Abstract
Objective
Amelioration of cross‐cultural and cross‐language impacts on scale validity should be of concern to the researcher. The Hierarchical Personality Inventory for Children, (HiPIC), a 144‐item Five‐Factor Model Flemish personality scale, is both a cross‐cultural and language scale in Australia. The present study is a mixed method validation study of the translated version of the HiPIC for use within the Australian context.
Method
Cognitive interviewing of 10 end‐users of the HiPIC identified potentially confusing items. Alternate items were generated by a team of developmental psychologists. A further sample of parents/carers of children aged 5–14 years (N = 399) completed the HiPIC items. Iterative single‐factor principal component analyses of the internal structure of facets were used to select psychometrically defensible items for an adapted HiPIC or HiPIC‐A. The hierarchical model of the HiPIC‐A was then confirmed against a Flemish HiPIC sample using Procrustes rotation, with external validity considered by comparison to the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire.
Results
The resulting HiPIC‐A, reduced to 124 items including 13 adapted items, achieved sound internal consistency and high total congruence (0.98) with the Flemish sample. Regression against the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire demonstrated further support for external validity of the HiPIC‐A.
Conclusion
The mixed method design was an effective approach to a cross‐language cultural adaptation and validation of the HiPIC, confirming the robust nature of the HiPIC model. The potential for the adapted HiPIC‐A to identify adaptive and maladaptive developmental trajectories in Australian children has important implications for practice and further research. On‐going validation is outlined.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to offer thanks to Professor Filip De Fruyt for granting the Personality, Abilities, and Individual Differences research team at Monash University permission to conduct research utilising the English‐translated HiPIC in Australia. This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not‐for‐profit sectors. There are no conflicts of interest to declare and all authors have provided significant contribution to the process and are in agreement with article submission.
Notes
1. A more detailed explanation can be sought from the first author.
2. For further explanation of this process refer to Hopkinson et al. (Citation2014).