Testing Practices in Lebanon: A Study of Practitioners' Perspectives on Cross Cultural Biases

Abstract

Cross-cultural testing, influenced by globalization and the transfer of assessments, faces challenges, such as literal translation and lack of cultural adaptation, risking ineffective practices. A substantial proportion of existing assessments are often Western-centric and may not align with the Arab region's cultural and linguistic diversity. In Lebanon, challenges intensify due to multilingualism, diglossia, and socio-economic constraints. This study aims to investigate the awareness of practitioners using standardized assessments of cross-cultural testing biases, explore their testing practices to accommodate individuals with diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and propose suggestions to improve the testing practice in Lebanon in the context of multilingualism with limited resources. The sample surveyed was 82 therapists working in Lebanon in psychology, speech and language therapy, and psychomotor therapy. This study used a mixed-method sequential approach. The dominant method is the quantitative analysis, followed by the qualitative analysis to give more depth to the quantitative findings. First, an online survey with both open-ended and close-ended questions was distributed. Afterwards, eight therapists from various specialities were interviewed for in-depth clarification. A thematic analysis approach was used to examine the interviews and to identify the main themes. The results shed light on assessors' awareness of psychometric tests in a multicultural context and their limitations. The findings showed moderate awareness towards cross-cultural testing biases. Their understanding of the Lebanese contextual challenges focused mainly on socio-economical constraints, neglecting, to an extent, challenges related to the lack of robust psychometric training. Moreover, by exploring the strategies used to overcome biases, the practitioners used basic, qualitative and non-costly strategies, highlighting extensive reliance on their clinical judgement in all assessment phases. As for areas for improvement, practitioners expressed the need for specialised training and practicum in evaluation and for more centralized entities on a governance level that would facilitate the development and adaptation of culturally and linguistically sensitive tests.