Rudmin F W, Ahmadzadeh V
Department of Psychology, University of Tromsø, Norway.
Scand J Psychol. 2001 Feb;42(1):41-56. doi: 10.1111/1467-9450.00213.
The presumptions, terminology, psychometrics, statistical analyses, and ethics of the fourfold acculturation paradigm are criticized in detail. Illustrative data came from Iranian refugees in Norway (N = 80) answering: 1) the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), 2) Zung's Self-Rating Depression Scale (ZSRDS), 3) ipsative fourfold scales of Integration, Assimilation, Separation, and Marginalization, 4) orthogonal scales of attitudes towards Norwegian and Iranian cultures, measured independently and using balanced reverse-keying, and 5) ipsative forced-choice preferences for cultural practices of Norway, Iran, both, or from other societies as well. Iranians in Norway favored global multiculturalism and, as a group. did not show distress. The SWLS and ZSRDS were correlated, but the measures of acculturation failed to replicate one another. As unconstrained ipsative measures, the fourfold scales showed acquiescence response bias contamination and doubtful operationalization of scale constructs. Recommendations are discussed for improving acculturation research.
四重文化适应范式的假设、术语、心理测量学、统计分析和伦理受到了详细批评。示例数据来自挪威的伊朗难民（N = 80），他们回答了以下问题：1）生活满意度量表（SWLS）；2）zung自评抑郁量表（ZSRDS）；3）整合、同化、分离和边缘化的自比四重量表；4）对挪威和伊朗文化态度的正交量表，独立测量并使用平衡反向计分法；5）对挪威、伊朗、两者或其他社会文化习俗的自比强制选择偏好。在挪威的伊朗人支持全球多元文化主义，并且作为一个群体，没有表现出痛苦。SWLS和ZSRDS具有相关性，但文化适应的测量未能相互复制。作为无约束的自比测量，四重量表显示出默许反应偏差污染和量表结构的可疑操作性。讨论了改进文化适应研究的建议。
