Data equivalence in cross-cultural international business research: assessment and guidelines

Abstract

Data equivalence refers to the extent to which the elements of a research design have the same meaning, and can be applied in the same way, in different cultural contexts. Failure to establish data equivalence in cross-cultural studies may bias empirical results and theoretical inferences. Although several authors have encouraged researchers to ensure high levels of data equivalence, no study has assessed the status of the field in relation to compliance with data equivalence standards. Accordingly, this study examines three aspects of data equivalence (construct equivalence, measurement equivalence, and data collection equivalence) within 167 studies that involve cross-cultural data published in the Journal of International Business Studies, Management International Review, Journal of World Business, Strategic Management Journal and the Academy of Management Journal from 1995 to 2005. The findings indicate that international business researchers report insufficient information in relation to data equivalence issues, thus limiting confidence in the findings of many cross-cultural studies. To enhance future research, a guideline for procedures for researchers to follow and report in establishing data equivalence is offered.

Multilevel models in international business research

“…One is that items often use simple words and dichotomous response alternatives to accommodate respondents with limited education. Another is the frequent use of singleitem scales, making translation equivalence and response bias difficult to evaluate (Hult et al, 2008).…”

Methodological issues in cross-cultural research: An overview and recommendations

“…Contrary to what might be expected, recent studies confi rm that the standards called for in past studies, such as achieving construct equivalence or assessing the measurement invariance of data collected, have not been met yet. 11,12 There are several reasons for this lack of improvement in the methodology of this type of research: the lack of knowledge between researchers, the diffi culty of setting and achieving equivalence at each stage of the research process, the methodological complexities involved in some procedures and the lack of clarity in the literature. 11,13 More importantly, the signifi cant number of sources about cross-cultural / national fi ndings make it diffi cult and time-consuming to get a basic overview.…”

Asia’s materialists: Reconciling collectivism and materialism

“…We administered back-translation of our original English survey into Chinese (Mandarin) and Thai to ensure translation equivalence across cultures (Hult et al, 2008;Mullen, 1995). We did not translate the survey into Hindi due to the sizeable proportion of fluent English speakers within our Indian professional network.…”