Validity Issues in Translating Instruments Acrosslanguages and Cultures: Exploring the Paradox of Differing Culturalperspectives on Intercultural Sensitivity

Many researchers wrongly assume that validity is theproperty of an instrument, and that once validity hasbeen 'demonstrated' no further analysis is requiredwhen it is used in a different research context. This work challenges that idea and seeks to remindresearchers that validity, the 'ne plus ultra' of anyresearch, is a multi-layered process incorporatingboth statistical and judgmental evidence, that mustbe specifically accounted for in any empirical project. A Japanese translation of Bennett and Hammer'sIntercultural Development Inventory (version 1) wastested for content, concurrent, and consequentialvalidity following Messick's (1998) framework inwhich these aspects of validity are seen tocontribute to an overarching judgment of constructvalidity. The validation analysis raised questionsabout whether results from a translated IDI, and byextension the stages of the Developmental Model ofIntercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) upon which it isbased, are transferable across languages and cultures. This work serves as a reminder that validity is acritical element, and that it must be an explicitlyaddressed, particularly in cross-cultural research.