Many researchers wrongly assume that validity is the
property of an instrument, and that once validity has
been ''demonstrated'' no further analysis is required
when it is used in a different research context.
This work challenges that idea and seeks to remind
researchers that validity, the ''ne plus ultra'' of any
research, is a multi-layered process incorporating
both statistical and judgmental evidence, that must
be specifically accounted for in any empirical project.
A Japanese translation of Bennett and Hammer''s
Intercultural Development Inventory (version 1) was
tested for content, concurrent, and consequential
validity following Messick''s (1998) framework in
which these aspects of validity are seen to
contribute to an overarching judgment of construct
validity. The validation analysis raised questions
about whether results from a translated IDI, and by
extension the stages of the Developmental Model of
Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) upon which it is
based, are transferable across languages and cultures.
This work serves as a reminder that validity is a
critical element, and that it must be an explicitly
addressed, particularly in cross-cultural research.