Imported vs. Indigenously Developed Personality Tests
In May 2015, the People’s Prosecutors’ Office of China declared that they would replace personality tests created in the US with ones developed in China in order to test juvenile offenders. Up until recently, tests such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) were being translated from English to Chinese. Not surprisingly, this generated a series of problems. First off, there is the common problem that occurs when anything is translated into another language which is that it is very difficult to insure that the meaning of the sentence, or in this case question, remains exactly the same. Additionally, it is important to take into account that many traits and behaviors are culturally specific and that they can be viewed in a very different light depending on what is considered the norm in each culture. According to Fan Rongqing, an official at the prosecutors’ office, “a question, even translated into Chinese, might be understood in different ways by Chinese because of different ways of thinking”.
There has been a lot of effort guided towards creating translated tests that are equivalent to original tests so that they can be used cross culturally. Fanny Cheung, professor at the University of Hong Kong, states that until recently, most Western psychological tests have simply been translated and used as if it were the original test, with little regard to quality and equivalence of the test. While an etic approach like this allows for cross-cultural comparisons of specific constructs, it may result in significant culture-specific personality constructs being overlooked.
Some psychologists have argued that psychological testing should focus more on the creation of indigenous personality measures as opposed to using imported measures across cultures. For example, the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory was developed by combining culturally significant constructs found in Chinese literature and descriptions about the self and others. These type of emic approaches have been found to be both valid and reliable in the specific cultures for which they were created.
For this reason, Beijing Normal University paired up with a drug rehab center and developed a new test targeted specifically at Chinese juvenile offenders with the goal to determine which offenders deserve to be charged and which deserve more lenience. This new test evaluates the likelihood of committing another crime taking into account the social background and the psychological state of the youth offenders. The results of the trial program led to 142 youths receiving less severe charges due to the fact that their profiling showed they would be unlikely to break the law a second time.
The question is, which type of approach, etic or emic, should be taken when investigating personality constructs in different cultures such as in Asia. Research has indicated that both methods have delivered valid and useful results. Officials at the People’s Prosecutor’s Office seem to think that the latter is more valuable and better fit their needs. However, research on tests like the MMPI has supported the use of translated versions in studying personality constructs cross-culturally. Ultimately, it seems as though both imported and indigenous psychological tests have their advantages and disadvantages. Until research shows that one approach is more fitting than the other, the best solution is to take both into consideration in order to get as much of an understanding on personality constructs as possible.
ID: 260622300
Cheung, Fanny M. “Use of Western and Indigenously Developed Personality Tests in Asia.” Applied Psychology 53.2 (2004): 173–91. Wiley Online Library. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.
Jiayun, Ke. “China’s New Psychological Test for Juvenile Offenders.” Shanghai Daily. Shanghai Daily, 12 May 2015. Web. 20 Mar. 2016.
