ArticleEvolutionary human sciences2025
Construct validity in cross-cultural, developmental research: challenges and strategies for improvement.
Article in Evolutionary human sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Motivational Profiles of Adolescent Gaming and Their Associations with Psychopathology and Well-Being.Journal of youth and adolescence · 2026Article
- Developmental Unity and Cultural Variation in Forms of Metarepresentational False Belief Understanding.Developmental science · 2026Article
- Women's mental health: current status and evolutionary perspectives.Evolutionary human sciences · 2026Review
- Human turn-taking development: A multi-faceted review of turn-taking comprehension and production in the first years of life.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- The impact of body image disturbances on social avoidance in burn patients.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recent expansion of cross-cultural research in the social sciences has led to increased discourse on methodological issues involved when studying culturally diverse populations. However, discussions have largely overlooked the challenges of construct validity - ensuring instruments are measuring what they are intended to - in diverse cultural contexts, particularly in developmental research. We contend that cross-cultural developmental research poses distinct problems for ensuring high construct validity owing to the nuances of working with children, and that the standard approach of transporting protocols designed and validated in one population to another risks low construct validity. Drawing upon our own and others' work, we highlight several challenges to construct validity in the field of cross-cultural developmental research, including (1) lack of cultural and contextual knowledge, (2) dissociating developmental and cultural theory and methods, (3) lack of causal frameworks, (4) superficial and short-term partnerships and collaborations, and (5) culturally inappropriate tools and tests. We provide guidelines for addressing these challenges, including (1) using ethnographic and observational approaches, (2) developing evidence-based causal frameworks, (3) conducting community-engaged and collaborative research, and (4) the application of culture-specific refinements and training. We discuss the need to balance methodological consistency with culture-specific refinements to improve construct validity in cross-cultural developmental research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.