ABSTRACT
This chapter might seem superfluous to readers who are familiar with recent literature on interest measurement in the context of cross-cultural comparisons, such as the excellent articles by Hansen (1987), Rounds and Tracey (1996), and Hesketh and Rounds (1995). Hansen (1987) states that “Development of interest inventories in other countries [outside the U.S.] or with ethnic cultures in the United States, in most cases, is prohibitive; the task is too expensive, too impractical, and in some instances, simply impossible because of the unavailability of adequate sample sizes for acceptable test construction and validation” (p. 173). This statement implies either that in small cultures counseling should not be based on any measurement of vocational interests or that interest measurement in these cultures should employ tools and measures adapted from larger cultures-a problematic strategy due to cross-cultural differences, as is discussed later. Our experience in interest measurement has convinced us otherwise. Both construct and predictive validity findings in cultures outside the United States indicate that abandoning the construction and use of interest inventories beyond American borders would be unjustified and might even be called negligent.
