Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-02T04:03:02.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Approaches to Scale Development in Chinese Management Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Jiing-Lih Farh
Affiliation:
The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, China
Albert A. Cannella Jr
Affiliation:
Arizona State University, USA
Cynthia Lee
Affiliation:
Northeastern University, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We classify survey scales or measures currently used in Chinese management research along two dimensions - the source of the scale and expectations about its cultural specificity. Based on these two dimensions, we differentiate four approaches to scale development: translation, adaptation, de-contextualization, and contextualization. We describe the key assumptions, strengths and limitations of each approach and their roles in Chinese management research. We illustrate the four approaches by commenting on the five articles in this special issue.

Type
From the Guest Editors
Copyright
Copyright © International Association for Chinese Management Research 2006

References

Baron, J. N., and Kreps, E. D. (1999). Strategic Human Resources. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Behling, O., and Law, K. S. (2000). Translating Questionnaires and Other Research Instruments: Problems and Solutions. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyacigiller, N. A., and Adler, N. J. (1991). ‘The parochial dinosaur: Organizational science in a global context’. Academy of Management Review, 16, 262–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brislin, R. W. (1980). ‘Translation and content analysis of oral and written material’. Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 2, 339444.Google Scholar
Chen, F. F. (forthcoming). ‘Sensitivity of goodness of fit indices to lack of measurement invariance’. Structural Equation Modeling.Google Scholar
Chen, X.-P., Hui, C., and Sego, D. J. (1998). ‘The role of organizational citizenship behavior in turnover: Conceptualization and preliminary tests of key hypotheses’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 922–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Fan, R. M., Song, W. Z., Zhang, J. X., and Zhang, J. P. (1996). ‘Development of the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory’. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 181–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Zhang, J. X., Sun, H. F., Gan, Y. Q., Song, W. Z., and Xie, D. (2001). ‘Indigenous Chinese personality construct: Is the Five-factor model complete?’. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 407–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, L. A., and Watson, D. (1995). ‘Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development’. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cropanzano, R., and Mitchell, M. S. (2005). ‘Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review’. Journal of Management, 31, 874900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale Development: Theory and Application, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Farh, J. L., Earley, P. C., and Lin, S. C. (1997). ‘Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 421–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farh, J. L., Zhong, C. B., and Organ, D. W. (2004). ‘Organizational citizenship behavior in the People's Republic of China’. Organization Science, 15, 241–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geisinger, K. F. (1994). ‘Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments’. Psychological Assessment, 6, 304–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hambleton, R. K., and Patsula, L. (1998). ‘Adapting tests for use in multiple languages and cultures’. Social Indicators Research, 45, 153–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harkness, J. A., Van de Vijver, F. J., and Mohler, P. P. (2003). Cross-Cultural Survey Methods. Hoboken, NJ.: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Heine, S. J., Lehman, D. R., Peng, K., and Greenholtz, J. (2002). ‘What's wrong with cross-cultural comparisons of subjective Likert scales?: The reference-group effect’. Journal Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 903–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hinkin, T. K. (1998). ‘A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires’. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 104–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hwang, K. K. (2000). ‘Chinese relationalism: Theoretical construction and methodological considerations’. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 30, 155–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, U., and Berry, J. W. (1993). Indigenous Psychologies: Research and Experience in Cultural Context. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage.Google Scholar
Korman, A. K. (1974). ‘Contingency approaches to leadership’. In Hunt, J. G., and Larson, L. L. (Eds), Contingency Approaches to Leadership. Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Lam, S. S. K., and Schaubroeck, J. (2000). ‘The role of locus of control in reactions to being promoted and to being passed over: A quasi experiment’. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 6678.Google Scholar
Lee, T. W. (1999). Using Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.Google Scholar
Leung, K., and Bond, M. H. (2004). ‘Social axioms: A model for social beliefs in multicultural perspective’. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 119–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, H., and Atuahene-Gima, K. (2001). ‘Product innovation strategy and the performance of new technology ventures in China’. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1123–34.Google Scholar
Li, J. T., and Tsui, A. S. (2000). Management and Organizations in the Chinese Context. London: McMillan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, S. (2003). ‘Cultures within culture: Unity and diversity of two generations of employees in state-owned enterprises’. Human Relations, 56, 387417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, J. D., and Salovey, P. (1997). ‘What is emotional in telligence?’. In Salovey, P., and Sluyter, D. (Eds), Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Educational Implications. New York: Basic Books, (pp. 334).Google Scholar
Sahlins, M. (1972). Stone Age Economics. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational Culture and Leadership, 2nd edn. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Schwab, D. P. (1980). ‘Construct validity in organizational behavior’. Research in Organizational Behavior, 2, 343.Google Scholar
Sinha, D. (1997). ‘Indigenizing psychology’. In Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., and Pandey, J. (Eds), Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology: Theory and Method. Boston, Mass.: Allyn & Bacon, (pp. 129–69).Google Scholar
Smith, P. B., and Bond, M. H. (2003). ‘Honoring culture scientifically when doing social psychology’. In Hogg, M. A., and Cooper, J. (Eds), Sage Handbook of Social Psychology. London: Sage, (pp. 4361).Google Scholar
Tsai, W. C. (2001). ‘Determinants and consequences of employee displayed positive emotions’. Journal of Management, 27, 497512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsui, A. S. (2006). ‘Contextualization in Chinese management research’. Management and Organization Review, 2, 113.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. S., and Lau, C. M. (2002). The Management of Enterprise in the People's Republic of China. Boston, Mass.: Kluwer Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2003). ‘Bias and equivalence: Cross-cultural perspectives’. In Harkness, J. A., Van de Vijver, F. J., and Mohler, P. P. (Eds), Cross-Cultural Survey Methods. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons, (pp. 143–56).Google Scholar
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., and Hambleton, R. K. (1996). ‘Translating tests: Some practical guidelines’. European Psychologist, 1, 8999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., and Leung, K. (1997). Methods and Data Analysis for Cross-Cultural Research. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Vandenberg, R. J. (2002). ‘Toward a further understanding of and improvement in measurement invariance methods and procedures’. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 139–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vandenberg, R. J., and Lance, C. E. (2000). ‘A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research’. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., and Chen, Z. X. (2005). ‘Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers’ performance and organizational citizenship behavior’. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 420–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werner, O., and Campbell, D. (1970). ‘Translating, working through interpreters, and the problem of decentering’. In Norall, R., and Cohen, R. (Eds), A Handbook of Method in Cultural Anthropology. New York: Natural History Press, (pp. 398429).Google Scholar
Whetten, D. A. (2002). ‘Constructing cross-context scholarly conversations’. In Tsui, A. S., and Lau, C. M. (Eds), The Management of Enterprises in the People's Republic of China. Boston, Mass.: Kluwer Academic Publishers, (pp. 2947).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, C. S., and Law, K. S. (2002). ‘The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study’. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 243–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, K. S. (1996). ‘Psychological transformation of the Chinese people as a result of societal modernization’. In Bond, M. H. (Ed.), The Handbook of Chinese Psychology. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, (pp. 479–98).Google Scholar
Yang, K. S. (1997). ‘Theories and research in Chinese personality: An indigenous approach’. In Rao, H. S. R., and Sinha, D. (Eds), Asian Perspectives on Psychology. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage, (pp. 236–62).Google Scholar