Discussion 2: Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Methods in Cross-Cultural Research In cross-cultural psychology research, a broad range of techniques is utilized to determine the best way to access critical data. Each technique has its advantages and disadvantages. For example, laboratory experiments may offer great control and ability to examine issues of cause and effect, but may not always reflect actual real-world conditions, especially in cross cultural situations. As an additional example, long term field work and interviews conducted by living in a given cultural setting for a year or two, may offer the possibility of many nuanced observations, yet such qualitative work will not lead to statistical or experimental designs. Each method tends to have pros and cons, rather than one method being the "right" one for every situation. For this Discussion, you will explore the advantages and disadvantages of using different research methods in cross-cultural research. Post and explain one advantage and one disadvantage of quantitative research for cross-cultural psychology. Then, describe one advantage and one disadvantage of qualitative research for cross-cultural psychology. Use examples from the studies provided to support your thinking. Learning Resources Required Readings Karasz, A., & Singelis, T. M. (2009). Qualitative and mixed methods research in cross-cultural psychology: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40 (6), 909–916 Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality and Quantity, 43 (2), 265–275. doi:10.1007/s11135-007-9105-3 Malda, M., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Srinivasan, K., Transler, C., Sukumar, P., & Rao, K. (2008). Adapting a cognitive test for a different culture: An illustration of qualitative procedures. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50 (4), 451–468. Miller, K. E., Omidian, P., Quraishy, A. S., Quraishy, N., Nasiry, M. N., Nasiry, S.,... & Yaqubi, A. A. (2006). The Afghan symptom checklist: A culturally grounded approach to mental health assessment in a conflict zone. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76 (4), 423–433. Rich, G., Sirikantraporn, S., & Jean-Charles, W. (2018). The concept of posttraumatic growth in an adult sample from Port-Au-Prince, Haiti: A mixed methods study. In G. Rich & S. Sirikantraporn (Eds.), Human strengths and resilience: Developmental, cross-cultural, and international Perspectives (pp. 21–38).Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Credit Line: International Differences in Well-Being, by Diener, J.; Helliwell, J. ; Kahneman, D. Copyright 2010 by Oxford University Press. Reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press via the Copyright Clearance Center.  Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2009). Types of comparative studies in cross-cultural psychology. Online readings in psychology and culture, 2 (2), pp.1–12. Credit Line: Fons J. R. van de Vijver. (2009). Types of Comparative Studies in Cross.

1. Discussion 2: Advantages and Disadvantages of Different
Methods in Cross-Cultural Research
In cross-cultural psychology research, a broad range of
techniques is utilized to determine the best way to access
critical data. Each technique has its advantages and
disadvantages. For example, laboratory experiments may offer
great control and ability to examine issues of cause and effect,
but may not always reflect actual real-world conditions,
especially in cross cultural situations. As an additional example,
long term field work and interviews conducted by living in a
given cultural setting for a year or two, may offer the
possibility of many nuanced observations, yet such qualitative
work will not lead to statistical or experimental designs. Each
method tends to have pros and cons, rather than one method
being the "right" one for every situation. For this Discussion,
you will explore the advantages and disadvantages of using
different research methods in cross-cultural research.
Post
and explain one advantage and one disadvantage of quantitative
research for cross-cultural psychology. Then, describe one
advantage and one disadvantage of qualitative research for
cross-cultural psychology. Use examples from the studies
provided to support your thinking.
Learning Resources
Required Readings
Karasz, A., & Singelis, T. M. (2009). Qualitative and mixed

2. methods research in cross-cultural psychology: Introduction to
the special issue.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40
(6), 909–916
Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). A typology of
mixed methods research designs.
Quality and Quantity, 43
(2), 265–275. doi:10.1007/s11135-007-9105-3
Malda, M., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Srinivasan, K., Transler, C.,
Sukumar, P., & Rao, K. (2008). Adapting a cognitive test for a
different culture: An illustration of qualitative procedures.
Psychology Science Quarterly, 50
(4), 451–468.
Miller, K. E., Omidian, P., Quraishy, A. S., Quraishy, N.,
Nasiry, M. N., Nasiry, S.,... & Yaqubi, A. A. (2006). The
Afghan symptom checklist: A culturally grounded approach to
mental health assessment in a conflict zone.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76
(4), 423–433.
Rich, G., Sirikantraporn, S., & Jean-Charles, W. (2018). The
concept of posttraumatic growth in an adult sample from Port-
Au-Prince, Haiti: A mixed methods study. In G. Rich & S.
Sirikantraporn (Eds.),
Human strengths and resilience: Developmental, cross-cultural,
and international Perspectives
(pp. 21–38).Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
Credit Line: International Differences in Well-Being, by Diener,
J.; Helliwell, J. ; Kahneman, D. Copyright 2010 by Oxford
University Press. Reprinted by permission of Oxford University
Press via the Copyright Clearance Center.

3. Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2009). Types of comparative studies in
cross-cultural psychology.
Online readings in psychology and culture, 2
(2), pp.1–12.
Credit Line: Fons J. R. van de Vijver. (2009). Types of
Comparative Studies in Cross-Cultural Psychology. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1017. Used with
permission of International Association for Cross-Cultural
Psychology.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Tanzer, N. K. (2004). Bias and
equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: An overview.
European Review of Applied Psychology, 54
(2), 119–135.