Pembangunan Teori dan Penilaian Kebolehpercayaan Pengukuran dalam Perbandingan Silang Budaya

MOHD. HELMI ABD. RAHIM (Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, mhelmi@ukm.my), NORDIN @ JUSOH MUHAMAD (Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, j.nordin@ukm.my)

Abstract


This article begins with a discussion of the theory - the dynamic constructs of personality bearing upon conflict within and between people. The six dynamics are range of feelings, task energy, respect for community, respect for the others, desire for control and concern for one's own self-uniqueness. The six dynamics is designed to measure the degree to which one is predisposed to handle conflict. The measurement concerned is the Communication-Conflict Instrument. The problem with measurement comparability in cross-cultural studies arises when researchers attempt to attribute differences in obtained scores to cultural influences. Thus, this study reports the reliability of Communication-Conflict Instrument of American and Malaysia subjects, comparatively. The instrument functions well in both cultures. Reliability assessments is a basis for determining the appropriateness of using standardized instruments although the evidence comparability is inconclusive.

ABSTRAK

Artikel ini bermula dengan perbincangan teori konstruk dinamik personaliti dengan tumpuan kepada konflik dalaman dan di antara perorangan. Enam dinamik tersebut ialah jarak perasaan, tenaga tugas, hormat pada komuniti, hormat pada orang lain, keinginan untuk mengawal dan mementingkan keunikan kendiri perorangan. Enam dinamik ini dibentuk untuk mengukur tahap mana seseorang dipengaruhinya untuk mengendalikan konflik. Pengukuran yang dimaksudkan ialah pengukuran komunikasi-konflik. Masalah yang timbul di dalam kesesuaian pengukuran di dalam kajian silang budaya ialah apabila penyelidik cuba menghasilkan perbezaan dengan memperolehi skor terhadap pengaruh budaya. Justeru, kajian ini melaporkan kebolehpercayaan pengukuran komunikasi-konflik dengan membandingkan subjek Amerika dan Malaysia. Pengukuran ini berfungsi dengan baik di dalam kedua-dua budaya. Penilaian kebolehpercayaan adalah asas dalam menentukan kesesuaian menggunakan pengukuran yang standard walaupun bukti perbandingan tersebut tidak muktamad.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Bales R.F. 1951. Interaction Process Analysis, Mass: Addison-Wesley.

Bales R.F. & Couch A.S. 1969. The Value Profile: A Factor Analytic Study of Value Statement. Sociological Inquiry 39: 1.

Brown C.T., Yelsma P. & Keller P.W. 1981. Communication-Conflict Predisposition: Development of a Theory and an Instrument. Human Relations 34(2): 1103-1117.

Borgotta E.F., Cottrell L.S. & Mann J.M. 1958. The Spectrum of Individual Interaction Characteristics: An Interdimensional Analysis. Psychology Report 4: 279-319.

Blake R.R. & Mouton J.S. 1964. The Managerial Grid. Houston.

Calder B.J., Philips L.W. & Tybout A.M. 1981. Designing Research for Application. Journal of Consumer Research 8: 197-207.

Cohen J. 1977. Statistical Power Analysis For The Behavioral Sciences. San Diego, Ca.:Academic Press.

Cronbach L.J. 1960. Essentials of Psychological Testing. New York: Harper & Row.

Ervin S. & Bower R.T. 1953. Translation Problems In International Surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly 16: 595-604.

Foa U.G. 1966. Perception of Behavior in Reciprocal Roles: The Ringex Model. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied 80: 623.

Foa U.G. & Foa E. 1969. Resource Exchange: Toward A Structural Theory of Interpersonal Communication. D h . Siegman A. W. & Pope P. (eds), Studies in Dyadic Communication. New York: Pergamon Press.

Henry W.E. 1961. Projective Tests in Cross-Cultural Research. Dlm. Kaplan E (ed.) Studying Personality Cross Culturally. New York: Harper & Row. Hall J. 1969. Conflict Management Survey: A Survey of One's Characteristic

Reaction to and Handling of Conflict Between Himself and Others. Conroe, Texas: Teleometrics International.

Jackson D.D. 1959. Family Interaction, Family Homeostasis and Some Implications for Conjoint Family Psycho Therapy. Dlm. Masseman J.H. (ed.) Individual and Family Dynamics. New York: Grune & Stratton.

Kilmanu R.H. & Thomas K.W. 1975. Interpersonal Conflict-Handling Behaviour As Reflections of Jnngian Personality Dimensions. Psychology Reports 37: 971-980.

Kilmann R.H. & Thomas K.W. 1977. Developing a Forced-Choice Measure of Conflict Handling Behavior: The 'Mode' Instruments. Educational and Psychology Measurement 37: 309-325.

Kerlinger F.N. 1986 Foundation of Behavioral Research (3rd. ed). Orlando FL: Holt Rinehart & Winston.

Leary T. 1957 Interpersonal Diagnosis of Personality. New York: The Ronald Press Co.

Likert R. & Likert J.G. 1976. New Ways of Managing Conflict. New York McGraw Hill.

Lawrence P.R. & Lorch J.W. 1967. Organization and Environment. Boston: Harvard University.

Maslow A.H. 1971. The Farther Peaches of Human Nature. New York: Charles Scribner's Sone.

Niebuht R. 1936. Moral Man and Immoral Society. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Nunnally J.C. 1967. Psychometric Theory, (2nd. ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Nunnally J.C. 1978. Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Nik Rahimah N.Y. & Ismail R. 1992. Reliability Assessment for Cross-Cultural Measurement Comparability. Jurnal Pengurusan, 11: 15-24.

Osgood C.E. Suci G.J. & Tannenbaum P.H. 1957. The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press.

Przeworski A. & Teune H. 1966. Equivalence in Cross-National Research. Public Opinion Quarterly. 30: 551-604.

Sears R.R. 1961. Transcultural Variables and Conceptual Equivalence. Dlm. Kaplan B. (ed.) Studying Personality Cross-Cultural. New York: Harper & Row.

Swensen C.H. 1973. Introduction to Interpersonal Relations, Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Co.

Schaefer E.S. 1959. A Circumplex Modal for Maternal Behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 59: 226-235.

Schutz W.C. 1958. FIRO: A Three-Dimensional Theory of Interpersonal Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart &Winston Inc.

Stiskin H. 1972. The Looking Glass Good. Brookline, Mass.: Autumn Press.

Verba S. 1971. Cross-national survey research: The Problem of Credibility. Dlm. Vallier I. (ed.), Comparative Methods in Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Winter L. G. & Prohaska C.R.1983. Methodological Problems in the Comparative Analysis of International Marketing System. Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science 11 (Fall): 417-432.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN: 0126-5008

eISSN: 0126-8694