Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 527

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Do Reverse-Worded Items Confound Measures in Cross-Cultural Consumer Research? The Case of the Material Values Scale

Wong, Nancy, Rindfleisch, Aric, Burroughs, James E.·2003·Journal of Consumer Research
DOI 10.1086/374697
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Most measures of consumer behavior have been developed and employed in the United States. Thus, relatively little is known about the cross-cultural applicability of these measures. Using Richins and Dawson's (1992) Material Values Scale (MVS) as an exemplar, this article focuses on the problems researchers are likely to encounter when employing domestic mixed-worded scales (i.e., scales that contain both positive- and reverse-worded items) in cross-cultural applications. Through an initial study among over 800 adults from the United States, Singapore, Thailand, Japan, and Korea, we show that the cross-cultural measurement equivalence and construct validity of the MVS is challenged by its mixed-worded Likert format. Through a second study among approximately 400 Americans and East Asians, we find that other mixed-worded scales produce similar problems and that the cross-cultural applicability of such scales may be enhanced by replacing items posed as statements with items framed as questions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/374697

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 527

Metadata

Authors
Wong, N., Rindfleisch, A., & Burroughs, J. E.
Venue
Journal of Consumer Research
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2003-06
Volume
30
Issue
1
Pages
72-91
ISSN
  • 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5277
DOI
10.1086/374697
OpenAlex
W1986911624
Cited by
527
References
11
FWCI
13.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.