International Business researchers have recently become interested in attributional complexity (AC) in the context of cross-cultural leadership effectiveness. Despite this recent surge in interest in this construct, we know very little about its measurement properties in cross-cultural situations. Given that attributions vary across cultures, verifying the validity (measurement invariance and nomological validity) of the Attributional Complexity Scale (ACS) is a research imperative. In study I, we examine the measurement invariance of ACS using a reduced version of the original scale (ACS-18) in five countries. The results suggest that the ACS shows metric invariance in that it has a similar factor structure across the five societies examined and in two other independent samples. In study II (France), we provide evidence of AC’s predictive validity based on its relationship to a key construct in its nomological network, namely, isomorphic attribution. In study III (United States), we provide additional evidence of nomological validity by showing the relationship between AC and biculturalism. Our results demonstrate the importance of AC and imply that researchers in cross-cultural contexts can safely use the ACS-18 without risking substantive misinterpretation. We discuss results, future research directions, implications, and limitations of the study.

中文翻译：

---

归因复杂度量表的测量不变性和法理学有效性：来自爱沙尼亚，法国，印度，美国和越南的证据

国际商务研究人员最近对跨文化领导有效性的归因复杂性（AC）产生了兴趣。尽管最近对该结构的兴趣激增，但我们对跨文化情况下的测量属性了解甚少。鉴于不同文化之间的归因不同，验证归因复杂性量表（ACS）的有效性（度量不变性和法理有效性）是一项研究势在必行。在研究I中，我们在五个国家中使用原始量表的简化版本（ACS-18）研究了ACS的测量不变性。结果表明，ACS显示了度量不变性，因为它在所研究的五个社会和其他两个独立样本中具有相似的因子结构。在研究二（法国）中，我们基于AC与其词法网络中关键构型（即同构归因）的关系来提供AC的预测有效性的证据。在研究III（美国）中，我们通过显示AC和双文化主义之间的关系提供了更多关于法理有效性的证据。我们的结果证明了交流的重要性，并暗示跨文化背景下的研究人员可以安全地使用ACS-18，而不会冒实质性的误解。我们讨论结果，未来的研究方向，影响和研究局限性。我们的结果证明了交流的重要性，并暗示跨文化背景下的研究人员可以安全地使用ACS-18，而不会冒实质性的曲解。我们讨论结果，未来的研究方向，影响和研究局限性。我们的结果证明了交流的重要性，并暗示跨文化背景下的研究人员可以安全地使用ACS-18，而不会冒实质性的曲解。我们讨论结果，未来的研究方向，影响和研究局限性。