Are indigenous scales really indigenous?

2.7.3 Are indigenous scales really indigenous?

Cheung, Leung, Zhang et al. (2001) further noted that the Interpersonal Relatedness factor may extend to non-Chinese populations. Utilising a convergence approach (Van de Vijer & Leung, 1997), Cheung et al. (2003) administered the CPAI in a translated English form with the abridged version of the NEO-PI-R, the NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI: Costa & McCrae, 1992a). They used two samples — firstly, a quota sample of 531 Singapore ethnic Chinese that approximated Singapore’s demographic background and then a convenience sample of 144 Caucasian American students at a university in the USA. For the Singaporean sample, joint factor analyses of CPAI and NEO-FFI data revealed that a separate factor of Interpersonal Relatedness was clearly defined in a six-factor solution. When using a five-factor solution, the Interpersonal Relatedness factor was “…forced to merge with the Conscientiousness factor…[of the FFM]” (Cheung et al., 2003; p.448). These results concur with the Cheung, Leung, Zhang et al. (2001) finding of the separate Interpersonal Relatedness factor in Chinese samples. For the American sample, the methodology was similar to previous attempts at validation of the FFM outside of its country of origin. A principal components analysis with varimax rotation, followed by procrustes rotation to a Chinese norm revealed that the CPAI structure was clearly replicated in this USA sample of university students with factor congruences between Chinese and American samples reaching .90 or above. This provides some support that the CPAI, as an instrument developed in China, can be exported to a foreign culture. However, given the relatively small sample size and the fact that there was a male-female imbalance (41males, 103 females), further research is needed using the CPAI in Western cultures before any firm conclusions may be drawn.