The indigenisation of psychological measurement constitutes a major challenge in the

context of indigenising social science research,especially in developing countries of the

world. The paper considers the task of developing and validating indigenous tests as
an important scientific enterprise while recognising the merits of several other viable

strategies. It is asserted that indigenous tests are cultural apparatuses, sensitive to

socio-cultural realities of a given system. Indigenous tests are developed when culture
is treated not as a target, but as a source. Several parameters of test indigenisation are
delineated: these include concept, language, items and materials, ecological setting,
population parameters, format and validation procedures. An empirical scale of asses-
sing test indigenisation is described with a view to measuring indigenisation across
time and studies. The limitations of this approach are also indicated.

Indigenisation of Psychological
Measuremen t: Parameters and
Opera tionalisa tion
FAKIR M. SAHOO

Utkal University

In recent decades the developing countries of the world have been

expressing the ambition of outgrowing their imperialistic and colo-

nial inheritance. Correlated with this nationalistic aspiration, there
have been increasing efforts to indigenise social science research
contents and methods, to make them relevant in the context of na-
tional life, and to render them accelerators of the country’s progress
and development. While neo-colonialism in the form of exposure
to western concepts and methods, imported books and )8urnals,
and Euro-American pattern of thinking dominates the social science
arena, indigenisation efforts are active in Third World countries
like India (Sinha, 1977), Mexico (Diaz-Guerrero, 1977) and the
Philippines (Enquirez, 1977). The voice of discontentment with im-
ported psychology is also heard in China (Chin & Chin, 1969).
Request for reprints should be sent to F.M. Sahoo, Psychology Department, Utkal
University, Bhubaneswar-751 004 (India).

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

2

However, the call for indigenisation has crossed the slogan stage.
Indigenisation as a process of deriving theories, concepts, tools, and
methods from a socio-cultural system and reflecting back upon the
culture has been accepted as a legitimate goal. The development of
indigenous psychology along these lines has been recognised as an
important enterprise (Enquirez, 1990). Central to this- academic
goal are the pragmatic steps needed to evolve indigenous concepts
and methods for explaining human behaviour in a given socio-cul-
tural milieu. The specific steps, however, should not be considered
in isolation. Kumar (1976) refers to three aspects of indigenisation.
Structural indigenisation refers to institutionalised and organisa-
tional capabilities of a nation for the production and diffusion of
social science knowledge. Substantive indigenisation defines the
focusing of a nation’s research and teaching activities on its own so-
cial institutions, conditions, and problems. Theoretic indigenisation
refers to the construction of a distinctive conceptual framework and
meta-theories reflective of their world-views, social and cultural
experiences as well as perceived goals. Since these aspects are inter-
related, indigenisation of psychological research requires support
systems at the structural level.
Although psychologists as a community have a limited role in
accelerating structural indigenisation, their work is likely to lead
to substantive indigenisation. In fact, attempts are manifest in
other social sciences to discard western models and to incorporate
national experiences in the development of indigenous anthropo-
logy (Roy, 1977), economics (Hagen, 1962) and sociology (Castillo,
1963). Greatly stimulated by this changing intellectual climate,
psychologists have intensified their efforts towards theoretic indi-
genisation.
It is important to recognise that measurement constitutes an im-
portant challenge in the task of indigenising psychological research
and evaluation (Puhan & Sahoo, 1991). A number of critics have
pointed out the limitations of the testing tradition because of its em-
phasis on western assumptions of impersonality in testing situations
which are artificial in non-western cultural settings. It is, however,
crucial to strengthen the process of indigenisation. by adopting
what Ligmay (1984) calls total approach and Campbell and Fiske
(1964) term multi-method approach. Despite the limitations of test
environments, measurements based on indigenous viewpoints can
define the being, the personhood of the individual within the

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

 3

institutions of his community (Ligmay, 1984). Findings obtained

from the use of indigenous tests, in combination with alternative ap-
proaches, are likely to provide a wealth of information regarding the
behavioural process.
Indigenous tests are products of cultural experiences. These tests
are developed when investigators design measuring devices that are
sensitive to cultural realities. The distinction between indigenisa-
tion from within and indigenisation. from outside as suggested by
Enquirez (1990) may be useful at this point. The distinguishing feature
involves the direction of the flow. Indigenisation from within
occurs when concepts/methods/theories are identified first in a cul-
ture followed by their codification, recodification, systematisation,

explication and application. Culture serves as a basic source. In

indigenisation from without, culture functions as a target. In
such a process, test modification and translation of imported mate-
rials are first undertaken with a view to subsequent evolution of
theoretic indigenisation and cultural assimilation. The basis of cul-
tural validation of existing test materials, thus, can be regarded as
exogenous.
The emphasis on the development of psychological measurement
responsive to the indigenous culture and realities may lead to the al-
legation of fragmenting social science. However, indigenous tests
are basically motivated by the search for universals. Jacob and Jacob

(1977) observe: &dquo;the variables affecting human relations may differ

radically across national cultures, so that studies within one country
will not provide adequate evidence for universal generalisations
about social dynamics. At least one cannot tell without conducting
comparative studies in a number of differing cultural situations&dquo;.
They further observe that common tools and techniques are essen-
tial for successful comparative research, but they must be relevant to
the circumstances being investigated.
In this context, it should be pointed out that the use of indigenous
tests in their respective socio-cultural milieu may lead to what

Enquirez (1990) calls the cross-indigenisation process. In the cross-

indigenisation method, no distinction is made between a source
culture and a target culture, rather several cultures function as
sources for contributing towards cross-cultural knowledge. It ap-

pears that the cross-indigenisation perspective is preferable to the

traditional cross-cultural approach where etic constructs (often
Euro-American etics, or imposed etics, or pseudo etics) are emically

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

4/

examined in new cultures. Indigenous tests, thus, are considered im-

portant notonly for an accurate recording of human behaviour in a

given cultural system but also for an evolution of global psychology
through cross-indigenisation attempts.
However, the assessment of indigenisation forms a crucial task.
Adair (1992) has developed a system to assess the extent of indigeni-
sation indicated by psychological studies. Applying this system, he
has analysed quantitatively the growth of indigenisation as revealed
by journal articles in Bangladesh, India, and Canada. The analysis
has indicated that the growth of indigenisation of psychological studies
is more rapid in Canada than in India; the growth in India is better
than in Bangladesh.
Although Adair’s system represents a general assessment device
to quantify indigenisation in broad terms, it does not specify vari-
ous aspects of the test environment. The device is useful in measur-

ing indigenisation of psychological research in general. Adair (1992)

has used his system to compare indigenisation of published articles
of journals. Yet, an important gap exists with respect to delineating
the contribution of test indigenisation in the process of maturing of
psychological sciences.
The empirical realisation of indigenising psychological measurement
rests on the identification of operational parameters of indigenous
tests. Two categories of such empirical parameters are concep-
tualised and elaborated: content parameters and context parameters.
A measuring device (see Appendix) based on these conceptualisa-
tions has also been developed by Sahoo (1991).

Content Parameters

Content parameters include the nature, components and format of

indigenous tests. As pointed out earlier, indigenisation on these
dimensions increases to the extent each parameter approximates cul-
tural realities. Further clarification is possible with treatment of
each parameter.

The Conceptual Parameter

Psychological measurements are geared to tap some hypothesised

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

 5

constructs. Other factors remaining constant, test indigenisation is

proportional to
concept indigenisation. Since concepts are building
blocks of social science theories, researchers need to be careful in
deriving indigenous concepts from the storehouse of culture. An in-
digenous concept captures the crystallised experiences of cultural
activities and it is a symbolic expression of commonly shared re-
sponses. As Taylor (1971) puts it, &dquo;We make sense of action when
there is a coherence between the actions of the agent and the meaning
of the situation for him&dquo;.
In the context of the Philippines, Enquirez and Protacio-Mar-
celino (1984) observe: &dquo;An indigenous concept need not be a concept
peculiar only to the Philippines, but the concept should possess a
specific meaning very close and real to the Filipino&dquo;. However,
these authors consider this requirement as the first step towards
concept indigenisation. They further suggest the relation between
the actors’ and the analysts’ concepts.
According to Enriquez (1990), the fusion of horizons, a change of
the stance of both the actor and the social scientist, take place in the
course of the study. As new actors, new researchers, and new situa-
tions appear, the process is repeated in the form of never ending
dialogues. The process generates concepts meaningful to the actors
Deing studied. These derived indigenous concepts are further refined in
the course of cross-indigenisation method.
In the context of the Philippines, Enriquez has suggested the indi-
genous method of pakapa-kapa to derive an indigenous concept. It
is defined on a suppositionless approach characterised by groping,
searching, and probing into an unsystematised mass of social and
cultural data to be able to obtain order, meaning and direction (Torres,
1982).
The essence of using the indigenous method lies in discarding a
&dquo;fore-judgement&dquo;. It is important to recognise that pakapa-kapa, a
method appropriate in the Philippines, may not be suitable in other
cultural systems. Researchers in a specific cultural system need to
adopt an indigenous method to generate indigenous concepts (Kim,
1990).

Language Parameters
The native language provides a rich source of concepts. Efforts to

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

 6

identify emic concepts in the native language have led to a number

of indigenous concepts. Examples of this approach include the
Japanese concept amae (Doi, 1974) and on (Lebra, 1969), the His-
panic concept simpatia (Marin & Triandis, 1985), and the Filipino
concept of pakikisama (Lynch, 1973), kapwa (Enriquez, 1978),
sumpong (Mataragnon, 1977), and utang na loob (Kaut, 1961).
In order to do empirical work to evolve indigenous concepts, we
need to have a vantage point from which to project an indigenous
horizon as against the horizon of western scholars. The continua-
tion of English as the medium of our test language reflects the fact
that not only is English the medium of communication but it also
structures the thinking process. Although the exclusive use of indi-

genous language is not suggested, the active use of the spoken and
written language of a culture is likely to facilitate the development
of concepts and terminology.
A few social scientists have been using language as a heuristic
device. Enriquez, for example, does his theorising in Filipino and
his writing too in this language. This discovery process has merits,
as it helps the writer to rethink concepts and principles and the
-

model in its most simple and elementary forms by counting on the

deep structure of a language.
On the contrary, the use of a foreign language is likely to distort
social reality. As Alfonso’(1977) puts it, the exclusive use of a sup-
posedly international language &dquo;can lead to the neglect of the wealth
of indigenous concepts and methods embodied in a language more
meaningful to the culture&dquo;. She argues that developing and follow-
ing a national language orientation in the conduct of research and
teaching in psychology does not contradict the goals of psychology
in its search for universals, but rather contributes towards it.
Thus, the use of indigenous language as the language of the in-
sider would faithfully reflect the world-view of the respondents.
The extent of departure from this model expression would reduce
test indigenisation.

Item Indigenisation
The arguments advanced in favour of language indigenisation
are applicable to item indigenisation. The components of the tests,
materials, and stimuli should have cultural salience. A number of

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

 /7

items in western textsand tools are meaningful in the western con-

text as they have been conceptualised in an individualistic society.
These items lose their meaning in collectivistic societies.
The degree of familiarity with an experience indicated by an item,
the meaning it carries for them in their socio-cultural milieu, and the
degree of correspondence between the actors’ way of thinking and
the researchers’ way of thinking are the main criteria that determine
item indigenisation.

Format Indigenisation
Indigenous concepts and materials presented in a &dquo;foreign&dquo; way
are inconsistent with the goals of indigenisation. The use of tests in
an &dquo;impersonal format&dquo; as is done in the west may be counter-

productive in societies that are highly collectivistic.

The problem of objectivity versus subjectivity may be raised here.
Western scholars advocate an impersonal format on the ground that
it guarantees objectivity. Yet, as pointed out by Sevilla (1978), the
Filipino experience has documented the utility of people-oriented
&dquo;collective indigenous method&dquo;. She argues that the approach
should be total, even if objectivity is at risk to some extent. A cul-
turally sensitive format may move towards subjective and projective
formats, depending on the prevailing circumstances. Lonner (1990)
has challenged the applicability of western assumptions regarding
test procedures. Sinha (1986) has elaborated Indian experiences in
the context of evolving appropriate techniques of research.
The myth of format appropriateness modelled on the western
pattern has gradually eroded and alternative methods are on the in-
crease in social science research. In India, Puhan (1982) has attemp-
ted to popularise the projective inventory approach, in view of the
high probability and socially desirable responses. Similar indigen-
ous formats of tests and their administration would constitute an
innovative development towards indigenisation.

Context Parameters

The contextual parameters are also an important consideration in

the development and validation of indigenous tests.

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

8

The population parameters be slighted. While develop-

must not

ing a test, careful selection of representative sample is a primary

a

consideration. It does not imply that only esoteric tribes or samples

need to be selected. The appropriateness of sample characteristics
depends upon the primary objective of test development.
In addition to the representativeness of sample characteristics, the
ecological setting is a crucial variable. If the test is developed in
people’s natural habitat, it not only enhances external validity, it
also facilitates the meeting of the actors’ horizon with the resear-
chers’ horizon. In recent years, researchers in general have increas-
ingly become aware of the need to explain human behaviour as it
occurs in the &dquo;natural cultural habitat&dquo;. In order to make meaning-
ful inferences from task performance, the person must have the
required skill, the test must measure that skill, and the test must
provide a natural context where the respondents can call their oper-
ational structure into play (Dash & Mishra, 1988). An evaluation of
ecological proximity indicates test indigenisation.
The process of validating a test is also a cultural experience and
expression. The extent of indigenisation associated with criteria
measures, predictors, and other validation elements provide addi-
tional information with respect to an indigenous test previously (or
concurrently) developed.

Operationalisation and Application

The delineation of indigenisation parameters of psychological

measurement serves the useful function of constructing an effective
assessment procedure. Based on these conceptualisations, Sahoo

(1991) has developed a Test Indigenization Survey Instrument

(TISI) for the assessment of test indigenisation (see Appendix). It
can be used as a self-serving feedback tool for researchers interested
in research indigenisation. Its role in providing peer evaluation of
psychological studies in general and tests in particular is also recog-
nised.
It is, however, admitted that this is the draft version of the scale.
While this scale has been used to chart the development of indigeni-
sation in the use of psychological tests in India, its refinement depends
on further studies. The assessment of test indigenisation through

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

 /9

articles in standard psychological journals published during the

1970s, 1980s and 1990s in India, has been undertaken. Considering
only the test origin, Adair (1989) has documented increasing efforts
of Indian scholars in using culture-specific tests. However, the pre-
sent conceptualisation of test indigenisation goes far beyond the
consideration of Adair’s notion of cultural origin.
Finally, indigenisation of psychological measurement needs to be
approached from the standpoint of building a universal psychology.
The developments of indigenous tests in various parts of the world,
particularly in Third World countries, would be helpful in decenter-
ing psychological research. As a contradistinction to a unicentered
approach, a decentering approach would combine responsiveness
with theory-building.

REFERENCES

ADAIR, J.G. (1989). Indigenous developments in Indian psychology: A quantitative

assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian
Psychological Association, Halifax, Canada.
ADAIR, J.G. (1992). What is indigenous psychology? Insights from operationalising
in measurement. Paper presented at the 10th convention of the International
Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology, Liege, Belgium.
ALFONSO, A.B. (1977). Towards developing Philippine psychology: Language-re-
lated issues in teaching and research. Paper presented at the fourth conference
of the Asian Association on National Languages, University of Malaysia,
Kuala Lumpur.
CAMPBELL, D.T. & FISKE, D.W. (1964). Convergent and discriminant validation by
the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
CASTILLO, G.T. (1964). The role and formation of rural sociology in Asia. Paper pre-
sented at the First World Congress of Rural Sociology, Digon, France.
CHIN, R. & CHIN, A. (1969). Psychological research in communist China, 1949-1966.
Cambridge, Massachussetts: The MIT Press.
DASH, U.N. & MISHRA, H.C. (1988). Testing in ecocultural setting: Some empirical
considerations. In F.M. Sahoo (Ed.), Psychology in Indian context. Agra: Na-
tional Psychological Corporation.
DIAZ-GUERRERO, R. (1977). A Mexican psychology. American Psychologist, 32, 934-
944.
DOI, L. (1974). Amae: A key concept for understanding Japanese personality struc-
ture. In R. Levine (Ed.), Culture and personality. Chicago: Aldine.

ENQUIREZ, V.G. (1977). Filipino psychology in the Third World. Quezon City: Philip-
pine Psychology Research and Training House.
ENQUIREZ, V.G. (1978). Kapwa: A core concept in Filipino social psychology..
Philip-
pine Social Sciences and Humanities Review, 42, 100-108.

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

10

ENQUIREZ, V.G. (Ed.). (1990). Indigenous psychology: A book of readings. Quezon

City: Philippine Psychology Research and Training House.
ENQUIREZ, V.G. & PROTACIO-MARCELINO, E. (1984). Neo-colonial politics and language
struggle in the Philippines (p.30). Quezon City: Philippine Psychology Research
and Training House.
HAGEN, E.L. (1962). On the theory of social change. Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey
Press.
JACOB, B.M. & JACOB, P.E. (1977). The diplomacy of cross-national collaborative re-
search. In K. Kumar (Ed.), Bonds without bondage. Honolulu, Hawaii: East
West Center.
KAUT, C.R. (1961). Utang na loob: A system of contractual obligation among Tagologs.
South-western Journal of Anthropology, 17, 256-272.
KIM, U. (1990). Indigenous psychology: Science and applications. In R.W. Brislin (Ed.),
Applied cross-cultural psychology. London: Sage.
KUMAR, K. (1976). Indigenization and transnational cooperation in the social sciences.
Paper presented at the conference on Emerging Issues in Culture Relation,
Honolulu, Hawaii.
LEBRA, T.S. (1969). Reciprocity and the asymmetric principle: An analytical reapprai-
sal of the Japanese concept of on. Psychologia, 12,
129-138.
LIGMAY, A.V. (1984). Western psychology in the Philippines: Impact and response.
In-
ternational Journal of Psychology, 19, 31-44.
LONNER, W.J. (1990). An overview of cross cultural testing and assessment. In
R.W. Brislin (Ed.), Applied cross-cultural psychology. London: Sage.
LYNCH, F. (1973). Social acceptance reconsidered. In F. Lynch & A. de Guzman II
(Eds.), Four readings on Philippine values (pp. 1-68). Quezon City: Manila Uni-
versity Press.
MARIN, G. & TRIANDIS, H.C. (1985). Allocentrism as an important characteristic of the
behaviour of Latin Americans and Hispanics. In R. Diaz Guerrero (Ed.), Cross-
cultural and national studies in social psychology (pp. 85-104). Amsterdam:
Elsevier.
MATARAGNON, R.H. (1977). A conceptual and psychological analysis of sumpong.
Philippine Journal of Psychology, 10,
45-53.
PUHAN, B.N. (1982). Issue in psychological measurement. Agra: National Psychological
Corporation.
PUHAN, B.N. SAHOO, F. M. (1991). Indigenization of psychological studies: Research
&
agenda. Current Journal of Psychological Research, 6
(2), 101-107.
ROY, R. (1977). Social science cooperation in Asia. UNESCO International Cooperation
in the Social Sciences. Paris: UNESCO.
SAHOO, F. M. (1991). Test Indigenization Survey Instrument. Unpublished report,
Utkal University, Bhubaneswar.
SEVILLA, J.C. (1978). Indigenous research methods: Evaluating first returns. Quezon
City: Philippine Psychology Research and Training House.
SINHA, D. (1977). Orientation and attitude of the social psychologist in a developing

country: The Indian case. International Review of Applied Psychology, 26,

1-10.
SINHA, D. (1986). Psychology in a third world country: The Indian experience. New
Delhi: Sage.

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

 11

TAYLOR, C. (1971). Interpretation and the science of man. Review of Metaphysics, 23.
TORRES, A.T. (1982). "Pakapa-Kapa" as an approach in Philippine psychology. In
Rogelio Pe-Pua (Ed.), Filipino psychology. Quezon City: Philippine Psychol-
ogy Research and Training House.

I
Author’s Note

The Test Indigenization Survey Instrument (TISI) developed by

the author is in the process of application. It is likely that the author
would complete data collection and analysis prior to its further
refinement. It would be possible to present data regarding test indi-
genisation in India during the 1970s and 1980s.
The Test Indigenization Survey Instrument (TISI) has been de-
veloped to assess test indigenisation. Please consider each test across
the parameter indicated below and check at appropriate places.
Within each parameter, alternatives have been arranged in an in-
creasing order of indigenisation. This would offer a quantitative
score for each parameter; the total indigenisation score can thus be

computed by summing across parameters.

You may record the following information prior to checking ap-
propriate alternative for each parameter.
Test name
Author -

With institutional affiliarion

Title of article indicating its use
Journal
Volume No. Year Page ――――

1. Concept Indicate the nature of the construct. (Check one).

Completely alien concept (not familiar in the culture being studied).
Somewhat alien.
Somewhat alien, but has been acculturated.
Culturally rooted. ,

Very much rooted in culture.

2. Language of testinglinstruetion. (Check one).
Foreign language (English).

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

12

Foreign language accompanied by explanatory notes in local language.

Language of the majority (national language).
Standardised local language (language of school).
Local dialects (language of home).

3. Test items/material. (Check one).

Borrowed without change.
Borrowed with minor word changes. ’

Translated verbatim.
Translated with minor word changes. ,

Adapted.
Derived from cross-comparisons.
Emically derived.
4. Ecological context setting. (Check one). >

Developed in a context/setting which is very remote to the target population.

Developed in a context/setting which is not very far from the target population’s
setting.
Developed in a context/setting which is roughly similar to the target popula-
tion’s.
Developed in a context/setting similar to the target population’s. ’

Developed in a natural habitat (ecological setting) of the population.

S. Participants in test development study. (O~heck one).
Sample completely different from the target population.
Sample substantially different.
Sample somewhat different.
Sample slightly different.
Sample closely similar to the target population.
6. Formatlprocedure. (Check one).
Completely unfamiliar with the procedure.
Very unfamiliar.
Somewhat unfamiliar.
Familiar, but not oft used in daily rounds.
Familiar and oft used in daily chores.

7. Validation procedure. (Check one).

Used without validation.
’

Validated on a similar sample.

Validated on an appropriate local sample.
Validated with respect to all the parameters listed (items 1 through 6).
Validated with respect to all the parameters by several independent researches.

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015

 13

Note. While reviewing tests used in a journal article, information pertaining to all
these sevenparameters may not be available. In such cases, a short version of this in-
strument consisting of items 1, 2, and 6 should be used and reported.

Fakir M. Sahoo is Reader in the Department of Psychology, Utkal University,

Bhubaneswar, India. His current research interests include learned helplessness and
cultural research.

Downloaded from pds.sagepub.com at James Cook University on March 17, 2015