Definitely yes we have to validate the translated tool. Of course the original tool should be valid. The reason for the validation [even without translation] is that the tool is being used in a new culture, new sample, new time, and possibly other covariate in the environment [and with translation, a new language].

Best regards

Definitely yes we have to validate the translated tool. Of course the original tool should be valid. The reason for the validation [even without translation] is that the tool is being used in a new culture, new sample, new time, and possibly other covariate in the environment [and with translation, a new language].

Best regards

Yes, you have to assess the face validity so that your question is understood by the respondent and in turn the aimed of the research can be achieved.

I would recommend cognitive interviewing as a technique to be sure that your questions mean the same thing to both you and your respondents. Here is a useful introduction to this technique by a well-known expert, which you can can download here:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259631901_What_Do_Our_Respondents_Think_We%27re_Asking_Using_Cognitive_Interviewing_to_Improve_Medical_Education_Surveys

Article What Do Our Respondents Think We're Asking? Using Cognitive ...

Emphatically Yes!

Multi-item scales are clumsy measures in the first place. There are many assumptions that we make about the nature of human evaluation and response style when we aggregate several 1-5 rating scales, most of which do not hold up to scrutiny. Further, as Muayyad Ahmed above explains, the scales are created at a particular time within a particular culture. Scale validity, both external and internal, is sensitive to who is answering the questions, and the context in which they are answering.

You may find some useful additional resources by looking at the literature on the  C-OAR-SE approach to measurement in the social sciences:

Rossiter, John R, (2002) The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19(4) pp.305–335

doi:10.1016/S0167-8116(02)00097-6

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167811602000976

Finn, Adam and Ujwal Kayande, (2005), How fine is C-OAR-SE? A generalizability theory perspective on Rossiter's procedure, International Journal of Research in Marketing  22(1) pp.11–21

doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2004.03.001

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016781160400059X

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016781160400059X

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167811602000976

absolutely yes .. for example if you're going to study the risk factors for cervical cancer and the tool is asking about muti-partner relationship .. and this is culturally sensitive issue for middle east population! so i totally agree with Dr. Muayyad.

Of course, you need to do so

quality of translation and validation of the translated instruments plays a significant role in ensuring that the results obtained in research are not due to errors in translation, but rather are due to real difference or similarities between cultures in the phenomena being measured.

Some meanings could be lost during translation, you need to be very careful during translation process to retain conceptual meaning rather literal translation. I would suggest to follow Brisilin Model of translation and back translation.

In addition, No objective method to assess face validity, you need to ask some expert people in instrument field to have a look on it. However, I would suggest to calculate content validity index for instrument and item in Arabic Language.

Please have a look on the article:

A systematic approach to cross-cultural adaptation of survey tools

Let me know if I can help further

Good Luck

If you look at published papers, usually people rely on tests of measurement equivalence/invariance, either based on confirmatory factor analysis or item response theory. They compare a sample using the translated version with a sample using the original language version. We provided an overview of these methods and a number of sources in the following article:

Spector, P. E., Liu, C., and Sanchez, J. I. (2015). Methodological and substantive issues in conducting multinational and cross-cultural research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 101-131.

أخي دكتور نضال

أعتقد وجوب التأكد من صدق وثبات المقاييس الإنسانية المترجمة أو المعربة بل والتحقق من كافة الشروط السيكومترية الأخرى؛ وذلك نظرا لاختلاف ثقافات الدول واختلاف عاداتهم وتقاليدهم، وكذلك أرى وجوب التأكد من صدق وثبات المقاييس في المجتمع الواحد كل فترة زمنية نظرا للتغيرات الثقافية التي تحدث في المجتمع الواحد