Cross-Cultural Perspective in Romanian I/O Psychology
Keywords:
Romania, cross-cultural approach, research agenda, design, analysisAbstract
The article describes important issues in the fledgling cross-cultural approach to I/O psychology in Romania. The first part of the paper deals with currently popular cross-cultural models of work values, and observes the relative absence of Romania in this global psychological map. The second part of the paper is more methodological and first describes a global framework of method issues in cross-cultural comparisons (bias and equivalence). I then describe specific issues in designing cross-cultural studies, such as the choice between existing questionnaires and developing novel tests, the importance of alternative interpretations of cross-cultural differences, and the need to have a team with all relevant types of expertise on board. Romanian psychology may benefit from the development of a cross-cultural approach, dealing with cultural heterogeneity in Romania, Romanians in the diaspora, and the place of Romania on the “psychological map of the world”.
Downloads
References
Aquilino, W. S. (1994). Interviewer mode effects in surveys of drug and alcohol use. Public Opinion Quarterly, 58, 210–240.
Arends-Tóth, J. V., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2008). Family relationships among immigrants and majority members in the Netherlands: The role of acculturation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 57, 466–487. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00331.x
Becker, M., Vignoles, V. L., Owe, E., Brown, R., Smith, P. B., Easterbrook, M., ... & Camino, L. (2012). Culture and the distinctiveness motive: constructing identity in individualistic and collectivistic contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 833–855. doi:10.1037/a0026853
Benítez Baena I., Van de Vijver, F. J. R. Padilla García, J.L. (in review). A Global global Strategy strategy for Investigating investigating Item item bias in cross-cultural studies: A mixed methods approach integrating differential item functioning and cognitive interviews.
Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Breugelmans, S. M., Chasiotis, A., & Sam, D. (2011). Cross-cultural psychology. Research and applications. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511974274
Bock, P. K. (1988). Rethinking psychological anthropology: Continuity and change in the study of human action. New York, NY: Freeman.
Bond, M. H., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2011). Making scientific sense of cultural differences in psychological outcomes: Unpackaging the magnum mysterium. In D. Matsumoto & F. J. R. van de Vijver (Eds.), Cross-cultural research methods in psychology (pp. 75–100). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Breugelmans, S. M., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2006). Emotion without a word: Shame and guilt among Raramuri Indians and rural Javanese. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1111–1122. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1111
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 185–216. doi:10.1177/135910457000100301
Camilli, G., & Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Campbell, D. T. (1986). Science's social system of validity-enhancing collective believe change and the problems of the social sciences. In D. W. Fiske & R. A. Shweder (Eds.), Metatheory in social science (pp. 108–135). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cheung, F. M., Leung, K., Zhang, J. X., Sun, H. F., Gan, Y. G., Song, W. Z., & Xie, D. (2001). Indigenous Chinese personality constructs: Is the Five-Factor Model complete? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 407–433. doi:10.1177/0022022101032004003
Church, A. T. (2010). Current perspectives in the study of personality across cultures. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 441–449. doi:10.1177/1745691610375559
Georgas, J., Weiss, L., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Saklofske, D. H. (Eds.) (2003). Cultures and children's intelligence: A cross-cultural analysis of the WISC-III. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Harkness, J. A. (2003). Questionnaire translation. In J. A. Harkness, F. J. R. van de Vijver & P. P. Mohler (Eds.), Cross-cultural survey methods (pp. 19–34). New York, NY: Wiley.
He, J., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2013). A general response style factor: Evidence from a multi-ethnic study in the Netherlands. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 794–800. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2013.06.017
Ho, D. Y. F. (1996). Filial piety and its psychological consequences. In M.H. Bond (Ed.), Handbook of Chinese psychology (pp. 155–165). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W., & Gupta V. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hurduzeu, R-E. (2015). Culture and Leadership: The case of Romania. The Romanian Economic Journal, 28, 119–134.
Johnson, T. P. (1998). Approaches to equivalence in cross-cultural and cross-national survey research. ZUMA-Nachrichten Spezial, 3, 1–40.
Matsumoto, D., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (Eds.) (2011), Cross-cultural research methods in psychology. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
McCrae, R. R., & Allik, J. (Eds.) (2002). The five-factor model of personality across cultures. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-0763-5
Neculăesei, A., & Tătărușanu, M. (2008). Romania – cultural and regional differences. Analele Stiințifice ale Universității „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iași, Tomul LV, 198–204.
Owe, E., Vignoles, V. L., Becker, M., Brown, R., Smith, P. B., Lee, S. W., ... & Baguma, P. (2013). Contextualism as an important facet of individualism-collectivism personhood beliefs across 37 national groups. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44, 24–45. doi:10.1177/0022022111430255
Patel, V., Abas, M., Broadhead, J., Todd, C., & Reeler, A. (2001). Depression in developing countries: Lessons from Zimbabwe. British Medical Journal, 322, 482–484. doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7284.482
Shiraev, E., & Levy, D. A. (2014). Cross-cultural psychology. Pearson Education Limited.
Smith, P. B., Fischer, R., & Sale, N. (2001). Cross-cultural industrial/organizational psychology. In C. L. Cooper and I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 16, pp. 147–194). New York, NY: Wiley.
Smith, P. B., Ahmad, A. H., Owe, E., Celikkol, G. C., Ping, H., Gavreliuc, A., ... & Vignoles, V. L. (2016, in press). Nation-level moderators of the extent to which self-efficacy and relationship harmony predict students’ depression and life satisfaction evidence from 10 cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. doi:10.1177/0022022116648210
Spector, P. E., Cooper, C. L., & Sparks, K. (2001). An international study of the psychometric properties of the Hofstede Values Survey Module 1994: A comparison of individual and country/province level results. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50, 269–281. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00058
Taras, V., Kirkman, B. L., & Steel, P. (2010). Examining the impact of culture’s consequences: A three-decade, multi-level, meta-analytic review of Hofstede’s cultural value dimensions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 405–439. doi:10.1037/a0018938
Tönnies, S. (2012). Gemeinschaft—Gesellschaft. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. (Originally published in 1887). doi:10.1007/978-3-531-94174-5
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism & collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (1998). Riding the waves of culture. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2015). Methodological aspects of cross-cultural research. In M. Gelfand, Y. Hong, & C. Y. Chiu (Eds.), Handbook of advances in culture & psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 101–160). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190218966.003.0003
Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2016, in press). Test Adaptations. ITC Handbook.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Fischer, R. (2009). Improving methodological robustness in cross-cultural organizational research. In R. S. Bhagat & R. M. Steers (Eds.), Handbook of culture, organizations, and work (pp. 491–517). Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511581151.019
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Psihologia Resurselor Umane
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal,it also allows for use of the work for non-commercial purposes and if others remix, transform or build upon the works found in this journal they must distribute the contributions under the same licence as the original.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See: The Effect of Open Access).
