Schimmack Ulrich, Oishi Shigehiro, Diener Ed
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Mississauga, Canada.
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2005;9(1):17-31. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0901_2.
Oyserman, Coon, and Kemmelmeier's (2002) meta-analysis suggested problems in the measurement of individualism and collectivism. Studies using Hofstede's individualism scores show little convergent validity with more recent measures of individualism and collectivism. We propose that the lack of convergent validity is due to national differences in response styles. Whereas Hofstede statistically controlled for response styles, Oyserman et al.'s meta-analysis relied on uncorrected ratings. Data from an international student survey demonstrated convergent validity between Hofstede's individualism dimension and horizontal individualism when response styles were statistically controlled, whereas uncorrected scores correlated highly with the individualism scores in Oyserman et al.'s meta-analysis. Uncorrected horizontal individualism scores and meta-analytic individualism scores did not correlate significantly with nations' development, whereas corrected horizontal individualism scores and Hofstede's individualism dimension were significantly correlated with development. This pattern of results suggests that individualism is a valid construct for cross-cultural comparisons, but that the measurement of this construct needs improvement.
奥伊泽曼、库恩和凯默迈尔（2002年）的元分析表明，个人主义和集体主义的测量存在问题。使用霍夫斯泰德个人主义得分的研究显示，与最近的个人主义和集体主义测量方法几乎没有收敛效度。我们认为，缺乏收敛效度是由于不同国家在回答方式上存在差异。虽然霍夫斯泰德在统计上控制了回答方式，但奥伊泽曼等人的元分析依赖于未校正的评分。一项国际学生调查的数据表明，在对回答方式进行统计控制时，霍夫斯泰德的个人主义维度与水平个人主义之间存在收敛效度，而未校正的分数与奥伊泽曼等人元分析中的个人主义分数高度相关。未校正的水平个人主义分数和元分析个人主义分数与国家发展没有显著相关性，而校正后的水平个人主义分数和霍夫斯泰德的个人主义维度与发展显著相关。这种结果模式表明，个人主义是跨文化比较的一个有效构念，但该构念的测量需要改进。
