{"title":"Factorial validity and reliability of the 16-item individualism and collectivism scale for measuring cultural orientation","authors":"Betul Keles-Gordesli , Mary Leamy , Trevor Murrells , Annmarie Grealish","doi":"10.1016/j.ijintrel.2025.102153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study aimed to investigate the factor structure of the 16-item individualism and collectivism scale and assess its validity and reliability. The sample consisted of 299 secondary school students aged 14–16 from Turkey (N = 176), Ireland (N = 70), and England (N = 53). The total sample was divided into halves, Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on the first half (N = 150) and the confirmatory factor analysis on the remaining sample (N = 149). Cognitive interviews were conducted with seven adolescents from Turkey and England to provide further evidence of validity. The mean age was 15.21 years (range 14–16 years). EFA generated a four-factor model in which all items except one loaded on the expected factors whereas the one item (labeled as VC4) that was expected to load on the factor representing ‘vertical collectivism’ loaded higher on the factor representing ‘horizontal collectivism’. Cognitive interview results supported the EFA results. After omitting the problematic item, fit indices showed a better fit to the data and the scale had good and acceptable reliability. A previously identified model, in which VC4 was assigned to the HC factor and HC3 and HI4 were excluded from the analysis, demonstrated a slightly better fit for the majority of fit indices. For valid and reliable results, the 16-item individualism and collectivism scale needs to be further developed by clarifying vague or ambiguous terms. Future research should also replicate this study with a larger sample and in different settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48216,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Intercultural Relations","volume":"105 ","pages":"Article 102153"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Intercultural Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147176725000161","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the factor structure of the 16-item individualism and collectivism scale and assess its validity and reliability. The sample consisted of 299 secondary school students aged 14–16 from Turkey (N = 176), Ireland (N = 70), and England (N = 53). The total sample was divided into halves, Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed on the first half (N = 150) and the confirmatory factor analysis on the remaining sample (N = 149). Cognitive interviews were conducted with seven adolescents from Turkey and England to provide further evidence of validity. The mean age was 15.21 years (range 14–16 years). EFA generated a four-factor model in which all items except one loaded on the expected factors whereas the one item (labeled as VC4) that was expected to load on the factor representing ‘vertical collectivism’ loaded higher on the factor representing ‘horizontal collectivism’. Cognitive interview results supported the EFA results. After omitting the problematic item, fit indices showed a better fit to the data and the scale had good and acceptable reliability. A previously identified model, in which VC4 was assigned to the HC factor and HC3 and HI4 were excluded from the analysis, demonstrated a slightly better fit for the majority of fit indices. For valid and reliable results, the 16-item individualism and collectivism scale needs to be further developed by clarifying vague or ambiguous terms. Future research should also replicate this study with a larger sample and in different settings.
期刊介绍:
IJIR is dedicated to advancing knowledge and understanding of theory, practice, and research in intergroup relations. The contents encompass theoretical developments, field-based evaluations of training techniques, empirical discussions of cultural similarities and differences, and critical descriptions of new training approaches. Papers selected for publication in IJIR are judged to increase our understanding of intergroup tensions and harmony. Issue-oriented and cross-discipline discussion is encouraged. The highest priority is given to manuscripts that join theory, practice, and field research design. By theory, we mean conceptual schemes focused on the nature of cultural differences and similarities.