TY - JOUR
T1 - Rating versus ranking
T2 - What is the best way to reduce response and language bias in cross-national research?
AU - Harzing, Anne-Wil
AU - Baldueza, Joyce
AU - Barner-Rasmussen, Wilhelm
AU - Barzantny, Cordula
AU - Canabal, Anne
AU - Davila, Anabella
AU - Espejo, Alvaro
AU - Ferreira, Rita
AU - Giroud, Axele
AU - Koester, Kathrin
AU - Liang, Yung-Kuei
AU - Mockaitis, Audra
AU - Morley, Michael J.
AU - Myloni, Barbara
AU - Odusanya, Joseph O. T.
AU - O'Sullivan, Sharon Leiba
AU - Palaniappan, Ananda Kumar
AU - Prochno, Paulo
AU - Choudhury, Srabani Roy
AU - Saka-Helmhout, Ayse
AU - Siengthai, Sununta
AU - Viswat, Linda
AU - Soydas, Ayda Uzuncarsili
AU - Zander, Lena
PY - 2009/8
Y1 - 2009/8
N2 - We propose solutions to two recurring problems in cross-national research: response style differences and language bias. In order to do so, we conduct a methodological comparison of two different response formats-rating and ranking. For rating, we assess the effect of changing the commonly used 5-point Likert scales to 7-point Likert scales. For ranking, we evaluate the validity of presenting respondents with short scenarios for which they need to rank their top 3 solutions. Our results - based on two studies of 1965 undergraduate and 1714 MBA students in 16 different countries - confirm our hypotheses that both solutions reduce response and language bias, but show that ranking generally is a superior solution. These findings allow researchers to have greater confidence in the validity of cross-national differences if these response formats are used, instead of the more traditional 5-point Likert scales. In addition, our findings have several practical implications for multinational corporations, relating to issues such as selection interviews, performance appraisals, and cross-cultural training. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AB - We propose solutions to two recurring problems in cross-national research: response style differences and language bias. In order to do so, we conduct a methodological comparison of two different response formats-rating and ranking. For rating, we assess the effect of changing the commonly used 5-point Likert scales to 7-point Likert scales. For ranking, we evaluate the validity of presenting respondents with short scenarios for which they need to rank their top 3 solutions. Our results - based on two studies of 1965 undergraduate and 1714 MBA students in 16 different countries - confirm our hypotheses that both solutions reduce response and language bias, but show that ranking generally is a superior solution. These findings allow researchers to have greater confidence in the validity of cross-national differences if these response formats are used, instead of the more traditional 5-point Likert scales. In addition, our findings have several practical implications for multinational corporations, relating to issues such as selection interviews, performance appraisals, and cross-cultural training. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
KW - Cross-national research
KW - Research methods
KW - Response style differences
KW - Language bias
KW - Survey research
KW - CULTURAL ACCOMMODATION
KW - HONG-KONG
KW - STYLE
KW - VALUES
KW - PERFORMANCE
KW - DIMENSIONS
KW - ISSUES
KW - IMPACT
U2 - 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2009.03.001
DO - 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2009.03.001
M3 - Article
SN - 0969-5931
VL - 18
SP - 417
EP - 432
JO - International Business Review
JF - International Business Review
IS - 4
ER -