What's wrong with cross-cultural comparisons of subjective Likert scales?: The reference-group effect.

TLDR

Social comparison theory suggests that people evaluate themselves against similar others, and because different cultures use different reference groups, cross‑cultural comparisons can be confounded. The authors propose and discuss possible solutions to mitigate the reference‑group effect in cross‑cultural research. Their studies demonstrate that cross‑cultural Likert comparisons fail to reveal expected collectivism differences unless reference groups are manipulated, and that within‑country cultural differences can exceed between‑country differences, showing that differing reference groups compromise such comparisons.

Abstract

Social comparison theory maintains that people think about themselves compared with similar others. Those in one culture, then, compare themselves with different others and standards than do those in another culture, thus potentially confounding cross-cultural comparisons. A pilot study and Study 1 demonstrated the problematic nature of this reference-group effect: Whereas cultural experts agreed that East Asians are more collectivistic than North Americans, cross-cultural comparisons of trait and attitude measures failed to reveal such a pattern. Study 2 found that manipulating reference groups enhanced the expected cultural differences, and Study 3 revealed that people from different cultural backgrounds within the same country exhibited larger differences than did people from different countries. Cross-cultural comparisons using subjective Likert scales are compromised because of different reference groups. Possible solutions are discussed.