TEST ADAPTATION

AMIT KUMAR SHUKLA

BANARAS HINDU UNIVERSITY

VARANASI INDIA

Originalinstrument

Translation 1

Translation 2

Synthesized translated

version

dsEvaluation by committee of

experts.

fEvaluation by target population

Adequate

YesNo

Back translation

Adjustments

Back translation

Back translation 1

Back translation 2

Synthesized translated

version

Presentation of the new version to the another of the original instrument

Adequate

Yes No

Pilot study

Discussion with the author of the original

instrument

STAGES OF THE TRANSLATION PROCESS AND THE ADAPTATION OF INSTRUMENTS

1) Instrument translation into the new language:-

Translation from the source language to target language

Final version should be consistent with original version

An appropriate translation requires a balanced treatment of linguistic, cultural, contextual & scientific information(tanzer2005)

the presence of at least two bilingual translators is now recommended for completing this process, thereby minimizing the risk of linguistic, psychological, cultural and both theoretical & practical understanding biases.(cassepp- borgeset.al. 2010)Translator should be fully proficient in both language of interest & familiar with the cultures associated with the respective language of each group.(Hambleton 1994, 2005)

Translator are expected to understand the construct and have to both scientific writing skills and familiarity with subjects( cassepp-borges et. Al. 2000 & Hambleton1994, 2005.

2) Synthesis of the Translated Versions:-

The researcher should have at least two version of the translated instrument

In summarizing process, researcher compare the different translations & assesses their semantic, idiomatic, conceptual, linguistic and contextual difference.

Two possible source of complication- A) complex translation that may hinder the understanding of the population for whom the instrument is intended.B) Overly the simplistic translation that underestimate the item content.

The committee should assesses the compatibility between the translated version and original instrument in the 4 areas- A) semantic equivalence

B) idiomatic equivalenceC) experiential equivalenceD) conceptual equivalence

A) Semantic equivalence which aims to assess whether the words have the same meaning, whether the item has more than one meaning and whether there are grammatical errors.

B) Idiomatic equivalence which refers to assessing whether the items from original instrument that are difficult to translate were changed into an equivalent expression that has the cultural meaning of the item.

C) Experiential equivalence which refers to noting whether a particular item is applicable in the new culture and, if not, replacing it with an equivalent item.

D) Conceptual equivalence which seeks to assess whether a given term or expression, even if properly translated, assesses the same aspect in different culture.

The choice of which versions to use must be made through consensus among the judges, never by imposition.( Gjersing et. al., 2010.

When possible, an external observer should be prompted to transcribe the entire synthesis process, especially regarding choice of items to be used.( Beaton et. al. 2000)

3) Evaluation of the Synthesized version by Experts:-

Experts will assess important aspects such as structure, layout, instrument instructions and both the scope and adequacy of expressions contain in items.

Aspects of instrument layout will also analyzed because they are as the indispensable as linguistic aspects of the items.

The clarity of content, the suitability of font formats & sizes, the arrangement of information on the instrument, inter alia are also analyzed.

4) Evaluation by the Target Population:-

This stage of the process aims to verify whether the items, the response scale & the instructions are comprehensible for the target population.

This procedure aims to investigate whether the instructions are clear, whether the terms found in items are appropriate, whether the expressions corresponds to those used by groups.

The subjects who participate in this step may vary depending on the characteristics of the respondent for whom the instrument is intended.

When a given item is not clear, the respondent is encouraged to provide synonyms that best exemplify the vocabulary of the group for whom the instrument is intended.

The stage of the evaluation by the target population may be conducted one or more times, depending on the need and the complexity of the instrument to be adapted.

5) Back translation:-

Back translation also suggested as an additional quality control check(sireci et. al., 2006)Back translation refers to translating the synthesized and revised versions of the instrument of source language

It’s aim is to evaluate the extent to which the translated versions reflects the items content of the original versions.

Back translation must be performed by at least two translators other than those who performed the first translation

Back translation process should be used as a tool to identify to identify the words that were not clear in the target language and to identify inconsistencies or conceptual errors in the final version(Beaton et. al. 2000)

When the author has access to the back translated version of the instrument, the author may state the whether the item share the same meanings as those of the original items.The author must be aware the possibility of meaning of the word of the item in it’s appropriate cultural context.

6) Pilot study:-The pilot study refers to a previous application of the instrument in a small sample that reflects the target population characteristics.(gudmundsson, 2009)

Once again, the appropriateness of items regarding their meaning & difficulty. In addition to instruction for conducting test, should be assessed during this process.

After considering modification suggested in the first pilot study, a second pilot study is necessary to assess whether the instrument is ready for used.

To avoid any type of bias, the change suggested by the pilot study should be implemented with the help of committee experts and should never be performed solely by field researcher

ASPECTS OF VALIDATING THE ADAPTED INSTRUMENT:-

For Herdman, Fox-Rushby, & Badia;1997 & Hui & trinadis; 1985, conceptual idiomatic equivalence is the first aspect that attained through the adaptation process.

Qualitative methods are essential for ensuring the appropriateness of the adaption process. They provide no information on the psychometrics proprieties of instrument.(Eremenco, cella & Arnold; 2005)

Stastical analyses must be performed to assess the extent to which the instrument can be considered valid for use in deginated context.

The steps required during the validation of psychological instrument are diverse(Uribna; 2007) and there is no consensus on how much validity must be possess for it to be considered valid.

1) Evidence of Instrument Validity in the New Context:-

The first step in the validation of an instrument included the evaluations of it’s factorial structure.

One should discuss possible change that occur during validation studies in light of quantitative & qualitative aspects.

The confirmatory factor analysis and exploratory factor analysis should be used to assist the researcher in his/her choice of a structure that most plausible for the sample.

2) Validation of Instruments for Cross-Cultural Studies:-

The concept of equivalence that refers not only to the qualitative aspects of the adapted instrument but also to the non-biased measurement between the adapted instruments and it’s original source.

The researcher must simultaneously assess the measure compatibility within the various groups.

Multi-group confirmatory factor analysis(MGCFA), Differential item functioning(DIF), proposed by item response theory(IRT) and multi-dimensional scaling(MDS) may be valuable ways to assessing measurement variance.

The validity of the assumption of factorial invariance between groups is crucial for development and adaption of psychological instrument and for the comparisons of the groups in cross- cultural studies.