All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Assessing the Reliability and Validity of the Generalized Ethnocentrism Scale
Unformatted Document Text:  Assessing Reliability 10 conjunction with a cognitive and affective orientation that places the ingroup is a position of centrality and superiority. Conceptually, then, ethnocentric persons perceive their ingroups (cultural, racial, ethnic, etc) as better than outgroups. A valid measure of ethnocentrism should include scale items that draw upon the ingroup-outgroup and the "my group is better than your group" distinction. The items in the revised GENE scale appear to reflect such distinctions. For example, such representative items as "Other cultures should try to be more like my culture," "Lifestyles in other cultures are not a valid as those in my culture," and "My culture should be the role model for other cultures," seem, on the face of it, to tap into the conceptual roots of ethnocentrism. Moreover, McCroskey’s (2001) factor analyses of the scale point to its unidimensionality. The 15 items used for scoring ethnocentrism consistently form a single factor when subjected to factor analysis. Criterion-related validity refers to the extent to which the measurement device is predictive of other theoretically linked concepts or behaviors that are external to the measurement device itself (Nunnally, 1978). There are two types of criterion-related validity, including predictive validity and concurrent validity. Predictive validity refers to an instrument’s ability to calculate and/or estimate some other outcome (e.g., attitudes or behaviors). For example, Frey, Botan, and Kreps (2000) point to ACT and SAT scores as predictors of success in college. Most college admissions departments view the ACT and SAT as valid indicators of the likelihood that a particular student will succeed in college. Indeed, many colleges and universities are so confident in the predictive validity of the ACT and SAT that they offer valuable scholarships to those students who score well on them. Although the data are limited,

Authors: Neuliep, James W..
first   previous   Page 10 of 25   next   last



background image
Assessing Reliability
10
conjunction with a cognitive and affective orientation that places the ingroup is a position of
centrality and superiority. Conceptually, then, ethnocentric persons perceive their ingroups
(cultural, racial, ethnic, etc) as better than outgroups. A valid measure of ethnocentrism should
include scale items that draw upon the ingroup-outgroup and the "my group is better than your
group" distinction. The items in the revised GENE scale appear to reflect such distinctions. For
example, such representative items as "Other cultures should try to be more like my culture,"
"Lifestyles in other cultures are not a valid as those in my culture," and "My culture should be the
role model for other cultures," seem, on the face of it, to tap into the conceptual roots of
ethnocentrism. Moreover, McCroskey’s (2001) factor analyses of the scale point to its
unidimensionality. The 15 items used for scoring ethnocentrism consistently form a single factor
when subjected to factor analysis.
Criterion-related validity refers to the extent to which the measurement device is
predictive of other theoretically linked concepts or behaviors that are external to the
measurement device itself (Nunnally, 1978). There are two types of criterion-related validity,
including predictive validity and concurrent validity. Predictive validity refers to an instrument’s
ability to calculate and/or estimate some other outcome (e.g., attitudes or behaviors). For
example, Frey, Botan, and Kreps (2000) point to ACT and SAT scores as predictors of success in
college. Most college admissions departments view the ACT and SAT as valid indicators of the
likelihood that a particular student will succeed in college. Indeed, many colleges and
universities are so confident in the predictive validity of the ACT and SAT that they offer
valuable scholarships to those students who score well on them. Although the data are limited,


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 10 of 25   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.