The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.
A Factor Analytic Study of the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory
Abstract
The Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory (CCAI) was developed as a tool to assess an individual's effectiveness in cross-cultural interaction and communication. Because limited validity evidence had been published regarding the CCAI, the purpose of the current study is to evaluate the psychometric properties of CCAI scores, specifically focusing on the replicability of the proposed four-factor structure. This study is based on responses from a sample of 709, primarily Caucasian, college sophomores at a mid-Atlantic university. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated poor fit of the four-factor structure and follow-up exploratory factor analyses failed to reveal an interpretable structure. Possible explanations of poor fit are discussed, and recommendations for further research are suggested.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Davis and Finney (2006) found weak support for the four-factor model originally proposed for the CCAI.
“Davis and Finney (2006) found weak support for the four-factor model originally proposed for the CCAI.”
From Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions (2016) · cites this paper as Davis and Finney (2006)
EFA failed to identify an interpretable structure and CFA found poor fit of four-factor structure for the CCAI.
“EFA failed to identify an interpretable structure and CFA found poor fit of four-factor structure (Davis &Finney, 2006).”
From Assessing Intercultural Competence in Higher Education: Existing Research and Future Directions (2016) · cites this paper as Davis & Finney, 2006
Citations
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 26 · Cited by 80
Research works printed but not linked: 30
- 10.1111/j.1745-3992.1998.tb00616.x · DOI
- Benson, J., 1998, Journal of Vocational Education Research, 23, 13
- 10.1177/00131640021970574 · DOI
- Connolly, I., 2000, Journal of Dental Hygiene, 74, 102
- 10.1177/0887403400011003003 · DOI
- Erwin, T. D., 1998, International Education Journal, 28, 5
- Fan, X., 2001, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 517
- 10.1080/10705519909540119 · DOI
- Fukasawa, L. (1990). The effect of multicultural counseling training on multicultural sensitivity of graduate students (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana State University, 1990). Dissertation Abstracts International , 51 , 05A-05A.
- Gelles, R. (1996). Expatriate adjustment and performance, and spouse adjustment (Doctoral dissertation, United States International University, 1996).Dissertation Abstracts International, 57,2-2.
- 10.1207/S15328007SEM1001_7 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0147-1767(98)00030-3 · DOI
- Hu, L., 1995, Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications, 76
- 10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/10705519909540118 · DOI · Paper page
- Jöreskog, K., 1993, LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language
- Jöreskog, K., 1996, PRELIS 2: User's reference guide
- Kelley, C., 1995, The Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory
- Kelley, C., 1995, The Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory manual
- Kitsantas, A., combined annual meeting of the San Diego State University and the U.S. Department of Education Centers for International Business Education and Research
- Kline, R. B., 1998, Principles and practice of structural equation modeling
- Lui, G. (1999). Personal characteristics associated with the Cross-Cultural Adaptability Inventory for Hong Kong Chinese missionaries (Doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1999).Dissertation Abstracts International,60,4-4.
- 10.1046/j.1365-2923.1999.00291.x · DOI
- 10.1080/00224549809600415 · DOI
- Nunnally, J., 1994, Psychometric theory
- 10.1207/S15328007SEM0704_3 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15327906mbr3401_2 · DOI
- Remmert, A. (1993). The impact of multicultural in-service education on the cross-cultural adaptability of public school teachers (Doctoral dissertation, Florida State University, 1995).Dissertation Abstracts International,54, 12A-12A.
- 10.1177/0013164497057001001 · DOI
- 10.1177/0013164496056002001 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Davis, S. L., & Finney, S. J.
- Affiliations
- James Madison University (US)
- ORCID
- Finney, Sara J.
- Venue
- Educational and Psychological Measurement
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-04
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 318-330
- ISSN
- 0013-1644 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3888
- OpenAlex
- W2060833301
- Cited by
- 80
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 5.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Educational and Psychological Measurement (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Communication › International Student and Expatriate Challenges
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
- Keywords
- cross-cultural adaptation, intercultural communication, factor structure, psychometric properties, construct validity, university students
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
