Lecture
Cross-cultural research in psychology (CCR) consists of quasi-experimental schemes for comparing homogeneous samples that differ in the factor of their cultural affiliation, with the aim of testing hypotheses about the influence of this factor on psychological indicators.
Within the framework of CCR, culture is understood as the characteristic way of life of people united by territorial and linguistic commonality and contextual variables.
The 6 global cultural zones: Africa, Asia, North and South America, Australia, Europe, and the Mediterranean basin.
The units for analyzing cultures are singled out from the standpoint of the hypotheses being tested.
2 tendencies in cross-cultural analysis:
1) the assumption of universals as general characteristics through the prism of which different cultures can be evaluated.
2) the assumption of the fundamental uniqueness of cultures.
The preferred methods, respectively: comparative analysis from the standpoint of previously identified common and distinctive characteristics; and the analysis of individual cases and the tools of qualitative methodology (the nomothetic and idiographic approaches, right?).
The basic psychological processes conditioning cross-cultural differences are the contextual variables.
Contextual variables are homogeneous and comparatively constant factors, reconstructed in CCR, the conditions of people's lives, considered as conduits of culture's influence on psychical processes, structures, and regularities.
Conditionally, they may act as analogues of the independent variable.
The main problems in organizing valid CCR:
- substantiating the contextual variables and the psychological indicators being recorded (as analogues of the dependent variable);
- establishing connections between the contextual variables and the measured dependent variables;
- considering competing explanations.
The main aspects of planning CCR:
1) Substantive planning:
- which samples (cultures) will be represented in the scheme in accordance with the goals and considerations of convenience;
- how many levels – compared groups;
- the necessary number of participants in the sample;
- resolving the question of operationalizing the measured variables (analogues of the dependent variable).
2) Formal planning: a combination of elements of between-group comparisons, a quasi-experiment with time series, and longitudinal analysis.
According to a number of researchers, the number of cultural units should be no fewer than three: because differences in two groups may be connected not with cultural factors but conditioned by external confounding variables (e.g., social differences).
Types of CCR
The classification of Van de Vijver and Leung. Two bases:
studies for testing previously formulated hypotheses derived from theory, or exploratory studies, when the existing data are insufficient for advancing specific hypotheses;
the presence or absence of contextual variables;
|
Taking contextual variables into account |
Orientation
|
|
|
Toward testing hypotheses |
Toward searching for differences |
|
|
No
|
Generalizing CCR Comparison of different samples from the standpoint of the representation of common basic variables. They use a scheme of supplementary variation Advantage: establishing the comparability of data; Disadvantages: problems of interpreting cross-cultural differences, since there are no contextual variables. Example: Schwartz, the study of values (more than 30 countries) |
Exploratory CCR of differences E.g.: Kornilova, Grigorenko – a comparative analysis of the motivational profiles of students at Moscow and Yale universities. Advantage: freedom from prejudice regarding cross-cultural differences; Disadvantage: problems with interpreting the results obtained. |
|
Yes
|
Theory-based CCR Advantage: the study of the interrelations between cultural factors and psychological variables; Drawback: insufficient attention to alternative interpretations. E.g.: Bruner's study: the contextual variable – primary schooling for the development of human thinking; A.R. Luria's study – Uzbeks have no illusions =) BUT here culture and literacy/illiteracy are confounded. |
Exploratory CCR for substantiating external validity Regression analysis is often applied here. Advantage: an emphasis on the interpretation of cross-cultural differences; Disadvantage: the choice of contextual variables may be random and unconsidered. |
There is no direct X-influence in CCR.
The general technique for setting up analogues of the independent variable is control of group composition, that is, the selection of participants into groups by criterial features. Stage 1 – the deliberate selection of populations – substantiating the appeal to particular cultural differences and samples; stage 2 – expanding the database on which comparisons of samples are built, using several methods for measuring the basic variable. Statistical control is the general strategy for controlling confounding variables in CCR.
Three main strategies for selecting participants in CCR:
(equivalent groups are needed, but ones that differ in the cultural feature – which is difficult!)
1. Selection of populations and samples from them for considerations of the convenience and availability of participants. Randomization is rarely realized here. These are usually criterial samples (students, for example). Stratified selection with randomization would be the preferable strategy here.
2. Systematically selected samples. If a continuum of values on a scale acting as an analogue of the independent variable is assumed, then individuals representing these levels of the factor are selected within each of the cultures. Systematicity here is the connection with the representation of different levels of the analogue of the independent variable.
3. Random selection of cultural groups. Initially there is a large set of cultures. Randomization is carried out with respect to the choice of the cultural groups themselves.
Threats to construct validity – the non-identity of constructs in different cultures.
2 approaches to ensuring construct validity (as the absence of dominant influences on the part of one of the cultures): 1) decentration – researchers from different cultures work together; 2) convergence – researchers from all the cultures develop their own methods and techniques, which are then applied in all the cultures under study to test the similarity of the patterns of results obtained.
Measurement error – an indicator of the operational validity of CCR – is connected with ensuring equivalent conditions for conducting the study, comparable levels of familiarity with the material, and the effectiveness of communication between the researcher and the participant.
3 types of error:
1) Construct-related.
- incomplete overlap of the definitions of constructs across cultures;
- incomplete coverage of the construct;
- differential admissibility of the content of the techniques (skills not included in the skill repertoire of one of the groups)
2) Methodological (operational)
- differential social desirability;
- different response patterns;
- different familiarity with the stimuli and ways of responding to them;
- non-comparability of samples;
- experimenter effects;
- communication problems between the researcher and the respondent
3) At the level of the items:
- poor translation of the items;
- inadequate wording (too complex)
- dependence of the answers on additional properties of the participant that are of no interest to the researcher
- differences in the admissibility of the content of individual items
Comments