Page 292 - Encyclopedia of Nursing Research

InSTRUMenTaTIon n 259

also, some contents and words repre- In summary, instrument translation is a
senting a particular construct (concept) are multistep process of adapting an instrument
difficult to translate into another language developed in one language (SL) into another I
when no comparable concept or word exists language (TL) with sensitivity to the culture
in the TL or when the use of a concept is being studied. Without the established equiv-
slightly different between cultures (Hilton & alence, cross-cultural comparisons using the
Skrutkowski, 2002; Yu et al., 2004). In addition, translated instruments should not be made
a word in the SL may have several meanings because differences found may be due to
in different contexts, thus rendering several translation errors rather than the true dif-
possible translations in the TL. Consequently, ference among cultures. There is a need for
the translators need to focus on the whole nursing to build the consensus on standard
meaning (both denotation and connotation) of guidelines for the processes and evaluation
a sentence, rather than the literal translation, of instrument translation and equivalence.
so that the translated sentence in the TL accu- all studies involving instrument transla-
rately reflects the original intent and specific tion should provide detailed information in
concepts in the instrument (Capitulo, Cornelio, reports to demonstrate that the translation
& Lenz, 2001; Willgerodt et al., 2005). process and testing of equivalence were the-
Without the established equivalence, the oretically and methodologically valid and
research findings are considered inconclusive adequate.
because the difference may be due to trans-
lation errors rather than the true difference Chiemi Kochinda
among groups or cultures (Goulet, Polomeno,
Laizner, Marcil, & Lang, 2003; Jones et al.,
2001). Yet, most published literature on cross-
cultural research fails to provide detailed InstrumentatIon
information on processes and criteria used
to evaluate the equivalence of translated
instruments with the original instruments Instrumentation is a broad term for the activ-
(Tang & Dixon, 2002). Specifically, the fol- ities involved in developing, testing, and
lowing information is essential to determine revising measures of concepts important
the equivalence of the translated instrument to nursing. The term is typically applied to
(Maneesriwongul & Dixon, 2004; Wang, Lee, these processes that relate to psychosocial or
& Fetzer, 2006; Willgerodt et al., 2005): (1) the self-report measures of attitudes and behav-
methods of translation (forward only or both iors. However, instrumentation also refers to
forward and back-translation), (2) the qualifi- the validating of measures for physiological
cation of translators and experts (reviewers), parameters or laboratory devices. The goal
(3) the approach used to examine the equiva- of instrumentation is to produce quantita-
lence (validity) of translation, (4) the process tive values that reduce measurement error
and the results on pretesting of the instru- through consistency, accuracy, and sensi-
ment with monolingual and/or bilingual tivity of the procedure, tool, or survey. For
subjects, (5) the information on psychometric self-report instruments, consistency is analo-
properties, and (6) the criteria used. Without gous to reliability, and accuracy is analogous
this information, it is difficult to fully under- to validity. With laboratory instruments,
stand how translation procedures were validity is also used to describe the accu-
implemented or adapted to maintain the sci- racy of the measures, but precision refers to
entific rigor of instruments and studies while the instrument’s consistency in measure-
being culturally sensitive to the populations ment. Sensitivity is directly applicable to
of interest. both types of measurement and refers to the