Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40548335›Full record

ArticleEvolutionary human sciences2025

Construct validity in cross-cultural, developmental research: challenges and strategies for improvement.

Nicole J Wen, Dorsa Amir, Jennifer M Clegg, Helen E Davis, Natalia B Dutra, Michelle A Kline, Sheina Lew-Levy, Tanya MacGillivray, Gairan Pamei, Yitong Wang and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Nicole J WenDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Culture & Evolution, Brunel University London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8471-4876
Dorsa AmirDepartment of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0255-0228
Jennifer M CleggDepartment of Psychology, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5655-9899
Helen E DavisSchool of Human Evolution and Social Change & the Institute of Human Origins, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8880-354X
Natalia B DutraGraduate Program in Neurosciences and Behavior, Universidad Federal do Pará, Belém, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0766-0795
Michelle A KlineDepartment of Psychology, Centre for Culture & Evolution, Brunel University London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1998-6928
Sheina Lew-LevyDepartment of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1250-6418
Tanya MacGillivrayDepartment of Psychology, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5937-5144
Gairan PameiDepartment of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7646-8094
Yitong WangDepartment of Psychology, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3545-9228
Jing XuDepartment of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7414-9383
Bruce S RawlingsDepartment of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9682-9216

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

childrencommunity-engaged researchconstruct validitycross-culturalculture-specific trainingmethodology

Identifiers

PMID40548335
PMCPMC12179541

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.