The Assessment of Multicultural Strength
Design and Validation of an Openness to the Other Affective Domain Inventory
Abstract
The classification of character strengths and virtues by Peterson and Seligman (2004) includes 24 strengths and 6 virtues. Although the development of this classification was inspired by diverse cultural traditions, no one strength or virtue centrally focused on cultural aspects. Fowers and Davidov (2006) have proposed a new multicultural strength or virtue termed as openness to the other. We developed the Openness to the Other Affective Domain Inventory (OADI), a new 6-item measurement instrument to assess affective attraction to the other, that is, fascination with or attraction to culturally diverse others, and affective aversion to the other, that is, distrust of or disgust with culturally diverse others. The results showed evidence of acceptable reliability, incremental and convergent validity, validity with an external criterion, and known group validity for the OADI. Moreover, a confirmatory factor analysis yielded an excepted two-factor model that corresponded to the attraction and aversion dimensions.
References
2003). Guidelines on multicultural education, training, research, practice, and organizational change for Psychologists. American Psychologist, 58, 377–402. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.5.377
(2002). The psychology of globalization. American Psychologist, 57, 774–783. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.57.10.774
(2001). An overview of analytic rotation in exploratory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 111–150. doi: 10.1207/S15327906MBR3601_05
(2004). New Zealand’s Diaspora and overseas born population. Wellington: New Zealand Treasury Working Paper 04/13.
(1984). Approaches to personality inventory construction: A comparison of merits. American Psychologist, 39, 214–227. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.39.3.214
(2010). Introduction: The psychology of global mobility. In , International and cultural psychology. The psychology of global mobility. pp. 1–19). doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-6208-9_1
(2011). A Global Community Psychology of Mobility. Psychosocial Intervention, 20, 319–325. doi: 10.5093/in2011v20n3a8
(2005). From global careers to talent flow: Reinterpreting “brain drain”. Journal of World Business, 40, 386–398. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2005.08.006
(2000). Estilos de personalidad, objetivos de vida y satisfacción vital. Un estudio comparativo con adolescentes argentinos.
([Personality styles, life objectives, and satisfaction with life. A comparative study with Argentinian adolescents] Doctoral Thesis. Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain2005). Técnicas de evaluación psicológica en los ámbitos militares
([Psychological assessment techniques in the military area] Buenos Aires: Paidós.2012). La evaluación de las competencias culturales: Validación del inventario ICC
([Assessment of cultural competence: Validation of the inventory ICC] Interdisciplinaria, 29, 109–132.2001). Rasgos de personalidad, bienestar psicológico y rendimiento académico en adolescentes argentinos.
([Personality traits, psychological well-being, and academic achievement of Argentine adolescents] Interdisciplinaria, 18, 65–85.1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–319. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309
(2009). Evaluación de las virtudes y fortalezas humanas en población de habla hispana
([Assessment of human virtues and strengths in Hispanic language population] . Psicodebate, 10, 53–71. Retrieved from www.palermo.edu/cienciassociales/publicaciones/pdf/psico10/10Psico_03.pdf2011 ). Fortalezas del carácter en militares argentinos[Character strengths in Argentinean soldiers] Unpublished doctoral thesis, Universidad de Palermo, Buenos Aires, Argentina2008a). Adaptación y validación argentina de la Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale
([Argentinian adaptation and validation of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale] . Interdisciplinaria, 25, 197–216.2008b ). Inventario de virtudes y fortalezas[Virtues and strengths inventory] . Unpublished manuscript2012). Character strengths: A study of Argentinean soldiers. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 15, 199–215. doi: 10.5209/rev_SJOP.2012.v15.n1.37310
(2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10, Retrieved from 1–9. pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=7
(2010). Evaluation of parallel analysis methods for determining the number of factors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70, 885–901. doi: 10.1177/0013164410379332
(1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349–354. doi: 10.1037/h0047358
(2005). Shared virtue: The convergence of valued human strengths across culture and history. Review of General Psychology, 9, 203–213. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.9.3.203
(2008). A nation challenged: The impact of foreign threat on America’s tolerance for diversity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 308–318. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.2.308
(1993). The experience of emotional well-being. In , Handbook of Emotions (pp. 405–415). New York, NY: Guilford.
(1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
(1994). Factor analysis of variables with 2, 3, 5 and 7 response categories: A comparison of categorical variable estimators using simulated data. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 47, 309–326. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8317.1994.tb01039.x
(2006). The virtue of multiculturalism: Personal transformation, character, and openness to the other. American Psychologist, 61, 581–594. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.61.6.581
(1999). The APA 1998 Annual Report. American Psychologist, 54, 537–568. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.54.8.537
(2010). Human mobility in a global era. In , International and cultural psychology. The psychology of global mobility. pp. 23–45). doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-6208-9_2
(2003). Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The Intercultural Development Inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 421–443. doi: 10.1016/S0147-1767(03)00032-4
(2006). Treating Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients as data in counseling research. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 630–660. doi: 10.1177/0011000006288308
(1996). “Some of my best friends”: Intergroup contact, concealable stigma, and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men and lesbians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 412–424. doi: 10.1177/0146167296224007
(2010). Polychoric versus Pearson correlations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 44, 153–166. doi: 10.1007/s11135-008-9190-y
(2003). The incremental validity of psychological testing and assessment: Conceptual, methodological, and statistical issues. Psychological Assessment, 15, 446–455. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.15.4.446
(2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and conceptual issues. In , Handbook of personality psychology: Theory and research (3rd ed.). (pp. 114–158). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
(2007). Multicultural experiences of US military psychologists: Current trends and training target areas. Psychological Services, 4, 158–167. doi: 10.1037/1541-1559.4.3.158
(2001). Intercultural encounters: The fundamentals of intercultural communication (5th ed.). Englewood, CO: Morton.
(1985). An evaluation of subjective well-being measures. Social Indicators Research, 17, 1–17. doi: 10.1007/BF00354108
(2011). A generalized dimensionality discrepancy measure for dimensionality assessment in multidimensional item response theory. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 64, 208–232. doi: 10.1348/000711010X500483
(2006). Positive psychology: Past, present, and (possible) future. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 3–16. doi: 10.1080/17439760500372796
(2011). The Hull method for selecting the number of common factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46, 340–364. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2011.564527
(1999). Intercultural competence: Interpersonal communication across cultures (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
(2008). Values in action scale and the Big 5: An empirical indication of structure. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, Retrieved from dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.10.003 787–799.
(2010). How to factor-analyze your data right: Do’s, don’ts, and how-to’s. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3, 97–110.
(2007). Construct validation of a short five-factor model instrument: A self-peer study on the German adaptation of the Ten-Item Personality Inventory (TIPI-G). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 166–175. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759.23.3.166
(2004). Strengths of character and well-being. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 603–619. doi: 10.1521/jscp.23.5.603.50748
(2004). Classification and measurement of character strengths: Implications for practice. In , Positive psychology in practice (pp. 433–446). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
(2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; Oxford University Press.
(2000). Does intergroup contact reduce prejudice: Recent meta-analytic findings. In , “The Claremont Symposium on Applied Social Psychology” – Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 93–114). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751
(2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 203–212. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001
(2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17, 354–373. doi: 10.1037/a0029315
(2010). A comparative investigation of rotation criteria within exploratory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 73–103. doi: 10.1080/00273170903504810
(2011). Current methodological considerations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 304–321. doi: 10.1177/0734282911406653
(2011). Rotation criteria and hypothesis testing for exploratory factor analysis: Implications for factor pattern loadings and interfactor correlations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 95–113. doi: 10.1177/0013164410387348
(2010). Some guidelines concerning the modeling of traits and abilities in test construction. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26, 1–2. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000001
(2011). Some thoughts concerning the recent shift from measures with many items to measures with few items. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27, 71–72. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000056
(2003). Incremental validity principles in test construction. Psychological Assessment, 15, 467–477. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.15.4.467
(2008). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice (5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
(2012). An overview of software for conducting dimensionality assessment in multidimensional models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 36, 659–669. doi: 10.1177/0146621612454593
(2010). Scale construction and evaluation in practice: A review of factor analysis versus item response theory applications. Retrieved from core.kmi.open.ac.uk/display/826428
(2008). Cross-cultural management. Essential Concepts. London, UK: Sage.
(2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
(2011). Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychological Methods, 16, 209–220. doi: 10.1037/a0023353
(2007). Item factor analysis: Current approaches and future directions. Psychological Methods, 12, 58–79. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.58
(2010). Confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables with misspecified models. Structural Equation Modeling, 17, 392–423. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2010.489003
(