At 07:49 AM 6/28/2005, David Lindsay wrote: >Hi Anna > >On 24 Jun 2005 at 16:52, A P wrote: > > > I'm in the process of analyzing data from an international customer > > loyalty/satisfaction study. In the study we ask the respondent to rate > > their satisfaction (on a scale of 1-10) with a wide variety of different > > experiences. > > > > Part of this analysis will include comparing the results between > > countries. One of the questions I anticipate getting is how does > > culture play into the differences we see. > >My experience is that problems can occur in the >translation of scales e.g. translating "slightly agree" >into say Italian. In other words, nuances in word >meanings have different interpretations when translated >back into english.

I think David brings up an excellent point. Although A P professes an interest in "cultural" differences, she has yet to identify any variables in this study that have "cultural" content. Previously, the only cultural variable evident was that perhaps country of residence was tracked. This of course serves as a rather crude proxy for "culture," but at least its more than nothing. David implies a second variable of relevance: What language was the satisfaction questionnaire administered in? How many language-specific versions were there? Were people from, say, Switzerland, able to choose between the German, French and Italian versions of the questionnaire? Better yet, did all respondents in all countries have a choice of which questionnaire to use?

> > > > Does anyone have any experience/information on how to handle cultural > > differences when analyzing data from rating questions?...

Unless A P is imagining that a priori cultural differences have been demonstrated and have already been established, the ability to handle "cultural differences" requires questions in the survey instrument with cultural content in order to establish whether such differences exist. The "a priori" strategy assumes that studies such as Benedict's "The Chrysanthemum and the Sword" have somehow established cultural patterns that can be inferred backwards, but this involves a logical fallacy, the fallacy of affirming the consequent, IIRC, as well as naive anthropology (read post-WWII reviews of studies of national character). For example, to expand upon David's suggestion, suppose this cultural stereotype was that Italians choose "slightly agree" in a certain context (I am not suggesting David would actually do this). But if in that certain context someone chooses "slightly agree," does that imply that he or she is Italian? I don't think so. In fact, I suspect that all cultural a priori's should be viewed with a great deal of skepticism.

However, if A P's instrument tracks both the respondent's country, and the language in which the questionnaire was administered, these then constitute two crude indicators of culture, allowing the data to be grouped accordingly, from which one can test the questionnaire responses using Contingency table analysis (e.g. chi-square) or ANOVA, so that one can actually determine whether differences exist with regard to certain questions.

Bob

Robert M. Schacht, Ph.D. <schacht@hawaii.edu> Pacific Basin Rehabilitation Research & Training Center 1268 Young Street, Suite #204 Research Center, University of Hawaii Honolulu, HI 96814