PURPOSE: The purposes of this methodologic paper are to (1) describe theoretical background in conducting research across different cultures; (2) address measurement issues related to instrument administration; and (3) provide strategies to deal with measurement issues. METHODS: A thorough review of the literature was conducted. A theoretical background is provided, and examples of administering instrument in studies are described. RESULTS: When applying an instrument to different cultures, both equivalence and bias need to be established. Three levels of equivalence, i.e., construct equivalence, measurement unit equivalence, and full score comparability, need to be explained to maintain the same concept being measured. In this paper, sources of bias in construct, method, and item are discussed. Issues related to instrument administration in a cross-cultural study are described. CONCLUSION: Researchers need to acknowledge various group differences in concept and/or language that include a specific set of symbols and norms. There is a need to question the philosophical and conceptual appropriateness of an assessment measure that has been conceptualized and operationalized in a different culture. Additionally, testing different response formats such as narrowing response range can be considered to reduce bias.
Attitude of Health Personnel/ethnology ; Attitude to Health/ethnology ; Bias (Epidemiology) ; Communication Barriers ; *Cross-Cultural Comparison ; Data Collection/*methods/standards ; Humans ; Interviews as Topic/methods/standards ; Nursing Assessment ; Nursing Research/*methods/standards ; Philosophy, Nursing ; Psychometrics ; Reproducibility of Results ; Research Design/standards ; Researcher-Subject Relations/psychology ; Transcultural Nursing/*methods/standards ; Translating