Graduation Year


Document Type




Degree Granting Department

Adult, Career and Higher Education

Major Professor

Waynne B. James

Committee Member

Donald A. Dellow

Committee Member

Jeffrey Kromrey

Committee Member

William H. Young


Cross-cultural competency, Global competency, Intercultural Sensitivity



Through a two-phase process an instrument was created to measure the cognitive domain as proposed by King and Baxter Magolda in their Developmental Model of Intercultural Maturity (2005). The first phase involved expert panels who identified the competencies which exist in the cognitive domain, identified situations which might exist between individuals from different cultures, validated scenarios created from the identified situations, and created responses which corresponded to the three developmental levels (Initial, Intermediate, and Mature) defined in the Developmental Theory of Intercultural Maturity.

Within the second phase, the created instrument was administered to 371 individuals representing eight geocultural world divisions (Asia, Caribbean, Europe, Middle East, North America, South/Latin America, South Pacific/Polynesia, and Sub-Saharan Africa). The initial instrument contained 8-12 interactive demographic questions and 20 scenario-based questions which were created to measure the four identified competencies (Ability to Shift Cognitive Perspectives, Flexibility in Thinking, Willingness to Seek Knowledge about Other Cultures, and Willingness to Consider Others' Viewpoints as Valid). Through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), the instrument was analyzed and a final 12-item instrument was identified which corresponded to three competencies: Ambiguity, Acclimation, and Acceptance.

Overall, the final instrument functioned with minimal gender bias. Some differences in world regions were noted. The Caribbean was the only region who had consistently different scores from the other regions. While some significant differences were noted in scores of those who had lived abroad and those who had not, time spent outside one's home region was not correlated to scores on the instrument.

Low reliability scores, factor pattern coefficients, and communality estimates indicated that opportunities to improve the instrument exist. Additional opportunities for further research include the creation of additional instruments to measure all three domains (Cognitive, Interpersonal, and Intrapersonal) and thus measure Intercultural Maturity in full. Recommended uses for the instrument are in the creation of intercultural curriculum to prompt discussion or to create metacognitive opportunities within intercultural training and classrooms.

Included in

Education Commons