Comparison of Psychological Data between Populations, A Measurement Perspective

In cross-cultural psychology there is a strong tradition of psychometric analysis of bias and invariance (equivalence) after collection of data in distinct populations with identical instruments developed in one population. This implies a focus on measurement outcomes and an operationalist orientation to science. Here we explore how a focus on joint development and content validity of instruments combined with relaxation of the demand of item identity can provide an additional perspective. Three points are addressed:(1) Any comparison between participants from two, or more, populations presumes a common quality (property, attribute) and requires a common measurement scale, a “standard of comparison”.(2) Stevens (1946) four levels of measurement are distinguished for a standard of comparison; this level (nominal, ordinal, interval, ratio) determines to which kinds of psychometric comparisons data are open.(3) A standard of comparison can be based on an existing instrument that is transferred from one population to some other population, with or without modification. It can also be a newly developed instrument that may be based, but (we argue) need not be based, on a set of stimuli or items that is identical across populations.Three considerations are mentioned: (i) representation of all participating populations at all stages of instrument development, (ii) emphasis on content validity, and (iii) various tools such as item banks and item parameters from IRT models that can help to derive a comparison standard from only partly overlapping item sets.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Online Readings in Psychology and Culture
Published
2025-08-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1209
Primary Topic
Health and Well-being Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Psychological Data between Populations, A Measurement Perspective

Johnny R. J. Fontaine, H. van Herk, Ype H. Poortinga
Online Readings in Psychology and Culture
Health and Well-being Studies
article

Comparison of Psychological Data between Populations, A Measurement Perspective

Johnny R. J. Fontaine, H. van Herk, Ype H. Poortinga
article en

Abstract

In cross-cultural psychology there is a strong tradition of psychometric analysis of bias and invariance (equivalence) after collection of data in distinct populations with identical instruments developed in one population. This implies a focus on measurement outcomes and an operationalist orientation to science. Here we explore how a focus on joint development and content validity of instruments combined with relaxation of the demand of item identity can provide an additional perspective. Three points are addressed:(1) Any comparison between participants from two, or more, populations presumes a common quality (property, attribute) and requires a common measurement scale, a “standard of comparison”.(2) Stevens (1946) four levels of measurement are distinguished for a standard of comparison; this level (nominal, ordinal, interval, ratio) determines to which kinds of psychometric comparisons data are open.(3) A standard of comparison can be based on an existing instrument that is transferred from one population to some other population, with or without modification. It can also be a newly developed instrument that may be based, but (we argue) need not be based, on a set of stimuli or items that is identical across populations.Three considerations are mentioned: (i) representation of all participating populations at all stages of instrument development, (ii) emphasis on content validity, and (iii) various tools such as item banks and item parameters from IRT models that can help to derive a comparison standard from only partly overlapping item sets.

Online Readings in Psychology and CultureVol. 2(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 71%
Health and Well-being Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Comparison of Psychological Data between Populations, A Measurement Perspective — Johnny R. J. Fontaine, H. van Herk, et al. · Online Readings in Psychology and Culture (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS