Consumer behavior research which is to be conducted in a multicultural environment should be based on the prior assurance that studied processes and phenomena are equivalent (in nature) and that the obtained results will be comparable. The main difference between various equivalence categories results from the fact that some of them may be noticed ex ante, and some only ex post. It is assumed that even with great researchers' knowledge of cultural characteristics of studied countries, one should recommend checking the equivalence after completion of direct research.
The problem of equivalence in international marketing research can be ap-proached with respect to four issue groups (Primer, 1997; Cavusgi & Das, 1997; Holzmuller, 1995):
equivalence of a research object,
measurement equivalence,
research sample equivalence,
equivalence of a direct research process.
Table 6.2. Equivalence categories of marketing research in a multicultural environment
Categories Types
Equivalence of a research object − conceptual equivalence
− functional equivalence
− categorization equivalence Measurement equivalence − calibration equivalence
− metric equivalence
− translational equivalence
105
Research sample equivalence − sample unit equivalence
− equivalence of a sampling frame of a studied population
− equivalence of sample selection method Equivalence of a direct research
process
− equivalence of data collection procedure
− contextual equivalence
− time (temporal) equivalence Source: Glowik & Smyczek (2011).
The first problem that needs resolving concerns the provision of conceptu-al equivconceptu-alence referring to the statement whether a given concept or an object denotes the same in all studied cultures and whether it is expressed through the same attitudes and behavior. Once the conceptual equivalence is ensured, another problem may relate to functional equivalence which is to determine whether a certain concept, behavior, or a product has the same function across different cultures. Another difficulty may be encountered while assuring equivalence of categorization, being a way of clustering (categorizing) such research objects as consumer reactions and behavior, products and brands. In some cases, criteria of categorizing certain products may considerably differ, and thus posing difficulties in comparisons of certain types of behavior with respect to cross-cultural categories. A proper definition of a research object which takes account of cultural specificity constitutes a basis for designing the measuring process. This measuring consists in assigning certain objects (phe-nomena, processes) to numbers so that the latter can reflect, in a reliable way, a measured feature of an object. The accuracy of the measurement, i.e. its pre-cision, depends on a proper selection of the so-called observable indices of studied objects, and in the case of international research, also on specificity of countries under the research (Schmidt & Hollensen, 2006, Karcz, 2004).
At this research stage it is advisable to guarantee the calibration equiva-lence (equivaequiva-lence of measurement units), or the so-called measurement ex-pressed in the same units of money, weight, distance, quantity, and the like, and to take into consideration the perceptive differences (e.g. number of col-ors recognized by members of a given community and symbolic interpretation of colors, perception of space, shape, materials and smells with respect to
one's own culture) (Steenkamp, 2001). The measuring process uses different measuring scales. International research requires metric equivalence with respect to verbal measuring scales, since distances between certain points (in verbal descriptions) are not equivalent across various languages. The dis-cussed problem is strictly connected with the assurance of translational equivalence i.e. with a translation of measuring scales applied in research tools such as interview questionnaires, questionnaire forms, projective tests, etc. Here, the difficulties go far beyond the grammatical and lexical issues, as the language represents one of elements of culture which determines the per-ception and denotation of and interactions with the external world (Ryan, Chan, Ployhart & Slade, 1999). The approach to linguistic issues may affect the whole research procedure and related to basic research paradigms.
One of key tasks at the stage of consumer behavior research in internation-al environment is to properly select research samples which can be used as a basis for production of general results of studied populations. The process of sample selection consists of five stages (Schiffman & Kanuk, 2010):
definition of a studied population,
establishment of a list (sampling frame) of a studied population,
determination of sample size,
choice of a sample selection method,
sampling.
The researcher tries to define as closely as possible a studied population by distinguishing in the operating definition such components as a subject (element) of research, a sample unit as well as time and place at which the samples are subject to the research. In the case of individual subjects (e.g.
individual consumers) the sample element becomes the sample unit, where-as in the cwhere-ase of group subjects, it is necessary to decide who will speak on behalf of such a subject (e.g. when a household is a research subject, the sample unit can be represented by a head of a household, whereas in the case of company, such a role can be assigned to a chief accountant or manag-er of a supply unit).
The achievement of sample comparability constitutes the main problem of a sample selection method of consumer behavior research conducted in a mul-tinational environment.
107
The main problem to be dealt with by the researcher concerns a proper definition of a sample on two levels:
1) the sample level of countries and cultures,
2) the sample level of defined individual and group subjects within countries and cultures.
G. Hofstede (2000) clearly states that despite the fact that data are collected from individual respondents, yet, for the sake of the analysis, they are compared on the country level. In his research, the mean values of respondents’ questions were subject to calculation in each country. However, the studies compared not the individuals, but a dominant tendency of respondents' questions of a particu-lar country. The author warns against using such results in construction of ste-reotypes referring to concrete individual. National indices are not used to de-scribe an individual, but to characterize social systems which can be developed by these individuals. Based on research results, no one should say that Suzuki is a Japan, and consequently is characterized by collective values, or that Ms Smith is an American, so she believes in individualistic values. Nonetheless, if one in-tends to collaborate with Suzuki corporation, one can follow the assumption that as corporation it is managed by collective values, whereas if one wants to enter into cooperation with Smith company, it will be safer to accept that the company is founded on individualistic values.
In the international studies, it is indispensable to ensure the sample unit equivalence by a proper sample definition and by such selection of respond-ents which could enable achievement of comparability on an international scale. This does not necessitate the selection of respondents who share the same demographic-social-economic features, but the ones that represent the same target group (buyer segment). It should be borne in mind that de-pending on a culture, different individuals play definite roles in the purchasing process.
The problem of guaranteeing the equivalence of a sampling frame of a stud-ied population in the international research relates to difficulties in obtaining proper lists (frame) of defined research populations across various countries.
In many countries such frames can be represented by general population lists, voter lists or telephone directories, but in some states it is impossible to make use of them (frames), since, like in Saudi Arabia, such lists do not exist, where-as directories are incomplete (Wells & Prensky, 1996). This poses a problem,
particularly when the research is to be conducted by means of a random sam-pling method.
In the international research, it is extremely difficult to achieve the equiva-lence of a sample selection method, i.e. the choice of a selection method which is feasible in all compared countries. In order to choose a proper sample selec-tion method, it is necessary to bring out a method guaranteeing sample repre-sentativeness in each studied country and providing data which could facili-tate international comparisons (Malhotra & Birks, 2010). In practice, re-searchers – despite numerous methodological reservations – agree to employ non-random sampling methods, although such a selection excludes the appli-cation of statistical methods in the estimation of unknown population parame-ters. The possibility of achieving international comparability calls for em-ployment of a selection method which is not based on the probability calculus.
Additionally, such data can be obtained at a relatively low cost and in a man-ner concurrent with the research goals.
In the course of primary research on consumer behavior, the equivalence of data collection procedures should be guaranteed and efforts should be made to adopt the same research techniques in all countries under comparison. It is ab-solutely necessary to ensure the equivalence, at least within the framework of definite research types. The studies must also take account of the contextual equivalence (a situation in which information is gathered) connected with a necessity of including respondents' cultural reluctance to talk about taboo issues. Researchers should be aware of the fact that in certain situations some answers may not reflect the real state of affairs and respondents' genuine atti-tudes, but may only express respondents' opinions about socially acceptable views (Karcz, 2004). International research on consumer behavior should be also conducted with respect to the time (temporal) equivalence which takes into account the process of relative data aging. One cannot ignore the fact that income or price data become outdated much later in countries with a low infla-tion-rate than in countries with a multidigit inflation rate. The equivalence of time can be also considered with respect to differences in the economic and technological development of various countries. A certain definite situation in one country may be „an equivalent” of a similar situation in another country but 20 years ago. The distance estimation in years can be used to make forecasts by the way of analogy to a model country (Glowik & Smyczek, 2011).
109