Constructs, concept mapping, and psychometric assessment of the Concise Scale of Individualism–Collectivism
- Authors
-
-
-
Jie Gong
Wuhan Center for Disease Prevention and Control
-
-
-
-
Niannian Yang
Wuhan Center for Disease Prevention and Control
-
Fang Li
Wuhan Center for Disease Prevention and Control
-
- Keywords:
- individualism, collectivism, health, culture, concept mapping
- Abstract
-
We developed and psychometrically evaluated the Concise Scale of Individualism–Collectivism (CSIC) to support the growing need for cross-cultural research to better understand the relationship between culture and health. To construct the scale, we used the concept mapping technique. The CSIC contains 18 paired items, 9 of which are used to assess respondents’ level of individualism and 9 to assess collectivism, rated using a 5-point Likert scale. We evaluated the instrument using a diverse sample (N = 249, Mage = 29.64, SD = 7.81) consisting of rural-to-urban migrants and nonmigrant rural and urban residents in the city of Wuhan, China. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were .91, .83, and .86 for the total CSIC scale, and for the collectivism and individualism subscales, respectively. A 2-factor model fit the data well, showing that both individualism and collectivism scores significantly differed according to level of education and area of residence, and significantly predicted levels of social capital, social support, resilience, and stress of respondents. We determined that the CSIC has adequate reliability and validity for use in research to quantify cultural beliefs about individualism and collectivism among Chinese adults.
- Author Biographies
- References
- Downloads
- Published
- 2015-04-01
- Issue
- Vol. 43 No. 4 (2015)
- Section
- Articles
- License
-
Author(s) agree that copyright of an article published in SBP Journal is transferred from the author(s) to the journal publisher (Scientific Journal Publishers Limited) upon publication.
Disclaimer
Social Behavior and Personality maintains an open editorial policy and may or may not endorse the conclusions made in its published articles. Neither the journal nor its publisher, editors or staff assume any responsibility for any material considered to be offensive or defamatory, or for obtaining any copyright permissions necessary for publication of articles.