CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25International Student and Expatriate ChallengesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingCultural Differences and Values

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A validation study of the Cross‐Cultural Adaptability Inventory

Nguyen, Nhung T., Biderman, Michael D., McNary, Lisa D.·2010·International Journal of Training and Development
DOI 10.1111/j.1468-2419.2010.00345.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Despite the claims made about the effectiveness of cross‐cultural training programs, few studies have examined the reliability and validity of the instruments used in these training programs. In this study, the authors examined the factor structure of the Cross‐Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) via a confirmatory factor analytic approach. A series of confirmatory factor analytic models was tested and applied at the item level to both the CCAI and Goldberg's Big Five Inventory. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model in which a method factor was estimated fits the data significantly better than a model without such a method effect. Further, the method factor suppressed substantive relationships such that the two CCAI factors of Emotional Resilience and Personal Autonomy became significant correlates with self‐reported number of international job assignments after accounting for method variance. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-2419.2010.00345.x

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The four subscales of the CCAI have low to moderate correlation with Goldberg's IPIP Big Five questionnaire (r = .182 to .548, p < 0.05).

    “The four subscales of the CCAI have low to moderate correlation with Goldberg's IPIP Big Five questionnaire ( r = .182 to .548, p < 0.05) from Nguyen et al. (2010).”

    From Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions (2016) · cites this paper as Nguyen et al., 2010

  • The emotional resilience subscale and personal autonomy subscale of the CCAI can weakly predict the number of international job assignments.

    “Emotional resilience subscale and personal autonomy subscale can weakly predict the number of international job assignments (Nguyen et al., 2010).”

    From Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions (2016) · cites this paper as Nguyen et al., 2010

  • Nguyen, Biderman, and McNary (2010) found each item from the CCAI loaded on a general factor.

    “Nguyen, Biderman, and McNary (2010) also found each item from the CCAI loaded on a general factor”

    From Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions (2016) · cites this paper as Nguyen, Biderman, and McNary (2010)

  • No CCAI subscales were correlated with the actual number of international job assignments.

    “The results partially supported the hypothesis, as only two subscales (resilience and personal autonomy) were weakly correlated with the logarithm number of international job assignments ( r = .20 and r = .29, respectively), and no subscales were correlated with the actual number of assignments.”

    From Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions (2016) · cites this paper as Nguyen et al., 2010

  • Only two CCAI subscales (resilience and personal autonomy) were weakly correlated with the logarithm number of international job assignments (r = .20 and .29).

    “The results partially supported the hypothesis, as only two subscales (resilience and personal autonomy) were weakly correlated with the logarithm number of international job assignments ( r = .20 and r = .29, respectively), and no subscales were correlated with the actual number of assignments.”

    From Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions (2016) · cites this paper as Nguyen et al., 2010

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. 10.1016/0147-1767(92)90031-O · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.paid.2007.10.022 · DOI
  3. 10.1037/h0046016 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Costa P. T., 1989, The NEO PI/FFI Manual Supplement
  5. 10.1177/0013164405278571 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1016/j.paid.2006.04.020 · DOI
  7. Elmuti D., 2008, Analyzing cross‐cultural adaptability among business students: an empirical investigation, International Journal of Management, 25, 551
  8. 10.1037/h0030704 · DOI
  9. Ford L. R.andScandura T. A.(2007) Item generation: a review of commonly‐used measures and recommendations for future practice. Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the Southern Management Association: Nashville TN.
  10. Gelles R. S.(1996) Expatriate adjustment and performance and spouse adjustment. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering 57(2‐B) pp.1483.
  11. 10.1016/S0147-1767(98)00030-3 · DOI
  12. 10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.143 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/S0147-1767(03)00032-4 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1080/10705519909540118 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1080/09585190500239325 · DOI
  16. Jensma J. L.(1996) A pilot study examining the predictive validity of the Cross‐Cultural Adaptability Inventory among first‐term missionaries. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering Vol 56(10‐B) Apr 1996. pp.5835.
  17. Kelley C., 1995, The Cross‐Cultural Adaptability Inventory
  18. 10.1177/1094428105283193 · DOI
  19. Kraemer T. L., 2003, Establishing the reliability of using the Cross Cultural Adaptability Inventory with physical therapist students, Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 17, 27, 10.1097/00001416-200301000-00005 · DOI
  20. 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2007.01.004 · DOI
  21. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.476 · DOI
  22. 10.1177/1094428105283193 · DOI
  23. 10.1177/1534484306290106 · DOI
  24. 10.1046/j.1365-2923.1999.00291.x · DOI
  25. 10.1016/S0147-1767(00)00050-X · DOI
  26. 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2004.06.002 · DOI
  27. 10.1007/s10551-006-9153-y · DOI
  28. 10.1080/00224549809600415 · DOI
  29. 10.1111/1468-2419.00126 · DOI
  30. 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.28.1.341 · DOI
  31. 10.1037/0022-3514.46.3.598 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Saucier G., 2003, Personality and Work, 1
  33. 10.1080/09585190110083767 · DOI
  34. 10.3200/JEXE.74.3.267-288 · DOI
  35. Williams L. J., 2002, Handbook of Research Methods in Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 366

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Nguyen, N. T., Biderman, M. D., & McNary, L. D.
Affiliations
  • Towson University (US)
  • University of Tennessee at Chattanooga (US)
  • North Carolina State University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Nguyen, Nhung T.
  • Biderman, Michael D.
  • McNary, Lisa D.
ORCID
Nguyen, Nhung T.
Venue
International Journal of Training and Development
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-05-13
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
112-129
ISSN
  • 1360-3736 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2419
DOI
10.1111/j.1468-2419.2010.00345.x
OpenAlex
W2166947643
Cited by
25
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
International Journal of Training and Development (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › International Student and Expatriate Challenges
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
Keywords
cross-cultural adaptability, intercultural training, factor structure, method variance, Big Five Inventory, psychological resilience, individual autonomy, instrument validation

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