{"title":"对包括霍夫斯泰德文化模型在内的七种价值衡量工具的比较评估","authors":"Vas Taras , Piers Steel , Madelynn Stackhouse","doi":"10.1016/j.jwb.2022.101386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Culture and its measurement are foundational to International Business research. Hofstede's model of culture dominates cross-cultural research. Unfortunately, the evidence of poor psychometric properties of Hofstede's instrument for measuring cultural values, the VSM, has been mounting, which prompted the development of numerous alternative instruments for measuring cultural values comprising Hofstede's model of culture. The abundance of choices makes it challenging to determine which of the instruments is most suitable for a given study. Using a large international sample (</span><em>N</em> = 12,462), we evaluated the psychometric properties of seven different instruments for measuring individual-level values in Hofstede's cultural framework and assessed their content validity, reliability, factor structure, and measurement equivalence. Our tests confirmed that Hofstede's instrument suffers from several psychometric deficiencies, while other instruments, notably those developed by Dorfman and Howell (1988), Yoo et al. (2011), and Taras et al. (2013), showed good reliability and validity. Guidelines for selecting the most suitable instrument and directions for future instrument development are provided.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51357,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Business","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative evaluation of seven instruments for measuring values comprising Hofstede's model of culture\",\"authors\":\"Vas Taras , Piers Steel , Madelynn Stackhouse\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jwb.2022.101386\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>Culture and its measurement are foundational to International Business research. Hofstede's model of culture dominates cross-cultural research. Unfortunately, the evidence of poor psychometric properties of Hofstede's instrument for measuring cultural values, the VSM, has been mounting, which prompted the development of numerous alternative instruments for measuring cultural values comprising Hofstede's model of culture. The abundance of choices makes it challenging to determine which of the instruments is most suitable for a given study. Using a large international sample (</span><em>N</em> = 12,462), we evaluated the psychometric properties of seven different instruments for measuring individual-level values in Hofstede's cultural framework and assessed their content validity, reliability, factor structure, and measurement equivalence. Our tests confirmed that Hofstede's instrument suffers from several psychometric deficiencies, while other instruments, notably those developed by Dorfman and Howell (1988), Yoo et al. (2011), and Taras et al. (2013), showed good reliability and validity. Guidelines for selecting the most suitable instrument and directions for future instrument development are provided.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51357,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of World Business\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of World Business\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090951622000773\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World Business","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090951622000773","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparative evaluation of seven instruments for measuring values comprising Hofstede's model of culture
Culture and its measurement are foundational to International Business research. Hofstede's model of culture dominates cross-cultural research. Unfortunately, the evidence of poor psychometric properties of Hofstede's instrument for measuring cultural values, the VSM, has been mounting, which prompted the development of numerous alternative instruments for measuring cultural values comprising Hofstede's model of culture. The abundance of choices makes it challenging to determine which of the instruments is most suitable for a given study. Using a large international sample (N = 12,462), we evaluated the psychometric properties of seven different instruments for measuring individual-level values in Hofstede's cultural framework and assessed their content validity, reliability, factor structure, and measurement equivalence. Our tests confirmed that Hofstede's instrument suffers from several psychometric deficiencies, while other instruments, notably those developed by Dorfman and Howell (1988), Yoo et al. (2011), and Taras et al. (2013), showed good reliability and validity. Guidelines for selecting the most suitable instrument and directions for future instrument development are provided.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of World Business holds a distinguished position as a leading publication within the realm of International Business. Rooted in a legacy dating back to 1965, when it was established as the Columbia Journal of World Business, JWB is committed to disseminating cutting-edge research that reflects significant advancements in the field. The journal actively seeks submissions that propel new theoretical frameworks and innovative perspectives on International Business phenomena. Aligned with its domain statement, submissions are expected to possess a clear multinational, cross-border, or international comparative focus, while remaining pertinent to the study of management and organizations. JWB particularly encourages submissions that challenge established theories or assumptions, presenting pioneering or counterintuitive findings. With an inclusive approach, the journal welcomes contributions from diverse conceptual and theoretical traditions, encompassing allied social sciences and behavioral sciences. Submissions should either develop new theories or rigorously test existing ones, employing a variety of qualitative, quantitative, or other methodological approaches. While JWB primarily caters to scholars and researchers, it values contributions that explore implications for Multinational Enterprises and their management, as well as ramifications for public policy and the broader societal role of business.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
