4. What is the central issue in
translations/adaptations?
Producing instruments that measure target
constructs adequately in target cultures
5. A Note on Terminology
Translation
Conventional term, still often used
Adaptation
Has become generic term for modern translation
practices
Based on increased sensitivity for non-linguistic factors
in translations, such as cultural norms of address,
relevance of thorough knowledge of target culture
6. Main Applications of
Translations/Adaptations
Comparative Studies
Comparison of construct or mean scores
across cultures
High demands on comparability of scores
Maximizing comparability
Monocultural studies in target culture
Main issue is ensuring validity in new context
Few demands on comparability scores
Maximizing local suitability
7. Translations in Historical Perspective
Stage 1:
Close translations were standard practice
Techniques were developed (e.g., translation back
translation)
Important societal developments:
Globalization and migration (multi-ethnic societies)
Stage 2:
Increasing appreciation that close translations have
problems, e.g., Grade 12 = Form 6 = ……?
Need for adaptations, localizations
Need for standardization of adaptation procedures
8. What is a Good Translation/
Adaptation?
Dependent on perspective
Linguistic
perspective
Psychological perspective
Mapping problem:
Translating/adaptingcan be seen as finding an
optimal mapping of text in two languages
What is a good mapping?
A good mapping shows equivalence of the
original and translation
9. Example
What is the American equivalent of the
Dutch item “Hoe heet de koningin van
Nederland?” (Suppose that item is part of
a test of crystallized intelligence)
Literal/close translation: What is the name
of the queen of the Netherlands?”
Problem: Item more difficult for American
children than for Dutch children
Adaptation: “What is the name of the
president of the USA?”
Problem: Queen and president are not equally
known in their respective countries
10. What Does “Equivalent” Mean?
Eusebius Hieronymus (St. Jerome, famous
bible translator from Greek and Hebrew to
Latin; ±347—419/420):
2 types of translations: “words” and “meanings”
(he favored the latter)
Here two types of equivalence relevant:
linguistic
mapping/equivalence
psychological }
11. Linguistic Equivalence
(Broader than similarity of words)
Linguistic equivalence refers to
similarity of linguistic features of a text.
Examples of relevant linguistic
features are:
Lexical similarity
Grammatical accuracy
In general: emphasis on formal-textual characteristics (cf.
automatic translations)
12. Psychological Equivalence
Psychological equivalence refers
to similarity of (psychological)
meaning and scores
Similarity in a broad sense:
Textual, e.g.,
Connotationof words, implied context of text
Comprehensibility
Metrical:
Score comparability
13. Relationship between Two
Perspectives
Three possible relations between linguistic and
psychological features, depending on the
overlap:
a. complete c. none
b. partial
psych. linguistic
Translatable Poorly translatable Essentially
non-translatable
14. Translatability
A psychological test/item is
Well translatable if linguistic and
psychological features yield the same
translation
Poorly translatable if linguistic and
psychological features do not entirely
converge (e.g., translation of slang:
meaning is translatable, but conciseness
is lost)
Non-translatable if there is a complete
or nearly complete nonoverlap (e.g.,
Jabberwocky)
15. Framework for
Translations/Adaptations
Need for a theoretical—
methodological framework that
links all stages of a project
Bias and equivalence as key
concepts
16. Steps in Designing Cross-Cultural Tests
(Hambleton & Patsula, 1999)
1. Ensure that construct equivalence exists in the language and cultural groups
of interest.
2. Decide whether to adapt an existing test or develop a new test.
3. Select well-qualified translators.
4. Translate and adapt the test.
5. Review the adapted version of the test and make necessary revisions.
6. Conduct a small tryout of the adapted version of the test.
7. Carry out a more ambitious field-test.
8. Choose a statistical design for connecting scores on the source and target
language versions of the test.
9. If cross-cultural comparisons are of interest, ensure equivalence of the
language versions of the test.
10. Perform validation research, as appropriate.
11. Document the process and prepare a manual for the users of the adapted
tests.
12. Train users.
13. Monitor experiences with the adapted test, and make appropriate revisions.
17. Overview of Common Procedures to
Examine Accuracy of Translations/
Adaptations
Procedures as opportunities to strengthen the
quality of a translation/adaptation project
Two taxonomies presented here:
common: (back) translations vs. committee
approach
use of existing/new material
18. Theoretical and Methodological
Background
Crucial concept in translations is equivalence:
Linguistic
Mapping of linguistic meaning (word meaning,
sentence meaning)
Psychological
Mapping of psychological meaning (serves the
same psychological function in all languages?)
A good translation combines these considerations
19. Options
Adoption (Close “literal” translation)
Advantage: maintains metric equivalence
Disadvantage: adequacy (too) readily assumed,
should be demonstrated
Adaptation(changing contents of one or
more items so as to increase cultural
appropriateness)
Advantage: more flexible, more tailored to the
context
Disadvantage: fewer statistical techniques
available to compare scores across cultures
Assembly (composing a new instrument)
Advantage: very flexible
Disadvantage: almost no comparability
maintained
20. A Sample of Possible Procedures
(after Harkness, 2003)
• Translation back translation
• Committee approach (forward
Translation stage translations)
• Mixed approaches (e.g., independent
forwards)
•Think alouds, focus groups
Pretesting stage
•Feedback from mono- and bilinguals
(qualitative) •Comprehension and readability checks
Pretesting or actual
• Equivalence and bias analyses (DIF,
administration structural equivalence)
(quantitative)
21. Strength and Weakness of
Translations Back Translation
Main strengths Main weaknesses
• Well accepted quality • Capitalizes on linguistic,
check; standard cultural, and item-writing
procedures well known in skills of (usually) a single
scientific community (incl. person
researchers, grant • Can produce stilted
institutions and journal language
boards) • Readability and
• No knowledge of target comprehensibility in
language required target language may be
problematic
22. What is the Best Option?
One type is not intrinsically better or worse than
another
Main question is
NOT
What is globally the best choice?
BUT
What is the best choice in a specific
case?
23. Four Important Perspectives
(Harkness & Van de Vijver, in preparation):
Construct Cultural Linguistic Measurement
equivalence equivalence equivalence equivalence
• Similarity of • Norms about • Translation • Retention of
construct in interaction accuracy: psychometric
source and (modes of Retention of features
target culture address) denotation (response
• “Cultural fact and styles)
sheet” connotation • Similarity of
factors
measured by
a test and
comparability
of scores
25. A good translation/adaptation
combines equivalence
perspectives
What is a good translation/
adaptation?
A translation or adaptation is
good when it combines high
levels of construct, cultural,
linguistic, and measurement
equivalence.
26. Is There a Best Way to Translate an
Instrument?
Simple items often straightforward to
translate
Close translations will do well, various kinds
of equivalence jointly maximized
More complex items often require choices
about which equivalence will be maximized:
Maximizing comparability or cultural
appropriateness ?
27. Different
perspectives on
equivalence often, but not always
compatible
Example: cross-cultural differences in modes
of address
Maximizing linguistic equivalence may
challenge cultural appropriateness (e.g.,
requests may be too direct)
Maximizing cultural appropriateness may
challenge statistical equivalence (e.g.,
rephrasing may threaten comparability of
scores)
29. Patel, Abas, Broadhead, Todd, & Reeler (2001)
In Zimbabwe, multiple somatic complaints such as
headaches and fatigue are the most common
presentations of depression. On inquiry, however, most
patients freely admit to cognitive and emotional
symptoms. Many somatic symptoms, especially those
related to the heart and the head, are cultural
metaphors for fear or grief. Most depressed individuals
attribute their symptoms to “thinking too much”
(kufungisisa), to a supernatural cause, and to social
stressors. Our data confirm the view that although
depression in developing countries often presents with
somatic symptoms, most patients do not attribute their
symptoms to a somatic illness and cannot be said to
have “pure” somatisation. This means that it is vital to
understand the culture specific terminology used by
patients and to assess mood in those with multiple
somatic complaints.
Consequence
Common western measures of depression will under-
diagnose depression in Shona speakers.
30. Example Culture-Driven
Example: ‘Burglar’ (Picture Arrangement; adapted for use
in low-SES children in Bangalore, India )
Problems:
1. Unclear whether the burglar was getting in
or getting out;
2. Man not recognized as burglar;
3. Window was not recognized (vertically
moving windows are uncommon in India)
Malda, Van de Vijver, Srinivasan, Transler (2008): Adapting a Western Cognitive Test for a
30
Non-Western Context: The KABC-II in Bangalore, India
31. Example of Language-Driven
Adaptation
Example: Do you often feel distressed?
Translation to Dutch:
“Distressed” does not have an equivalent word in Dutch
Possible solutions
Composite of different emotions in Dutch; ask for frequency
of composite (“how often do you feel X and Y?”). Problem:
composite may not be recognizable
Choose a single emotion that is as close as possible; problem:
change of item content if no close match can be found
Describe the emotion in the item (e.g., vignette); problem:
may require a similar description in English original
Need to check adequacy of chosen solution in statistical
analysis
Combination of judgmental and statistical evidence crucial in
instruments that are more difficult to translate/adapt
33. Rover
Test content:
Additional instructions in subtest Rover
One additional instruction in subtest Pattern
Reasoning
Slight change of subtest composition and item order
in subtest Triangles
Sample item Original version
Sample item Indian version
Problem: original sample item was too difficult; this
item has been added as actual test item
35. What now is the challenge
for psychologists?
Construct own psychological
instrument of which is basically
applicable for our own culture
instead of adaptations of other
cultures test.
