The Cultural Element in the Adaptation of a Test: Proposals and Reflections on Internal and External Influences
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The subject is interesting and indeed very recurrent, although there are many doubts about how to adapt an instrument in different cultures. This is why the topic is relevant.
The introduction is clear and complete, with relevant literature to expand on the subject. It seems that it fills an essential gap in the literature, although I consider it necessary to include additional information:
1) Indicate in the abstract how the adaptation was performed in a brief manner.
2) Present the questions that were answered by the judges and some comparative tables with the results.
3)To deepen how the pilot test was conducted, the characteristics of the participants, what data were obtained, and how this information was analyzed.
I consider that by deepening in the analysis form it can guide similar studies and also be of reference.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
In the following, we explain the changes made in relation to your comments.
The subject is interesting and indeed very recurrent, although there are many doubts about how to adapt an instrument in different cultures. This is why the topic is relevant.
First and foremost, thank you very much for your feedback.
The introduction is clear and complete, with relevant literature to expand on the subject. It seems that it fills an essential gap in the literature, although I consider it necessary to include additional information:
1) Indicate in the abstract how the adaptation was performed in a brief manner.
We have included in the abstract the basic aspects of the process followed. In particular:
“The process of "emic-etic" adaptation, in which a technical, semantic, conceptual and metric equivalence of the test is sought, has been carried out through group translation, with post-translation empirical processes (expert judgement, a pilot study and external criteria)” (p. 1, l. 10-13)
2) Present the questions that were answered by the judges and some comparative tables with the results.
Section 4 of the article, " First steps in test validity and the search for metric equivalence", has been restructured by adding features of the evaluation sheet filled in by the expert judges, and also a further description of the results. The latter has also been considered for the pilot study and the comparison with the external criterion.
Tables 2 and 3 with statistics in relation to the items and dimensions have been included.
All these changes can be found on pages 6, 7 and 8 of the article.
3)To deepen how the pilot test was conducted, the characteristics of the participants, what data were obtained, and how this information was analyzed. I consider that by deepening in the analysis form it can guide similar studies and also be of reference.
We have increased the information on this. Among other additional information, we have included the following about the participants and the analysis:
“Second, a pilot study was carried out with 64 8th grade (i.e., 13-to-14-year-old) Portuguese students (26 boys, 38 girls). Using the statistical packages IBM SPSS Statistics (version 24.0.0) and MPlus, descriptive statistics, Cronbach's α, ease and discrimination indices of the items were calculated and a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted” (p. 7, l. 244-248)
Best regards
Reviewer 2 Report
Congratulation for your article.
I find it an interesting topic.
At the same time, it is well presented, with a clear structure.
However, as far as the references are concerned, most of them are out of date.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
In the following, we explain the changes made in relation to your comments.
Congratulation for your article.
I find it an interesting topic.
At the same time, it is well presented, with a clear structure.
First and foremost, thank you very much for your feedback.
However, as far as the references are concerned, most of them are out of date.
Although we have eliminated some old references that we did not consider important, we have maintained those that, from the authors' point of view, are a reference for understanding the process of adapting an instrument and are in line with the approach followed in the article. However, in addition to eliminating some of them, we have included other more recent references that continue the same line of research. These can be found throughout the article and in the final references.
Best regards.
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
The paper treats an interesting Topic and its aim is clearly stated. The references used are relevant to the purpose of the paper but some of them should be replaced by more recent ones. Regarding the methodology of the research, its design is clear enough, however, the results could be a bit more detailed. Discussion and conclusions are supported by the results, while at the same time the limitations of the study are adequately presented. Last but not least, any reader can follow the flow of arguments expressed, but in any case, the paper could be revised by a language expert.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer:
In the following, we explain the changes made in relation to your comments.
Dear Authors,
The paper treats an interesting Topic and its aim is clearly stated.
First and foremost, thank you very much for your feedback.
The references used are relevant to the purpose of the paper but some of them should be replaced by more recent ones.
Although we have eliminated some old references that we did not consider important, we have maintained those that, from the authors' point of view, are a reference for understanding the process of adapting an instrument and are in line with the approach followed in the article. However, in addition to eliminating some of them, we have included other more recent references that continue the same line of research. These can be found throughout the article and in the final references.
Regarding the methodology of the research, its design is clear enough, however, the results could be a bit more detailed.
Section 4 of the article, " First steps in test validity and the search for metric equivalence", has been restructured by adding features of the evaluation sheet filled in by the expert judges, and also a further description of the results. The latter has also been considered for the pilot study and the comparison with the external criterion.
Tables 2 and 3 with statistics in relation to the items and dimensions have been included.
All these changes can be found on pages 6, 7 and 8 of the article.
Discussion and conclusions are supported by the results, while at the same time the limitations of the study are adequately presented. Last but not least, any reader can follow the flow of arguments expressed, but in any case, the paper could be revised by a language expert.
The article has been linguistically peer-reviewed. We send a certificate to the editor.
Best regards
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors responded to the suggestions and the article was improved. Success with its publication!
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
