Suchergebnisse

"Schwartz's theory of human values, as operationalized using different instruments such as the Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ), was confirmed by multiple studies using Smallest Space Analysis (SSA). Because of its success, a short version of the PVQ was introduced in the European Social Survey (ESS). However, initial tests using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) pointed to low discriminant validity of the 10 basic values: The correlations between values next to each other in the two-dimensional space described by SSA were close to or greater than 1. In response, one research stream suggested combining the factors with low discriminant validity. Another stream suggested that the problem was not low discriminant validity but rather misspecifications in the model. Analyses of the short Portrait Values Questionnaire of the ESS confirmed the latter view. This paper demonstrates that the problems of the short version of the PVQ exist in the full 40-item PVQ as well. Based on SEM analyses of the items of the full PVQ, we propose that it can provide measures of 15 more narrowly defined values with good discriminant validity. The author's proposal respects the conceptual complexity of the values theory while avoiding contamination of composite scores. It can be expected that the improved measurement of 15 values will increase their predictive power. The presence of some single items suggests the extension of the value theory and scales to encompass more than 15 values. Implications for further development of the scale are drawn." (author's abstract)

Abstract. This article describes the process of the aggregation of individual ministerial preferences into group decisions in a national cabinet, on the basis of a sample of crucial Dutch foreign policy decisions as described in the minutes of the council of ministers. The results of the study show that decisions in the cabinet were mainly made according to the norms of this group, which were consensus and the non‐interference of ministers in issues not concerning their department. Consensus turned out to be of secondary importance as compared with noninterference; key ministers could push through decisions by majority rule if they had consensus among themselves. Since specialists mostly made the decisions, the task of non‐specialist ministers was mainly to function as approvers or disapprovers, though they did make some minor contributions in cases of disagreement among the specialists. When there was agreement among the specialists they followed a process resembling the analytic model, i. e. one based on consideration of the consequences. However, when there was disagreement between specialists, they engaged in a cybernetic decision process, reviewing sequentially a large number of options, neglecting the consequences and striving for a consensus option such as incremental action, which would frequently be the result of a compromise.

In political participation research it is widely assumed that it is irrelevant on whose behalf a protest action is used, as claimed in A. Marsh's "Exploration in Unorthodox Political Behavior: A Scale to Measure 'Protest Potential"' (European Journal of Political Research, 1974, 2, 107-129). To investigate this claim, interview data were obtained from Dutch adults (N = 34) from 10 cities in 5 provinces on the acceptability of specific political acts, the extent to which they held firm opinions, & the degree to which a specific act would be acceptable in relation to a certain issue. A cursory analysis of data would uphold the commonly held claim; however, closer examination reveals that just over 50% of the responses were made according to the usual expectations. The results indicate that different rules for making decisions are employed not only among different people, but also by the same individual, depending on the issue. 11 Tables, 7 Figures, 3 Graphs, 11 References. Modified HA

"Although agree/ disagree (a/ d) rating scales are hugely popular in the social sciences, a large body of research conducted during more than five decades has documented the bias that results from acquiescence in responses to these items. This may be a reason to prefer questions with Item Specific (IS) response options, but remarkably little research has explored whether responses to a/ d rating scale questions are indeed of lower quality than responses to questions with IS response options. Using a research design that combines the advantages of a random assignment between-subjects experiment and the multitrait-multimethod approach in the context of representative sample surveys, we found that responses to a/ d rating scale questions indeed had much lower quality than responses to comparable questions offering IS response options. These results attest to the superiority of questions with IS response options." (author's abstract)

To ascertain whether use of an information-choice questionnaire, which includes information about a problem as well as the advantages & disadvantages of each option, raises the competence of citizens voting in a political referendum, fieldwork was conducted in the course of a 1992 referendum addressing car traffic in inner-city Amsterdam, Netherlands. Two random telephone surveys, panel data collected weekly during the campaign, & data from a computerized information-choice questionnaire revealed the efficacy of the questionnaire; 88% of respondents (Rs) felt it was a worthwhile aid. Further, questionnaire Rs were better equipped to make informed decisions than telephone Rs, who were only exposed to normal prereferendum information. 3 Figures, 13 References. J. Lindroth

"In der Empirischen Sozialforschung finden in Europa Telefoninterviews anstelle von face to face-Interviews zunehmende Verbreitung. Im Rahmen der zweimal jährlich für die Europäische Kommission in Brüssel durchgeführten Repräsentativbefragungen in den Mitgliedsländern der Europäischen Union, den sogenannten Eurobarometern, ergab sich für die Erhebung vom Frühjahr 1994 (EB 41.0) die Möglichkeit, durch eine zeitgleich mit einem weitgehend identischen Fragenprogramm stattfindende Telefonbefragung in den damaligen zwölf Mitgliedsländern der EU, systematisch Effekte der unterschiedlichen Stichprobenansätze und Erhebungsmethoden zu untersuchen. Dabei konnte das Analysespektrum noch durch eine Telefon-Panelkomponente in dreien der zwölf EU-Länder für das face to face-Eurobarometer erweitert werden. Die Beiträge im vorliegenden Buch untersuchen auf dieser Grundlage methodische und methodologische Fragestellungen, die insbesondere für die international vergleichende Sozialforschung, aber auch für die Markt- und Meinungsforschung in Europa von großer Bedeutung sind." (Autorenreferat). Inhaltsverzeichnis: Max Kaase, Willem E. Saris: The Eurobarometer - a tool for comparative survey research (5-23); Peter Schubert, Angelika Greil: Sample design and consequences (24-31); Sabine Häder, Siegfried Gabler: Deviations from the population and optimal weights (32-44); Jürgen Lass: Telephone ownership - a cause of sampling bias in Europe? (45-63); Jürgen Lass, Willem E. Saris, Max Kaase: Sizes of the different effects: coverage, mode and nonresponse (64-74); Willem E. Saris, Jacques A. Hagenaars: Mode effects in the standard Eurobarometer questions (75-88); Hermann Schmitt, Peter Schrott, Michaela Thoma: Mode effects on open-ended agenda questions (89-99); Hans-Dieter Klingemann: The left-right self-placement question in face to face and telephone surveys (100-110); Willem E. Saris: Comparability across mode and country (111-125); Willem E. Saris: Adjustment for differences between face to face and telephone interviews (126-141); Willem E. Saris, Max Kaase: Summary and discussion (142-154).

"In survey research many decisions are made in order to design an instrument for data collection. These choices have to do with the formulation of the question, the response categories, the instruction, the sample, the mode of data collection, etc. Each of these choices can lead to different errors (Sudman and Bradburn, 1974; Belson, 1981; Schuman and Presser, 1981; Dijkstra and Van der Zouwen, 1982; Andrews, 1984; Molenaar, 1986; Billiet et al., 1986; Groves, 1989; Alwin and Krosnick, 1991, and Scherpenzeel and Saris, 1997) and consequently to incomparability of results with respect to estimates of correlations and effect parameters across studies and also across countries. It is common knowledge that cross-cultural comparison can only be made if the measurement procedures are completely the same. In this study, we want to argue that this requirement is not enough. We will show that the results can also differ if the same procedures have been used because of differences in measurement errors in the different countries. We therefore propose a procedure to correct for measurement error, in order to make comparisons across countries with respect to correlations and regression coefficients. To correct for measurement error, we have chosen an approach that can be used by every researcher involved in social science research. This in particular is why we advocate this approach, even though, from a methodological point of view, more suitable approaches are available. We avoid using these methods because one purpose of this project is that we want to demonstrate a procedure for the correction of measurement error which can be used in any study, once prior methodological research is done. We begin with a discussion of the problems connected with measurement error in comparative survey research and then we describe the solution we have chosen for these problems. All examples given are based on the satisfaction studies done in the context of a methodological, comparative research project involving 13 language areas." (author's abstract)