidence of systematic bias affecting nomological network relationships from a) previous research on intelligence and response styles, b) two simulation studies, and c) data on the choice index from the World Value Survey (WVS). Our main point is that nomological network analysis by itself is insufficient to rule out systematic bias in data. We point out how a thoughtful exploration of sources of biases in cross-national data can contribute to stronger theory development.

show abstract

Section: Previous Research On Bias In Scores On Psychometric Tests An...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence of Validity Does not Rule out Systematic Bias: A Commentary on Nomological Noise and Cross-Cultural Invariance

Fischer

Karl

Fontaine

et al. 2022

Sociological Methods & Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a recent chapter Van de Vijver et al (2011) formulated four such questions: In a recent chapter Van de Vijver et al (2011) formulated four such questions:…”

Section: Future Outlookmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-Cultural Psychology

Poortinga

2015

International Encyclopedia of the Social &Amp; Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This effort is rarely (if ever) reported, and papers often focus exclusively on the quantitative (and a posteriori) aspects of adapting the test, for instance, by establishing measurement invariance in SEM. However, robust reports on the cultural comparability of various forms of the same test should be inspired by both a priori (usually judgment-driven) and a posteriori (usually data-driven) methods (van de Vijver, 2011). A priori procedures are applied to prevent the appearance of bias.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%