Adapting a psychological instrument on the “hard-to-survey” population: the case of poor people in Russia

This paper addresses the issue of adapting the instrument on a “hard-to-survey” sample (poor people). The adaptation consisted of three stages: (1) the translation of scales that have not been previously adapted on a Russian sample, (2) cognitive interviews with people living in poverty, (3) adjusting the questionnaire based on the results of cognitive interviews. We used translation — back translation, as well as committee approach, to translate the scales. Cognitive interviews were conducted using a concurrent probing approach with both scripted and spontaneous probes. In the conclusion, we present the results of reliability analysis and equivalence of measures across the poor (N=162) and non-poor (N=188) samples. Finally, we formulate recommendations for researchers dealing with “hard-to-survey” samples among the poor.

1. Brislin R.W. Back-translation for cross-cultural research // Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 1970. Vol. 1(3). P. 185—216. doi:10.1177/135910457000100301
2. Cronbach L.J. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests // Psychometrika. 1951. Vol. 16(3). P. 297—334. doi:10.1007/BF02310555
3. Diener E.D.,  Emmons  R.A.,  Larsen  R.J.,  Griffin  S.  The  satisfaction  with  life scale // Journal of Personality Assessment. 1985. Vol. 49(1). P. 71—75. doi:10.1207/ s15327752jpa4901_13
4. Farah M.J. The  Neuroscience  of  Socioeconomic  Status:  Correlates,  Causes,  and Consequences // Neuron. 2017. Vol. 96(1). P. 56—71. doi:10.1016/j. neuron.2017.08.034
5. Goodman E., Adler N.E., Kawachi I., Frazier A.L., Huang B., Colditz G.A. Adolescents’ perceptions of social status: development and evaluation of a new indicator // Pediatrics. 2001. Vol. 108(2). P. e31—e31. doi:10.1542/peds.108.2.e31
6. Gray-Little B., Williams V.S. L.,  Hancock  T.D. An item response theory analysis of  the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1997. Vol. 23(5). P. 443—451. doi:10.1177/0146167297235001
7. Griskevicius V., Ackerman J.M., Cant S.M., Delton A.W., Robertson T.E., Simpson J.A., Thompson M.E., Tybur J.M. When the economy falters, do people spend or save? Responses to resource scarcity depend on childhood environments // Psychological Science 2013. Vol. 24(2). P. 197—205. doi: 10.1177/0956797612451471
8. Hackman D.A., Betancourt  L.M.,  Gallop  R.,  Brodsky  A.,  Giannetta  J.M.,  Hurt  H.,  Farah M.J. Mapping the trajectory of socioeconomic disparity in working memory: Parental and neighborhood factors // Child Development. 2014. Vol. 85(4). P. 1433— 1445. doi:10.1111/cdev.12242
9. Hard-to-survey Populations / R. Tourangeau, B. Edwards, T.P. Johnson, N. Bates, K.M. Wolter (Eds.). Cambridge University Press, 2014. 676 p.
10. Kraus M.W., Piff P.K., Keltner D. Social class, sense of  control,  and  social explanation // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2009. Vol. 97(6). P. 992— 1004. doi:10.1037/a0016357
11. Mani A., Mullainathan S., Shafir E., Zhao J. Poverty Impedes Cognitive Function // Science. 2013. Vol. 341(6149). P. 976—980.  doi:10.1126/science.1238041
12. Rosenberg M. Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSE) // Acceptance and commitment therapy. Measures Package. 1961. Vol. 61. P. 52.
13. chwartz S.H., Cieciuch J., Vecchione M., Davidov E., Fischer R., Beierlein C., Ramos A., Verkasalo M., Lönnqvist J.-E., Demirutku K., Dirilen-Gumus O., Konty M. Refining the theory of basic individual values // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2012. Vol. 103(4). P. 663—688.  doi:10.1037/a0029393
14. Schwarzer R., Jerusalem M. Generalized Self-Efficacy scale // Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs. 1995. P. 35—37.
15. Seuntjens T.G., Zeelenberg M., van de Ven N., Breugelmans S.M. Dispositional greed // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2015. Vol. 108(6). P. 917—933. doi:10.1037/ pspp0000031
16. Sprotles G.B., Kendall E.L. A methodology for profiling consumers’ decision-  making styles // Journal of Consumer Affairs. 1986. Vol. 20(2). P. 267—279. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6606.1986.tb00382.x
17. Tai S.H. Shopping styles of working Chinese females // Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. 2006. Vol. 12(3). P. 191—203. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2004.06.003
18. Tangney J. P., Baumeister R. F., Boone A.L. High self-control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success // Journal of Personality. 2004. Vol. 72(2). P. 271—324. doi:10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x
19. Van de Vijver F., Leung K. Methods and Data Analysis of Comparative Research. Allyn & Bacon, 1997. 300 p.
20. Van de Vijver F., Tanzer N.K. Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment // European Review of Applied Psychology. 1997. Vol. 47(4). P. 263—279.
21. Weber E.U., Blais A.R., Betz N.E. A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors // Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 2002. Vol. 15(4). P. 263—290. doi:10.1002/bdm.414
22. Willis G.B. Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Sage Publications, 2004. 352 p.
23. Yamagishi T. The provision of a sanctioning system as a public good // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986. Vol. 51(1). P. 110—116.