跨文化適應力檢核單：中文版信效度之研究

全文

(1)CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION This chapter outlines the background of the study, purpose of the study, questions of the study, significance of the study, as well as the definition of terms.. Background of the Study With the tread of globalization, more and more multinational corporates (MNCs) in Taiwan enter different regional markets. Sending expatriate workers to the host countries have been a common way in the operations of multinational companies. When an expatriate of one culture interacts with a subordinate of another, different cultural norms and values may cause misunderstanding and conflicts that lead to frustration. Research literature on U.S international expatriates reports relatively high failure rates (Black, 1988). In order to prevent failed international assignments, utilizing effective selection and training intervention is one of the possible solutions (Arthur & Bennett, 1995; Tung, 1981). Many personnel administrators believe that factors in relation to successful international assignments are not enough well known to devise sound selection instruments or training programs (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985). However, numerous studies (e.g., Arthur & Bennett, 1995; Hammer, Gudykunst, & Wiseman, 1978; Hannigan, 1990; Ruben, 1976; Yamazaki & Keyes, 2004) tried to find factors crucial to success in a host culture or competencies for successful cross-cultural adaptation. Due to the better understanding of key factors underlying successful international assignment, there is an increasing need to have an instrument to evaluate whether potential expatriates possess the necessary competencies or quickly assess the adaptation states after the expatriates receive the training program. Globalization also allows more worldwide customers coming into Taiwan. In the service industry, such as hotels and restaurants, the service providers are likely to have cross-cultural interactions with people of different cultures. Misunderstandings easily occur among people with different sets of behaviors and beliefs. Sizoo’s (2007) study revealed that employees in the service encounter with high intercultural sensitivity had significant higher scores than employees with low intercultural sensitivity with regard to service attentiveness, revenue contribution, interpersonal skills, job satisfaction, and social satisfaction when they are under cross-cultural situation. Thus, it’s useful for Human resource (HR) professionals in the service industry to 1.

(2) understand the intercultural sensitivity of the employees who interact with customers coming from other countries. Though high cultural competence is essential for expatriates, service providers, and those who frequently interact with people from other cultures, there are relatively few instruments measuring cross-cultural adaptability or sensitivity for a use of selection or training in Taiwan. However, in America, measures for cross-cultural competence do exist, such as Intercultural Development Inventory (Hammer & Bennett, 1998), Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (Kelley & Meyers, 1995a), and Multicultural Personality Questionnaire (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, 2000, 2001). Borrowing from the western instruments may be one of the solutions in the status quo. However, there are some limitations if the original western instruments are implemented in Taiwan. For example, they can’t reach the Chinese population with restricted English proficiency and their reliability and validity among Chinese have not been established. Among measures for cross-cultural competence, Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) (Kelley & Meyers, 1995a) is a widely used instrument to provide information about cross-cultural effectiveness (e.g., Black & Duhon, 2006; Kitsantas, 2004; Majumdar, Keystone, & Cuttress, 1999; Montagliani & Giacalone, 1998; Sizoo, 2007). It has been examined on hundreds of participants by various cultures, ages, occupations. It’s a self-report instrument with an overall reliability of .90. Great care must be taken during the process of handling the measures developed in different languages, especially by people from different cultures. Therefore, only when Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory undergoes the process of thorough translation as well as reliability and validity examination can it be considered a valid research tool and be utilized in Taiwan.. 2.

(3) Purposes of the Study Due to relatively few measures for cross-cultural competence in Taiwan, the purpose of the study aimed at developing a Chinese version of the CCAI by adopting back translation and examining the reliability and validity of the CCAI on Taiwanese sample. The purposes of this study were: 1. To understand measures for cross-cultural competence in the literature. 2. To translate the CCAI into Mandarin Chinese, adopting a back translation approach. 3. To examine the reliability of the Chinese version of the CCAI. 4. To examine the validity of the Chinese version of the CCAI. 5. To compare the results of reliability and validity examination based on the Taiwanese sample with results in the literature.. Questions of the Study There were three research questions based on the purpose of this study: 1. What instruments are used to measure cross-cultural adaptation? 2. What’s the procedure to enhance item equivalence while translating instruments? 3. Is the Chinese version of the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory reliable and valid for measuring adaptability?. 3.

(4) Significance of the Study Cross-cultural adaptation has been a research topic in the management literature, subjects including expatriate ( e.g., Arthur & Bennett, 1995; Black, 1990; Stening & Hammer, 1992; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004); health care professionals (Holder-Ballard, 2006; Majumdar et al., 1999; Tavoc, 2006; Woehrle, 2005); study-abroad students (Black & Duhon, 2006; Clemens, 2002; Hughes, 2003; Kitsantas, 2004; Voss, 1999; Williams, 2002), and so on. To better understand key factors underlying effective cross-cultural adaptation, there is an increasing need to have an instrument to quickly assess the adaptability of the target subjects. Such instruments or measures are scarce in Taiwan. Based on the research purpose of this study, developing the Chinese version of the CCAI may contribute to the further studies as well as practical application. Furthermore, the results of this study can be compared cross-culturally with results of the literature. With regard to practical application, this study through developing a Chinese version of the CCAI can contribute to selection interventions or training tools of the target population, such as expatriates, service providers, international students as well as the teachers in the international settings.. 4.

(5) Definition of Terms This section provides definition of key terms shown in the study: Cross-cultural adjustment: a psychosocial concept which has to do with the process of achieving harmony between the individual and the cross-cultural environment (Hannigan, 1990). Cross-cultural adaptation: a complex process in which an individual grows to function effectively in a new culture (Haslberger, 2005). Cross-cultural adaptability: the ability to adapt to another culture with its requirements, values, and beliefs (Chuprina, 2001). In this study, it’s measured by Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (Kelley & Meyers, 1995a). Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory: an instrument designed by Kelley & Meyers (1995a). It is the most effective when it is used as part of a training event both as a means of developing self-understanding in the area of cross-cultural adaptability and as a take-off point for further awareness and skill training (Kelley & Meyers, 1995b, p.2).. 5.

(6) 6.

(7) CHPATER II. LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter reviews the general literature on cross-cultural adaptation, measures for cross-cultural competence, and translation equivalence.. Cross-Cultural Adaptation The first section will focus on the literature considering brief similarities and differences of the definition between adjustment and adaptation, and competencies for successful cross-cultural adaptation.. Definition of cross-cultural adaptation The definition of adaptation overlaps the definition of adjustment. Their differences have been identified by several authors. Adjustment is used to refer to the psychological responses to cross-cultural challenges (Kim, 1995). Adjustment is defined by Hannigan (1990) as “a psychosocial concept which has to do with the process of achieving harmony between the individual and the environment” (p.91). With regard to the definition of adaptation, Grove and Torbiorn (cited in Hannigan, 1990) conceptualized adaptation as a process of building one’s new mental frame of reference since one has lost confidence in the previous structure and quality. Hannigan (1990) views adaptation as a broad term which “encompasses cognitive, attitudinal, behavioral, and psychological changes in an individual who lives in a new or foreign culture” (p.92). Kim (1995) also views adaptation as a broad term which contains other similar but narrower terms, from assimilation, acculturation, coping, adjustment, to integration. Compared to adjustment, adaptation involves the person’s cognitive changes in addition to attitudinal, behavioral and psychological responses and it’s a more long-term process (Kelley & Meyers, 1995b). Cross-cultural adaptation is regarded as a complex process in which an individual grows to function effectively in a new culture (Haslberger, 2005). In the complex process of cross-cultural adaptation, Anderson (1994) proposed six principles applying to cross-cultural adaptation. Cross-cultural adaptation (a) involves adjustment; (b) it implies learning; (c) it implies a stranger-host relationship; (d) it is cyclical, continuous, interactive; (e) it is relative, and (f) it implies personal development (Anderson, 1994, p.303). 7.

(8) Competencies for successful cross-cultural adaptation Many researches (Cui & Van Den Berg, 1991; Hannigan, 1990; Hammer et al., 1978; Stening & Hammer, 1992) use the term, effectiveness, to describe that a person can function effectively in other culture. Competence (Ruben, 1976; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004) and success (Arthur & Bennett, 1995) are also commonly used. Ruben (1976) stated his comment on the problem of these three interchangeable terms considering the same concept: Systematic attempts to define “effective, “successful,” or “competent” communication behavior are relative scare…For a particular interaction to be termed effective or a person to be termed competent, the performance must meet the needs and goals of both the message initiator and the recipient. (p.335) Therefore, to understand competencies for successful cross-cultural adaptation, a general review of literature on cross-cultural effectiveness, competence, and success was conducted. The review included not only empirical studies that investigated the factors related to cross-cultural effectiveness/success but also researchers’ literature review on assessing required competencies for cross-cultural adaptation. The results are found in Table 2.1. and discussed below. 1. Communication skills Communication skills are frequently mentioned in the literature. Kim (1995) labeled this dimension as host communication competence, which means a person can effectively and appropriately receive and explain the sending messages (decoding); reversely, he can properly take actions to respond to those messages (encoding). Given that host communication competence serves as an instrument of understanding the host country culture and showing appropriate behavior while effective communication is proceeding, it will affect the cross-cultural adaptation in a significant way (Kim, 1995). In addition to the survival level of language proficiency, Mendenhall and Oddou (1985) mentioned that willingness to communicate was one important aspect of the communication skills which help an individual adjust to the host culture. Numerous terms are described in the literature as ability to communicate effectively (Hammer et al., 1978), willing to communicate (Black, 1990), ability to communicate (Hannigan, 1990), communication competence (Cui & Van Den Berg, 1991), communication behavior (Cui & Van Den Berg, 1991), communication (Stening & Hammer, 1992), and translating complex information (Yamazaki & Keyes, 2004). 8.

(9) 2. Relationship building This competency essentially focuses on developing and fostering human relationships with people from other cultures. The importance of this interpersonal skill lies in the information and feedback received from host nationals when building relationships with them (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985). The individual will modify the inappropriate behavior and strengthen the appropriate behavior according to enough information and feedback (Black, 1990). More culturally appropriate behavior an individual exhibits, more positive feedback one will get. Consequently, one feels more comfortable and adapts to this new environment. This dimension has been described in the literature as ability to establish interpersonal relationships (Hammer et al., 1978), ability to establish and maintain relationship, social orientation (Black, 1990), ability to establish and maintain relationship (Hannigan, 1990), interpersonal relationships (Stening & Hammer, 1992), relational skills (Arthur & Bennett, 1995), and building relationships (Yamazaki & Keyes. 2004). 3. Flexibility/Adaptability Flexibility is viewed as the ability to substitute the different and unfamiliar activities in the host country for the enjoyed but unavailable activities in one’s home country (Black, 1990). Adaptability is referred as the ability to adapt to another culture with its requirements, values, and beliefs (Chuprina, 2001). Flexibility and adaptability are regarded as important abilities for successful adaptation. Hannigan (1990) and Yamazaki and Keyes (2004) in their review of the literature, identified this dimension as important competency. Furthermore, Black (1990) found cultural flexibility was significantly related to adjustment and Arthur and Bennett (1995) regarded flexibility/adaptability as a factor perceived to contribute to the success of international expatriates. 4. Empathy A phrase called “put oneself in another’s shoes” can closely deliver the meaning of empathy. Ruben (1976) stated that individuals differ in the capacity for showing their empathy. Some people are capable of projecting an interest in others, and even obtaining and reflecting what other people’s thoughts, feelings, and experiences are. However, others who fail to show their interests, or aren’t willing to project an interests probably can’t understand other people’s situation. This competency has been described in research as empathy (Ruben, 1976), and cultural empathy (Cui & Van Den Berg, 1991; Hannigan, 1990). 9.

(10) 5. Stress management This dimension basically focuses on a person’s ability to cope with stress. Stress occurs when the capabilities of an individual don’t meet the demands of the environment (Kim, 1995). This dimension which has been described in various ways include ability to deal with psychological stress (Hammer et al., 1978), conflict resolution (Black, 1990), and stress management (Stening & Hammer, 1992; Yamazaki & Keyes, 2004). In sum, five dimensions emerged as required competencies for cross-cultural adaptation. They are communication skills, relationship building, flexibility/ adaptability, empathy, and stress management. Other significant skills, attitudes, and traits which contribute to cross-cultural effectiveness include tolerance for ambiguity, display of respect, openness, and so on.. Table 2.1. Review of Competencies for Successful Cross-Cultural Adaptation Authors. Ruben (1976). Literature Review/ Empirical Study Literature review. Subjects (Sample Size). Focus on intercultural behavior competence. Hammer et al. (1978). Empirical study. American sojourners (N=53). Black (1990). Empirical study. Expatriates (N=67). Hannigan (1990). Literature review. Focus on sojourners’ literature. 10. Significant Skills, Attitudes, and Traits. Display of respect Interaction posture Orientation to knowledge Empathy Self-oriented role behavior Interaction management Tolerance for ambiguity Ability to deal with psychological stress Ability to communicate effectively Ability to establish interpersonal relationships Cultural flexibility Social orientation Willing to communicate Conflict resolution Ability to communicate Ability to establish and maintain relationship Interaction management Linguistic ability Orientation to knowledge World view Cultural empathy (table continues).

(11) Table 2.1.(continued) Authors. Cui and Van Den Berg (1991) Stening and Hammer (1992) Arthur and Bennett (1995). Yamazaki and Keyes (2004). Literature Review/ Empirical Study. Subjects (Sample Size). Empirical study. Expatriates (N=257). Empirical study. Expatriates (N= 291). Empirical study. Expatriates (N=338). Literature review. Focus on expatriates’ literature. Significant Skills, Attitudes, and Traits. Flexibility A realistic view of the target culture and organization skills Communication competence Cultural empathy Communication behavior. Stress management Communication Interpersonal relationships Flexibility/Adaptability Job knowledge and motivation Relational skills Extra-cultural openness Building relationships Valuing people of different cultures Listening and observation Coping with ambiguity Translating complex information Taking action and initiative Managing other Adaptability and flexibility Managing stress. Summary On the basis of the literature review on cross-cultural adaptation, cross-cultural competence requires certain knowledge, attitudes, and traits. Cross-cultural success is composed of communication skills, relationship building, flexibility/adaptability, empathy, stress management, and so on. After identifying the essential competencies necessary for successful cross-cultural adaptation, the next step is to review measures for cross-cultural competence in the literature to assess necessary competencies which the research participants possess.. 11.

(12) Measures for Cross-Cultural Competence After reviewing the required competencies for cross-cultural adaptation, the development of the measures which allows a quick assessment of adaptation states is vital. This section will introduce five measures for cross-cultural competence; then mainly focus on Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI).. Multicultural Awareness, Knowledge, Skills Survey-Counselor Edition-Revised (MAKSS-CE-R) The. Multicultural. Awareness,. Knowledge,. Skills. Survey-Counselor. Edition-Revised (MAKSS-CE-R) (Kim, Cartwright, Asay, & Andrea, 2003) is a revision of the Multicultural Awareness, Knowledge, Skills Survey (MAKSS; D’Andrea, Daniels, & Heck, 1991). The 33-item total scale is made up of 10-item Awareness-Revised. (Awareness-R). subscale,. 13-item. Knowledge-Revised. (Knowledge-R) subscale, and 10-item Skills-Revised (Skills-R) subscale. According to Kim et al.’s (2003) results, the reliability coefficients were reported as .71 for Awareness-R, .85 for Knowledge-R, and .87 for Skills-R. The MAKSS-CE-R items are anchored on three different 4-point Likert scales (very limited to very aware; very limited to very good; strongly disagree to strongly agree). Item examples include: (a) promoting a client’s sense of psychological independence is usually a safe goal to strive for in most counseling situations (Awareness-Revised item); (b) how would you rate your ability to effectively secure information and resources to better serve culturally different clients (Skills-Revised item); (c) at the present time, how would you rate your understanding of the following term? “culture” (Knowledge-Revised item).. Multicultural Counseling Knowledge and Awareness Scale (MCKAS) The Multicultural Counseling Knowledge and Awareness Scale (MCKAS, Ponterotto, Gretchen, Utsey, Rieger, & Austin, 2002), a revision of the Multicultural Counseling Awareness Scale-Form B (MCAS-B, Ponterotto, Sanchez, & Magids, 1991) evaluates self-reported multicultural counseling competence. The 32-item measure is divided into two subscales, Knowledge (20 items) and Awareness (12 items). The reliability coefficients were reported as .85 for both Knowledge and Awareness subscale (Ponterotto et al., 2002). It is scored on a 7-point Likert-type. 12.

(13) scale ranging from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (totally true). Sample items include: (a) I am aware of certain counseling skills, techniques, or approaches that are more likely to transcend culture and be effective with any clients (Knowledge item); (b) I think that clients should perceive the nuclear family as the ideal social unit (Awareness item).. Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI) Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI) developed by Hammer and Bennett (1998, 2002) is intended to measure the orientations toward cultural differences (Hammer, Bennett, & Wiseman, 2003). The IDI with 50 items is divided into five subscales, which are Denial/Defense (DD; 13 items), Reversal (R; 9 items), Minimization (M; 9 items), Acceptance/Adaptation (AA, 14 items), and Encapsulated Marginality (EM, 5 items). According to Hammer et al.’s (2003) results, the scale reliability estimates for the each scale were .85 for DD scale, .80 for R scale, .83 for M scale, .84 for AA scale, and .80 for EM scale, respectively. The IDI items are anchored on a 5-point agree/disagree Likert scale. The sample items include: (a) it is appropriate that people do not care what happens outside their country (DD item); (b) people from our culture are less tolerant compared to people from other cultures (R item); (c) our common humanity deserves more attention than culture difference (M item); (d) I have observed many instances of misunderstanding due to cultural differences in gesturing or eye contact (AA item); (e) I feel rootless because I do not think I have a cultural identification (EM item).. Multicultural Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) The Multicultural Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) was developed by Van der Zee and Van Oudenhoven (2000, 2001) as an instrument measuring multicultural effectiveness. The recent version of MPQ has 91 items and is comprised of five subscales, Cultural Empathy (CE), Open-Mindedness (O), Emotional Stability (ES), Social Initiative (SI) and Flexibility (F). Participants can give their answers on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Totally not applicable) to 5 (Completely applicable). Sample items include: (a) notices when someone is in trouble (CE item); (b) gets involved in other cultures (O item); (c) can put setbacks in perspective (ES item); (d) is often the driving force behind things (SI item), and (e) starts a new life easily (F item). The comparisons among four instruments were shown in Table 2.2. 13.

(14) Table 2.2. Comparisons of Four Measures for Cross-Cultural Competence Instrument. Source. MAKSS-CE-RThe Multicultural Awareness, Knowledge, Skills Survey-Counselor Edition-Revised MCKASMulticultural Counseling Knowledge and Awareness Scale IDIIntercultural Development Inventory. MPQMulticultural Questionnaire. Construct Assessed. Subscale. Items Response Format. Implementation Method. Kim et (2003). al. multi-cultural competence. (a) awareness-revised (b) knowledge-revised (c) skills-revised. 33. 4-point Likert scale. Self-report. Ponterotto al. (2002). et multi-cultural competence. (a) knowledge (b) awareness. 32. 7-point Likert scale. Self-report. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e). 50. 5-point Likert scale. Self-report. 91. 5-point Likert scale. Self-report. Hammer and Intercultural Bennett (1998, sensitivity 2002). Van der Zee Multicultural Personality and Van effectiveness Oudenhoven (2000, 2001). 14. denial/defense reversal minimization acceptance/adaptation encapsulated marginality cultural empathy open-mindedness emotional stability social initiative flexibility.

(15) Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) First, the developmental history of the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory is introduced. Next portion is general information on the CCAI, including the four subscales and its reliability and validity. Finally, the applications of the CCAI in the literature were reviewed. 1. Development of the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) The Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory manual (Kelley & Meyers, 1995b) was examined in order to understand the developmental history of CCAI. However, this portion in the manual was not specified in detail. After Kelley and Meyers (1995b) reviewed the literature on cross-cultural adaptability and asked the experts specialized in the cross-cultural field for their opinions, Cross-cultural Readiness Checklist was made, totally 58 rated items, which was composed of the traits and skills in relation to adapt to the other culture. A panel of the specialists, most of whom were cross-cultural trainers and consultants (N=25), rated the importance of each item on the Checklist. Items were then grouped into four categories: Emotional Resilience (ER), Flexibility/Openness (FO), Perceptual Acuity (PAC), and Personal Autonomy (PA) based on the statistical analysis and the literature review. Furthermore, the fifth category, positive regard for others, which was also considered important in the literature and had been rated high by the specialists, was added into the CCAI. The primary version of the inventory was completed. Using the cross-cultural experts and general public who were interested in the CCAI, the CCAI was examined and revised according the data and feedback from those who filled in the CCAI. After three revisions, the CCAI was initially introduced to the public at a workshop at the SIETAR (International Society for Intercultural Education Training and Research) conference in May of 1987. For the purpose of refining the scoring procedure, the CCAI was administered to the normative sample, 653 people to collect the necessary data. After analyzing the data, the fifth category was deleted because it was correlated with the flexibility/openness dimension. And, several items which were not specified in the manual were moved from it original category to another. Finally, the current version of the CCAI was published in January of 1992. The developmental sequences of the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory are showed in Figure 2.1.. 15.

(16) Kelley and Meyers developed Cross-cultural Readiness Checklist. Experts rated the importance of each item on the Chceklist Four categories, F/O, ER, PC, and PAC, were formed. The fifth set, positive regard for others, was added. After being tested and revised, the CCAI was initially introduced to the public at a workshop at the SIETAR in 1987. The CCAI was administered to the normative sample (N=653) The fifth set, positive regard for others, was deleted and some items were removed form one category to another. The current version of the CCAI was published in 1992 Figure 2.1. Developmental sequences of the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory. 2. General information on the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) 2.1 The CCAI scales Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory is a cultural-general instrument because the authors, Kelley and Meyers (1995b), assumed that “individuals adapting to other cultures share common feelings, perceptions, and experience” (p.2). The CCAI comprised of 50 items is divided into four scales, motional Resilience (ER), Flexibility/Openness (FO), Perceptual Acuity (PAC), and Personal Autonomy (PA). They are described and defined in the manual (Kelley & Meyers, 1995b). The Emotional Resilience (ER) scale measures the degree to which an individual can rebound from negative, unpleasant, and stressful feelings and react positively to new things and experiences. Emotionally resilient people are confident in dealing with ambiguity and stresses of new situation and like to try new things and experiences. They always possess a positive attitude. The ER scale which contains 18 items is the largest scale in the CCAI. The Flexibility/Openness (FO) scale measures the extent to which a person 16.

(17) enjoys the various ways of thinking and behaving in a cross-cultural situation. People who are open and flexible have a tendency to interact with people who are different form them, and learn from unfamiliar people and thoughts with a nonjudgmental attitude. The FO scale has 15 items. The Perceptual Acuity (PAC) scale measures the extent to which an individual detect and perceive various aspects of the environment. These people who perceive both verbal and nonverbal cues and interpret those cues accurately communicate with people from other cultures effectively. The PAC scale includes 10 times. The last scale, Personal Autonomy (PA) scale measures the extent to which a person has evolved a personal belief and value system and appreciates the cultural differences in a new setting. Personally autonomous people maintain their own identity when encountering with the new environment full of the external fluctuations. In addition, they value themselves and others, and enjoy making their own decisions. This scale contains 7 items. 2.2 Reliability and validity of the CCAI According to the statistical analyses of the normative sample (N=653), the CCAI had reliability estimates for each scale and the total scale ranging form .68 to .90. Kraemer and Beckstead (2003) established the reliability of the CCAI on physical therapist (PT) students. The sample consisted of 288 entry-level master’s degree physical therapy students. Cronbach alpha coefficient was calculated and the results revealed that total score had an estimated reliability of .90 and the estimated reliability of the four subscales ranged from .59 to .83. Compared with Kelley and Meyers’s (1995b) result, the Cronbach alpha of .90 on the total scale was the same. However, three of the four scales, FO, PAC, and PA, showed significantly lower reliability estimates than those published by Kelley and Meyers. The authors explained the difference caused by the sample used since this study only examined the PA students. When it comes to the CCAI’s validity, Kelley and Meyers (1995b) claimed in the manual that CCAI has face, content, construct validity. CCAI has face validity because the respondents easily understand that CCAI measures cross-cultural adaptability. For content validity, the CCAI which was developed based on the literature on cross-cultural adaptability and a panel of experts is offered as content-related validity. Since no one can claim that an instrument truly measures what it’s designed to measure, an analysis of factor loadings for each item was presented as an indirect claim. 17.

(18) Jensma (1995) examined the predictive validity of the CCAI, using a sample of thirty-seven first-term missionaries. The sample was asked to fill out the CCAI before the departure and after six months on the field. The missionaries and their peers were additionally asked to rate the relative adequacy of the missionary’s cross-cultural adaptation on 6-point (1= poor; 6=excellent) scale in the second administration. The results showed the first (prefiled) scores were highly correlated with the second (onfiled) scores, suggesting that the CCAI is a reliable instrument over six to nine months. Unfortunately, the prefiled’s scores failed to predict the relative adequacy of the missionary’s cross-cultural adaptation. Davis and Finney (2006) argued that there were some problems existing but not specified in the manual, such as cross-loadings, reassignment of items, and lack of cross-validation. Therefore, they examined whether the CCAI represents the proposed four-factor structure of cross-culture adaptability. Data from a sample of 709 college sophomores were analyzed in a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) approach, results showing poor-fit of the four-factor structure. The author recommended that there should be more studies contributing to examine the CCAI. 3. Applications of the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) The CCAI was developed to provide information about an individual’s cross-cultural effectiveness in adaptation, communication, and interaction. Therefore, the CCAI should be applied to (a) understand the research findings; (b) assess one’s capacities; and (c) plan for self-improvement, and it would exert its function when it combined with a training session. In addition, the CCAI can be used in individual counseling and psychotherapy sessions with those who have moved or are going to move to another culture (Kelley & Meyers, 1995b). Up to date, the CCAI has been applied to considerable research studies. Davis and Finney (2006) grouped those research studies into two categories: (a) measuring the effectiveness of cultural training and (b) determining the utility of hypothesized predictor variables of cross-cultural adaptability. In one category, there were some subcategories according to the trainees’ differences, such as law enforcement officers (Cornett-DeVito & McGlone, 2000), teachers (Remmert, 1993), business professional (Goldstein & Smith, 1999), and medical professional (Majumdar et al., 1999). In the other category, the independent variables that have an effect on cross-cultural adaptability include impression management (Montagliani & Giacalone, 1998), and general personality characteristics (e.g., temperament and problem-solving abilities) 18.

(19) (Lui, 1999). After more studies were reviewed, the original two categories proposed by Davis and Finney (2006) could be expanded into five categories: (a) measuring the effectiveness of cultural training (b) assessing the impact on the study abroad program (c) determining the utility of independent variables of cross-cultural adaptability (d) determining the effect of cross-cultural adaptability on the dependent variables (e) comparing the discrepancy of cross-cultural adaptability between two groups or during a specific time interval. The results are found in Table 2.3. In the first category, some studies (Cornett-DeVito & McGlone, 2000; Holder-Ballard, 2006) used pretest and post-test to determine whether the cross-cultural training enhanced the cross-cultural adaptability of the sample, and others (Edwards, 1999; Flamini, 2005; Goldstein, 1992; Levy-Barnett, 1995; Majumdar et al., 1999; Remmert, 1993; Wright, 1997) had the experimental group who received the training and control group who didn’t receive the training to compare with. After receiving the training program, the trainees’ scores on the dimensions of the CCAI revealed statistically greater than those of the control group showing the improvement in cross-cultural skills and knowledge (Edwards, 1999; Goldstein, 1992; Levy-Barnett, 1995; Majumdar et al., 1999; Wright, 1997). Unexpectedly, Flamini (2005) and Remmert’s (1993) results indicated no significant differences in the control and experimental group’s pretest and post-test scores. In addition to measuring the effectiveness of cultural training, in the second category, the CCAI was applied to assess the impact on the study abroad program (Black & Duhon, 2006; Hughes, 2003; Kitsantas, 2004; Williams, 2002). Students joining the study abroad revealed changes in cross-cultural skills and awareness. In the third category, the CCAI was used to determine the utility of hypothesized independent variables of cross-cultural adaptability, such as personal characteristics (Avallone, 1997; Lui, 1999), impression management (Montagliani & Giacalone, 1998), emotional intelligence (Tang, 2001; Wells, 2004), self-directed learning skills (Chuprina, 2001), and demographic variables (e.g.,gender) (Clemens , 2002). Contrary to the third category, in the fourth category, the CCAI was also used to examine the effect of cross-cultural adaptability on the dependent variables, including career development (Caster, 1995), employee performance (Sizoo, 2007), student achievement (George, 1991) and expatriate work performance (Gelles, 1996). However, Caster’s (1995) results indicated that the cross-cultural adaptability wasn’t related to the career development, and George’s (1991) showed no differences in the 19.

(20) student achievement between the high level cultural adaptability principals and low level cultural adaptability ones. In the last category, the CCAI was used to examine the differences of cross-cultural adaptability between two groups, such as teachers in different settings (Lee, 2005), practiced dental hygienists and dental hygiene students (Tavoc, 2006), or the improvement of cross-cultural skills over a period of time (Woehrle, 2005).. Table 2.3. Applications of the CCAI in the Literature Category Authors The effectiveness of Goldstein (1992) cultural training/programs Remmert (1993) Levy-Barnett (1995) Wright (1997). Subject & Sample Size Students sojourners (N=81) Public school teachers (N=103) Freshmen-literature Students (N=102) Students in the foreign-language classroom (N=89) Edwards (1999) Undergraduate college students (N=160) Voss (1999) Chinese and Japanese graduate students* Majumdar et al. Newly immigrated physicians (1999) (N=48) Choi (2000) Korean missionaries* Cornett-DeVito & Law enforcement officer (N=40) McGlone (2000) Flamini (2005) University business students (N=134) Holder-Ballard Dental hygiene students (N=32) (2006) The impact on the study Williams (2002) International students and campus abroad program students* Hughes (2003) US university students (N=47) Kitsantas (2004) Study-abroad college students (N=232) Black and Duhon Business students (N=26) (2006) Expatriate managers* The utility of independent Avallone (1997) variables of cross-cultural Montagliani and Employees from US based Giacalone (1998) international corporations (N=35) adaptability and undergraduate students (N=77) Lui (1999) Hong Kong Chinese missionaries (N=115) Tang (2001) Non-clinical service provider (N=80) Chuprina (2001) US expatriate managers* (table continues) 20.

(21) Table 2.3. (continued) Category. Authors Clemens (2002) Wells (2004). The effect of George (1991) cross-cultural adaptability on the dependent variables Caster (1995) Gelles (1996) Sizoo (2007) The discrepancy of Lee (2005) cross-cultural adaptability between two groups or Woehrle (2005) over a period of time. Tavoc (2006). Subject & Sample Size Diverse students at Ohio University* Undergraduate University students (N=90) Public elementary school principals (N=83) Ghanaian immigrants (N=41) Expatriate couples (N=126) Food server in the restaurants (N=491) Teachers in international settings and teachers in Iowa* Physical therapy learners* Dental hygiene students (N=194) and licensed dental hygienists(N=95). * the number of the sample is unknown.. Summary CCAI is a self-report instrument consisting of 50 items. It’s intended to provide information about an individual’s cross-cultural effectiveness. CCAI has been used as a research tool on various participants, including expatriate (Avallone, 1997; Chuprina, 2001; Gelles, 1996); health care professionals (Holder-Ballard, 2006; Majumdar et al., 1999; Tavoc, 2006; Woehrle, 2005); international students (Black & Duhon, 2006; Clemens, 2002; Hughes, 2003; Kitsantas, 2004; Voss, 1999; Williams, 2002), teachers (Lee, 2005; Remmert, 1993), and so on. The purpose of applying CCAI differs from one to another. Most of the studies focus on measuring the effectiveness of the cross-cultural training. CCAI was also demonstrated the necessary internal reliability and validity needed to conduct the reliable research (Kraemer & Beckstead, 2003; Kelley & Meyers, 1995b).. 21.

(22) Translation Equivalence In this section, the concept of two scale development approaches involving foreign measures and four translation methods are introduced.. Two scale development approaches involving foreign measures In the four types of scale approaches in the Chinese management research proposed by Farh, Cannella, and Lee (2006), the de-contextualization approach and the contextualization approach are applied when developing a new scale (Farh et al., 2006, 307-310). However, while the foreign measure which is available for the target construct exists, the translation approach and the adaptation approach are applied and they are briefly discussed below. 1. The translation approach It’s referred to a process in which a foreign existing scale is translated literally into a Chinese version (also called a target language scale). The translation approach is grounded on two major assumptions: (a) the meaning of the target construct is equivalent across cultures, and (b) a high quality unbiased source language scale is available for the target construct (Farh et al., 2006. p.303). Although this approach doesn’t take lots of time and costs and it’s convenient for the researcher to compare the research results across cultures, the limitations of this approach do exist. One of the major limitations is that it’s difficult to achieve semantic equivalence by translating the source language scale word by word due to cultural distance between the West and Chinese. Another limitation is that some unknown cultural biases embedded in the Western scales are likely to keep hiding in the Chinese version through literal translation. To lessen the limitations of the translation approach, the adaptation approach is proposed. 2. The adaptation approach In recent years, the term test translation has been frequently replaced with test adaptation because adaptations in contents and wordings in reference to culture are needed (Geisinger, 1994; Hambleton & Patsula, 1998). Adapting a scale has to do with item appropriateness. Altering the wording of items, dropping inappropriate item, or even adding new items to the scale is acceptable from the cultural perspective (Farh et al., 2006). According to Hambleton and Patsula (1998), test adaptation involves more activities such as:. 22.

(23) (1) deciding whether or not a test can measure the same construct in a different language and culture, (2) selecting translators, (3) deciding on appropriate accommodations to be made in preparing a test use in a second language, and (4) adapting the test and checking its equivalence in the adapted form. (p. 155) Geisinger (1994) proposed ten steps for adapting a measure and he mentioned that not all steps would be required during a process of the measure adaptation. Hambleton and Patsula (1998) suggested that steps and guideline of cross-cultural adaptation of the measure should include at least four steps: (a) translating the test from source to target language (forward translation); (b) translating the translated version back to the source language (back translation); (c) resolving the discrepancies between the original version and the adapted version; and examining cross-cultural equivalence; and (d) Pre-testing the original and adapted versions to check for equivalence. The comparison of two types of scale development approaches is shown in Table 2.4.. 23.

(24) Table 2.4. Two Types of Scale Development Approaches in Chinese Management Research: Key Assumption, Major Strengths and Limitations Scale Development Approaches Translation approach. Key Assumptions. Major Strengths. Major Limitations. . . Low developmental time and costs Preserve the possibility of a high level of equivalence Allow for direct cross-cultural comparison of research findings. . Low to moderate developmental time and costs Ease of scholarly exchanges of research findings with the Western literature. . Adaptation approach. . Target construct is equivalent across cultures in terms of overall definition, content domain and empirical representations of the content domain Availability of high quality culturally unbiased Western scales for target construct Target construct is equivalent between cultures in terms of overall definition and content domain Availability of high quality Western scales for target construct. . . Source: Farh et al., 2006, p.304. 24. . . Difficulty in achieving semantic equivalence between the Chinese and Western scales Culturally unbiased Western scales are hard to come by. Difficulty in conducting cross-cultural research Drastic adaptation may create new scale that requires extensive validation in the Chinese context.

(25) Translation methods Most measures used in Chinese contexts are borrowed form the foreign measures. Since language is clearly regarded as one component of culture, and our thinking is influenced by the words and phrases existing in our language (Hofstede, 2001). Great care must be taken during the process of translating the measures developed in different languages. Brislin (1980) offered four translation methods which are elaborated in the following: 1. Back translation It’s referred to a process in which the material in one language is forward translated into the target language and then back translated to the source language to examine the discrepancy between the original and back-translated one. If the two source language forms are not the same, follow-up modifications are made to enhance the translation equivalence. This technique is frequently mentioned by many researchers in the literature (Farh et al., 2006; Geisinger, 1994; Hofstede, 2001; Hambleton & Patsula, 1998; Van de Vijver & Hambleton, 1996) There are at least two bilingual translators needed during the process of back translation. Hofstede (2001) and Geisinger (1994) further noted that translators should meet a set of requirements. They have to be (a) fluent in both languages; (b) familiar with both cultures; and (c) knowledgeable on the characteristics and content of the instrument. The advantages of back translation lie in that even if the researcher doesn’t understand the target language, he or she can still judge about the quality of the translation (Brislin, 1980). In addition, it avoids translation errors and prevents the translators from filtering the meanings according to their value systems in their countries (Hofstede, 2001). However, one of the criticisms of back translation is that once the translators realize their work was going to undergo back translation, they would use wordings which were correctly translated into original wordings instead of a translation in reference to culture differences (Hambelton, 1993, cited in Geisinger, 1994; Van de Vijver & Hambleton, 1996). The possible solution is to invite a whole group of persons participated in the translation process because a higher quality of translation will be yielded than a back translation approach involving two independent translators (Van de Vijver & Hambleton, 1996). 2. The bilingual technique Bilinguals take the same test in the source language and the target language. 25.

(26) Alternatively, one group take the test in the source language, and the other group take the same test in the target language. After running a statistical analysis, items which yield discrepant responses or different frequency of responses can be easily found by the researcher. The criteria of selecting samples of respondent should include not only their language proficiency but also demographic variable (e.g., gender, age, occupation) which affect the meaning of answers (Hofstede, 2001). The advantage of this technique is sophisticated statistical methods and concepts which assist in judging the quality of the translation. The disadvantage is that the test, or the research instrument, is developed on the basis of the bilinguals’ responses which may not represent the population of interest. 3. The committee approach A group of bilinguals works together to translate the instrument from the source to the target language. Because they are not independent workers, any mistake made by one member can be found by others on the committee. However, it’s possible that the committee members may be unwilling to criticize one another. The committee approach is suggested to be combined with back translation (Geisinger, 1994; Van de Vijver & Hambleton, 1996). A group of individual who meet the same requirements as the translators reviews the translated or adapted version of the instrument. 4. Pretest procedures Once a translation is completed, it’s suggested that it should be field tested to ensure that the translated version can capture the same construct underlying the original instrument. Thus, a small sample of individuals similar to the target population should be identified (Geisinger, 1994). A combination of the above-mentioned translation methods should depend on the needs of the research project (Brislin, 1980). The disadvantages of one translation method are offset by the advantages of another.. Summary In translation approach and adaptation approach, the term adaptation has been frequently used in the literature because adaptations in contents and wordings in reference to culture are needed instead of translating the instrument literally. Four translation methods proposed by Brislin (1980) include back translation, the bilingual technique, and the committee approach, and pretest procedures. These four 26.

(27) translation methods can be combined or used individually. However, the quality of the translation lies in a careful selection of the translators (Geisinger, 1994; Hofstede, 2001). 27.

(28) 28.

(29) CHPATER III. METHODOLOGY This chapter outlines research methods as well as strategies for data analysis.. Research Methods This section describes research procedure, sample, and the instrument. Research procedure The research procedure is described in the following: 1. Literature review Literature on cross-cultural adaptation, Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI), and translation equivalence were collected and reviewed. 2. Obtain the permission to translate the CCAI The researcher contacted the CCAI publisher, Vangent Inc., via e-mail communication to obtain the permission to translate Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) (Kelley & Meyers, 1995a) into Mandarin Chinese. 3. Back translation The researcher who received TOEFL CBT scores 247 worked independently to forward translate the CCAI into Mandarin Chinese. Then, two bilinguals backward translated the Chinese version into English. They are second-year graduate students of the master program of International Workforce Education and Development at the National Taiwan Normal University. One received the certificate of the General English Proficiency Test (GEPT) at a high-intermediate level, and the other received TOEFL IBT scores 84. The differences between the original and back-translated versions were identified and then modifications of the Chinese version were made for inconsistencies. 4. Peer review Not only the translators but also three second-year graduate students with the same educational background did review the translated version of the CCAI. The committee members were selected based on a certain level of English proficiency. A committee meeting was held to reach the consensus of the appropriateness of the translation. The translation of the CCAI was modified again on the basis of the peer’s comments. 5. Expert review Three professors in the HR field, who are bilinguals, reviewed the translation 29.

(30) carefully to see whether the wordings or phrases used in the translation are appropriate in the Chinese culture. In addition, two psychologists in the CCAI publisher, Kelly and Gary, reviewed the translation and gave their comments on it as well. The translation of the CCAI was modified again on the basis of the reviewers’ comments. 6. Pretest the Chinese version of the CCAI The translated version of the CCAI gone through the above-mentioned steps was administered to 37 students from National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, who joined the Taiwan Overseas Volunteers Orientation held by International Cooperation and Development Fund. The purpose of the pre-test was to check respondents’ comprehension on the measure and how long it took to complete the CCAI. The feedback regarding the Chinese version of the CCAI was collected from the respondents. The translation of the CCAI was modified again on the basis of the respondents’ feedback. 7. Questionnaire delivery The questionnaires, including the Chinese version of the CCAI as well as the demographic questions, were administered to the targeted sample. 8. Statistical analysis Demographic statistics was conducted on the following variables: age, gender, education background, abroad experience, and language certificate. And scale scores by demographic characteristics were also analyzed. Critical ratio was run before testing the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the CCAI. The reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the CCAI were established based on the sample participated in this study. Psychometric properties, including internal consistency (Cronbach’s α ), composite reliability (confirmatory factor analysis), and construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis) were tested. 9. Conclusion and suggestion According to the results of the statistical analysis of the Chinese version of the CCAI, suggestions were made to adapt the Chinese version of the CCAI. In addition, the results will be used as a basis of cross-cultural comparison and further data gathering. The research procedure, Figure 3.1., is shown below:. 30.

(31) Literature review. Obtain the permission to translate the CCAI. Back translation. Peer review. Expert review. Pretest the Chinese version of the CCAI. Questionnaire delivery. Statistical analysis. Conclusion and suggestion Figure 3.1. Research procedure. 31.

(32) Sample The respondents in this study were purposively sampled. The criteria of selecting the purposive sample include: 1. They have potential opportunities to interact with people from other cultures within two years. (e.g., Mandarin teachers; international volunteers; and graduate students in international trade/business program) 2. They are likely to be assigned international tasks within two years. (e.g., international volunteers; expatriates; and participants in international trade training program) 3. They have taken international affairs courses or training. (e.g., international business; international business; and training for overseas service) The number of the sample in this study, 543 participants (N=543), were made up of three groups: participants in the International Trade Institute (N=346), graduate students in the international trade/business master program (N=79), and trainees joining the Taiwan Overseas Volunteers Orientation held by International Cooperation and Development Fund (N=118). Their basic information was described as follows: 1. International Trade Institute International Trade Institute (ITI) is a trade-specialist training center which offers general courses of international trade, marketing, and language. It was found in 1987 as a part of Taiwan External Trade Development Council (TAITRA). International Trade Institute (ITI) has three campuses: two in Hsinchu and one in Taipei. Since 2001, ITI-Hsinchu offers five residential post-graduate programs in trade and foreign languages. Three of them are comprehensive two-year programs: the English major, European major, and Japanese major. The rest of them are intensive one-year programs: the Business Major and English major. In addition, they offer an evening business English program as well. The ITI-Taipei offers day and evening classes in business English and trade. Our target sample in ITI-Hsinchu consists of participants joining two-year programs in English and Japanese major as well as those joining one-year programs in English and business major. ITI-Taipei includes participants joining in the international trade program. 2. Graduate Institute of International Trade/Business The graduate students in the international trade/business program in National 32.

(33) Taiwan University (NTU), National Chengchi University (NCCU), and National Kaohsiung University of Applied Science (NKUAS) participated in this study. 3. International Cooperation and Development Fund. In 1996 and 1997, the International Cooperation and Development Fund (TaiwanICDF) government was built in the consolidation between the Committee of International Technical Cooperation (CITC) and the International Economic Cooperation Development Fund (IECDF). The TaiwanICDF's was developed for the purpose of strengthening international cooperation and enhancing foreign relations One of the activities and operations of the International Cooperation and Development Fund is overseas volunteers. There are two different types of the overseas volunteers: the long-term and the short-term. The participants in this study are potential short-term overseas volunteers who joined the Taiwan Overseas Volunteers Orientation in Kaohsiung, Nanhua University, and Taipei. The profile of the participants in this study is described as follows (Table 3.1.):. Table 3.1. The Profile of the Participants (N=543) Group International Trade Institution (ITI) (N=346). Graduate Institute of International Trade/Business (N=79) International Cooperation and Development Fund (ICDF)Taiwan Overseas Volunteers Orientation (N=118). International trade program 96A-two-year program in English major 96D-one-year program in English major 95B-two-year program in Japanese major 96B-two-year program in Japanese major 96C-one-year program in business major National Taiwan University (NTU) National Chengchi University (NCCU) National Kaohsiung University of Applied Science (NKUAS) In Kaohsiung In Nanhua University In Taipei.. Number of Participants 93 58 52 46 44 53 25 40 14 38 35 45. Instrument The questionnaire used in this study includes two parts: the Chinese version of the CCAI developed by Kelley and Meyers (1995a) as well as the demographic 33.

(34) questions designed by the researcher. Each part is described below. 1. The Chinese version of the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory The Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) developed by Kelley and Meyers (1995a). It is “a training instrument designed to provide information to an individual about his or her potential for cross-cultural effectiveness” (Kelly and Meyers, 1995b, p.2). This instrument has 50 items and is divided into four subscales: Emotional Resilience (ER), Flexibility/Openness (FO), Perceptual Acuity (PAC), and Personal Autonomy (PA). Each item is scored on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Definitely Not True) to 6 (Definitely True). Nine of the items distributed throughout the instrument are reversed-scored. The individuals circle the response to each item on the answer sheet according to how accurate each item describes them. Scores are calculated. for. the. total. scores. and. four. scales. (Emotional. Resilience,. Flexibility/Openness, Perceptual Acuity, and Personal Autonomy). In addition, each four subscale score is plotted on the CCAI self-Assessment Profile (see Kelley & Meyers, 1995b, p.24). The profile graphically portrays the four subscale results and allows individuals internally compare with one another. Not only the numerical scores but also graphic representation does CCAI allow the individual to gain better understanding of his or her overall cross-cultural effectiveness and potential areas in which the individual has room to develop skills in relation to four dimensions. The basic assumption is that higher total score a person can get, more cross-culturally he or she can function. The brief descriptions of the scores on four dimensions are showed below. . Emotional Resilience (ER) (18items): A high score on this dimension indicates the individual is able to deal with. stresses and ambiguity in a new environment, and able to maintain a positive attitude and self-esteem. . Flexibility/Openness (FO) (15 items): People who are scored high on this dimension tend to enjoy interacting with. people from other cultures and view things from different perspectives. . Perceptual Acuity (PAC) (10 items): People who are strong on this dimension have the capacity of interpreting. accurately the verbal and nonverbal cues and then communicate with people from other cultures effectively. 34.

(35) . Personal Autonomy (PA) (7 items): People with high personal autonomy tend to “have strong sense of self as a. separate and unique entity” (Kelley & Meyers, 1995b, p.18). It’s easy for them to make their own decisions, maintain their unique value system, and show respect for themselves and others. In the CCAI manual, Kelley and Meyers (1995b) provide statistical information regarding the reliability and validity of the instrument. They are described as follows. 1.1. Reliability of the instrument Table 3.2. presents the reliability of the CCAI established on the 653 respondents. Kraemer and Beckstead (2003) established the reliability of the CCAI on 288 physical therapist students. The results showed that the estimated reliability of total scale and four subscales ranged from .59 to .90 (For details, see Chapter Two).. Table 3.2. Internal Consistency (Standardized Alpha) of the CCAI. Number of Items. ER 18. FO 15. Scale PAC 10. PA 7. Total 49*. Cronbach’s Alpha. .82. .80. .78. .68. .90. * Item 15 (PAC) and 46 (FO) are duplicates. Source: Kelley and Meyers, 1995b, p.31 1.2. Validity of the instrument The CCAI manual (Kelley & Meyers, 1995b) provides information on its face, content, and construct validity. Jensma’s (1995) dissertation was a pilot study examining the predictive validity of the CCAI, using thirty seven missionaries. The results reveled that the CCAI failed to predict the relative adequacy of the missionaries’ cross-cultural adaptation. Davis and Finney (2006) used a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) approach to examine the four-factor structure of the CCAI. The results indicated that a poor fit of the structure of the CCAI. (For details, see Chapter Two). The 709 respondents who completed the CCAI instruments were sophomores from a midsized, mid-Atlantic university. Kelley and Meyers (1995b), the authors of the instrument, suggested that appropriate populations for the instrument be (a) people preparing to travel, live, or work with abroad; (b) people returning from living abroad and readjusting to their home culture; (c) people who work in a multicultural or culturally diverse environment; (d) people who frequently interact with people from 35.

(36) other cultures; (e) immigrants; (f) professional who work with the above groups (38-39). Though they stated that the CCAI are not limited to the above categories of people, it’s doubted that the sample in Davis and Finney’s (2006) study partly contributed to the poor fit of the structure. To avoid the same situation, the purposive sample in this study reached a level of similarity to (c) and (d) within two years.. 1.3. The procedure for measure translation The translation of the CCAI went through back translation, peer review, as well as expert review. There were five major findings after the process of the translation. 1.3.1. The advantage of back translation Back translation helped identify the discrepancy between the original and back-translated version as Hofstede (2001) suggested. Take ER2 for example: ER2: I feel confident in my ability to cope with life, no matter where I am. Translation:不論身處何地，我對自己處理生活事宜的能力很有自信。 The phrase “my ability to cope with life” was back translated as “my living ability” (生活能力) which was different from the original meaning. It was then identified and replaced with a more accurate Chinese phrase (應對生活的能力). However, later one expert thought such expression (應對生活) is seldom used in the Chinese usage. Thus, it was replaced with the phase, “deal with life” (處理生活事宜). 1.3.2. Word/Phrase choice It’s hard to choose the right expression on the situation of no corresponding Chinese term or more than one corresponding Chinese term. Take ER3 and PAC2 as an example: ER3: I can laugh at myself when I make a cultural faux pas (mistake). Translation: 當我因不懂文化而做出失禮的事，我能一笑置之。 Since it was difficult to choose the suitable expression between “to laugh off something” (一笑置之) and “to find excuses to console oneself” (自我解嘲). Kelly and Gary suggested that the phrase, “to laugh off something”, was more appropriate because the English text indicates an attitude of not feeling badly about making a mistake, whereas “to find excuses to console oneself” implies a condition or emotion of feeling badly, perhaps from shame or a sense of low self-worth. 36.

(37) PAC2: I have a realistic perception of how others see me Translation: 我對別人如何看待我有實際的認知。 “Realistic” has several meanings in Chinese (真實的、實際的). The expert found the translation of the word “realistic” (真實的) didn’t clearly convey the original meaning in the translated version. Thus, the expression was replaced with “realistic; actual” (實際的). The full sentence was modified to fit its original language structure. 1.3.3. Different sentence structures in Mandarin Chinese and English Due to the sentence structure in Chinese different from that in English, some sentences were hard to translate well. The free translation with original meaning preserved was utilized instead of literal translation. Take FO4 for instance: FO4: I like a number of people who don’t share my particular interests. Translation: 在我喜歡的朋友之中，有一些人的興趣與我不同。 Based on the Chinese language structure, this item was literally translated as “I like people with many interests that are different from mine” (我喜歡很多興趣與我不相同的人). Different from the original item, “many”, that is, a number of, was an adjective in front of “interests” instead of in front of “people”. Kelly and Gary suggested considering the English text from the structural perspective of “There are some people I like even though we have different interests.” Thus, the free translation was utilized. 1.3.4. The translation problem of slang English slang is not easy to be translated into Chinese because sometimes it is a tough concept to convey in a language other than English with the same exact meaning. Among fifty items, PAC3 contains English slang, the benefit of the doubt. PAC3: I am the kind of person who gives people who are different from me the benefit of the doubt. Translation: 面對跟我不一樣的人，我會看他們好的一面。 Originally, the benefit of the doubt was translated as “place oneself in other’s position” (設身處地為他們著想). After peer review, most reviewers agreed that “see something good in someone” (看他們好的一面) was more appropriate because of the actual meaning of the benefit of the doubt. If the exact meaning was needed to convey in Chinese, the sentences would be long and lack of readability. 37.

(38) 1.3.5. Implicit meanings within the item Some implicit meanings concealed within the item were not easily identified even though back translation was utilized. Take PAC10 for example. PAC10: In talking with people from other cultures, I pay attention to body language. Translation: 我跟來自其它文化的人談話時，我會留意他們的肢體語言。 In the original translation, it was literally translated as “I will notice the body language.” (我會留意肢體語言). However, Kelly and Gary emphasized that body language refers to paying attention to the other person's body language instead of one’s own body language.. 2. Demographic questions Questions regarding gender, age, level of education, abroad experience, language certificates, and whether they are willing to accept an international assignment in the near future are included in the demographic questions for use of respondents’ personal profiles.. 38.

(39) Data Collection and Analysis This section is divided into two parts, data collection and data analysis, which are illustrated respectively.. Data collection 1. Obtain the permission from the organizations The permission for data collection from the International Trade Institute (ITI) and International Cooperation and Development Fund (ICDF) was confirmed via email back and forth. The contact period of obtaining permission lasted one month. 2. Period of data collection The data collection lasted one month, from March 29th to April 29th. 3. Method of data collection The sufficient quantity of the questionnaires was sent by post to ITI and ICDF in advance, and delivered to the gatekeepers in NTU and NCCU in person. The participants in the NKUAS were contacted via email through the gatekeeper. Those who were responsible for helping the distribution of the questionnaires received the “distribution guide” to ensure the good quality of the questionnaire distribution. After the sample completed the questionnaires, the researcher retrieved those questionnaires from the gatekeepers in person or via email ( for NKUAS case).. Data analysis SPSS 12.0 for window and LISREL 8.51 were used for data analysis to answer the research questions. Steps of the data analysis are shown below: 1. Demographic of the sample and descriptive statistics Descriptive statistics were presented to provide a demographic profile of the respondents. Also, scale scores means and standard deviations by demographic characteristics (gender, age, education, experience abroad, and language proficiency) were presented. 2. Critical ratio Extreme groups comparison (Critical Ratio; CR) was made, which uses t statistic to determine items in the Chinese version of the CCAI discriminate between extreme groups (high-score group and low-score group). 3. Reliability of the Chinese version of the CCAI. 39.

(40) Cronbach’s α was used to examine the internal consistency of the CCAI and Composite reliability was calculated as well. 4. Validity of the Chinese version of the CCAI For testing construct validity (convergent validity, discriminant validity, and factorial validity), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to examine the proposed four-factor structure.. 40.

(41) CHAPTER IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS This chapter presents statistical results of this study. The data collected were analyzed using SPSS 12.0 and LISREL 8.51.. Demographic and Descriptive Statistics Response rate There were 543 questionnaires distributed and 438 responses collected from three groups, for a 80.7% response rate. There were fifty-four out of 438 respondents who had been found to have at least one item missing on the Chinese version of the CCAI. Seven respondents circled two answers on one item; one had extreme answers; and four circled the same answer on all items. Thus, a total of 372 questionnaires were valid with a completion of all 50 items on the Chinese version of the CCAI. The three groups represented participants in the International Trade Institution (ITI) (212; 57.0%), graduate students in the international trade/business master program (N=66; 17.7%), and trainees joining the Taiwan Overseas Volunteers Orientation held by International Cooperation and Development Fund (N=94; 25.3%).. Demographic The demographic of the sample can be found in Table 4.1. The following is the brief description: 1. Gender: The number of the female is much more than that of the male. The number of the female is 240 (64.5%), whereas the number of the male is 131 (35.2%). 1 Missing value (0.3%). 2. Age: Most of the respondents’ age range 21-30 (83.6%). 3. Educational background: Most of the respondents’ educational level was the bachelor degree (N=261; 70.2%). The rest of the respondents include graduates from high school (N= 2; 0.5%), college (N=3, 0.8%), graduate school of the master program (N= 105, 28.2%) 28.2%, and graduate school of the doctoral program (N=1, 0.3%). 4. Abroad experience: 88.7% of participants (N=330) have been abroad, but 11.3% of them (N=42) haven’t. Among those who had abroad experience, 71.0% for trip, 26.6% for study tour, 7.0% for study abroad, 12.4% for work, and 5.4% for other reasons (e.g., exchange students, immigrants, overseas volunteers, international 41.

(42) conferences, overseas internship, and international contests). Most of them whose abroad frequency in 5 years are 1-3 times (N=189, 50.8%). 21.3% of them have 4-6 times, 6.5% of them have 7-9 times, and 5.4% of them have over 10 times. 14 missing values (3.8%). 5. Work overseas: 18.4% of the respondents (N=69) have worked overseas. Among them, 63 respondents have worked with the foreigners. 20 respondents have worked overseas for less than one month, 36 for one to twelve months, 5 for thirteen to twenty-four months, 4 for twenty-five to thirty-six months. 4 for more than three years. 6. Study overseas: Study overseas include study tour and study abroad. 29.0% of the respondents (N=108) have had the experience of study overseas. Among them, 13 respondents have studied overseas for less than one month. 72 for one to twelve months, 6 for thirteen to twenty-four months, 7 for twenty-five to thirty-six months. 8 for more than three years. 7. Language certificate: 23.1% of the respondents (N=86) don’t have any language certificate. 2.2% of respondents whose English language level is elementary level. 16.9% is intermediated level. 26.1% is high-intermediated level. 9.9% is proficient level. 1.1% is mastery level. 2.2% of respondents whose Japanese language level is level four. 7.3% is level three. 1.9% is level two. 4.6% level one. One of the possible reasons why 72 missing values (19.4%) are high is that reporting grades is sensitive. 8. Willingness to accept an international assignment: 94% of the respondents (N=353) are willing to accept an international assignment, but 2.7% aren’t.. 42.

(43) Table 4.1. The Profile of the Respondents (N=372). Sources. Demographic ITI (N= 212) Gender Age. Educational background. Abroad Experience. Male Female < 20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 > 41 High school College Bachelor Master Doctor Yes. No Trip Abroad Study tour reason Study abroad (multiple Work answers) Others Abroad 1-3 times frequency 4-6 times ( in 5 years) 7-9 times >10 times Yes Work No Overseas Work with Yes No foreigners Length of Less than 1 month work 1-12 overseas months 13-24 months 25-36 months Over 3 years. ICDF (N=94). Total (N=372). 67(31.6%) 145(68.4%) 0 86 (40.6%) 101(47.6%) 18(8.5%) 6(2.8%) 1(0.5%) 0 2(0.9%) 187(88.2%) 23(10.8%) 0 200(94.3%). Graduate Institute (N= 66) 33(50.0%) 32(48.5%) 0 57(86.4%) 9(13.6%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 66(100%) 0 50(75.8%). 31(33.0%) 63(67.0%) 14(14.9%) 42(44.7%) 16(17.0%) 9(9.6%) 5(5.3%) 8(8.5%) 2(2.1%) 1(1.1%) 74(78.7) 16(17.0%) 1(1.1%) 80(85.1%). 131 240 14 185 126 27 11 9 2 3 261 105 1 330. 12(5.7%) 159(75.0%) 68(32.1%) 14(6.6%) 22(10.4%) 7(3.3%) 111(52.4%) 53(25.0%) 16(7.6%) 11(5.2) 39(18.4%) 171(80.7) 34(16.0%) 175(82.5%). 16(24.2) 37(56.1%) 11(16.7%) 5(7.6%) 2(3.0%) 4(6.1%) 38(57.6%) 9(13.6) 0 0 6(9.1%) 59(89.4) 5(7.6%) 60(90.9%). 14(14.9%) 68(72.3%) 20(21.3%) 7(7.4%) 21(22.3%) 9(9.6%) 40(42.6%) 21(22.3%) 8(8.5%) 9(9.6%) 24(25.5%) 69(73.4%) 24(25.5%) 69(73.4%). 42 264 99 26 45 20 189 83 24 20 69 299 63 304. 13(6.1%). 0. 7(7.4%). 20. 20(9.4%). 4(6.1%). 12(12.8%). 36. 3(1.4%). 1(1.5%). 1(1.1%). 5. 3(1.4%). 0. 1(1.1%). 4. 1(0.5%). 0. 3(3.2%). 4. (table continues) 43.