Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review 2014, 50(4): 547-580 | DOI: 10.13060/00380288.2014.50.4.108

The Comparability of Schwartz's Human Values Scale in International Data

Petra Anýžová
Vysoká škola finanční a správní, Praha

The first part of this article looks at the comparability of the crosscountry PVQ scale tested on the basis of the Sixth Round of the European Social Survey. To test comparability, the classic 21-item tool is used to measure ten different types of value orientation. These value types are based on Schwartz's original basic human values theory. In order to test equivalence, a multiple group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) was used. The results of the analyses show that the configural and metric equivalences of all seven value types are valid in only 10 out of 23 countries. However, even in those 10 countries, it is impossible to fully rely on scalar equivalence. For more detail, in many countries it is possible to carry out valid comparisons of relations and value types, as well as of other value attitudes or socio-demographic indicators. However, it is not possible to compare national averages of the seven value types. The article then demonstrates that the seven value types are longitudinally comparable across every round of the ESS in the Czech Republic. The second part of the article points out some of the problems in the Czech Republic with the PVQ comparison between different social groups delineated by gender, age, and education. While the averages of the seven value types can be sometimes compared in all groups (male, female), in some cases it is necessary either to amalgamate the groups or to decrease their quantity (age groups, education levels of groups).

Keywords: PVQ scale, human values, European Social Survey, metric and scalar equivalences, multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis

Published: August 1, 2014Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Anýžová, P. (2014). The Comparability of Schwartz's Human Values Scale in International Data. Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review50(4), 547-580. doi: 10.13060/00380288.2014.50.4.108.
Download citation

Attachments

Download fileStat_Anyzova_prilohy.pdf

File size: 128.09 kB

References

  1. Arbuckle, J. L. 1996. "Full Information Estimation in the Presence of Incomplete Data." Pp. 243-277 in G. A. Marcoulides, R. E. Schumacker (eds.). Advanced Structural Equation Modeling: Issues and Techniques. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  2. Arbuckle, J. L. 2012. IBM SPSS® Amos™ 21 User's Guide. Crawfordville, FL: Amos Development Corporation.
  3. Beierlein, C., P. Schmidt, E. Davidov, S. H. Schwartz. 2012. "Testing the Discriminant Validity of Schwartz' Portrait Value Questionnaire Items - A Replication and Extension of Knoppen and Saris (2009)." Survey Research Methods 6 (1): 25-36.
  4. Bentler, P. M., C.-P. Chou. 1987. "Practical Issues in Structural Modeling." Sociological Methods & Research 16 (1): 78-117, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124187016001004. Go to original source...
  5. Billiet, J. 2003. "Cross-cultural Equivalence with Structural Equation Modeling." Pp. 247-263 in J. A. Harkness, F. J. R. Van de Vijver, P. Ph. Mohler (eds.). Cross-cultural Survey Methods. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
  6. Billiet, J., J. Welkenhuysen-Gybels. 2004. "Assessing Cross-national Construct Equivalence in the ESS: The Case of Six Items" [online]. Příspěvek přednesený na konferenci International Conference on Social Science Methodology, Edition 6. Amsterdam, 17.-20. 8. 2004 [cit. 2. 11. 2010]. Dostupné z: https://lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/84246/1/DA+2004-40.pdf.
  7. Burnham, K. P., D. R. Anderson. 2004. "Multimodel Inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in Model Selection." Sociological Methods & Research 33 (2): 261-304, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049124104268644. Go to original source...
  8. Byrne, B. M. 2008. "Testing for Multigroup Equivalence of a Measuring Instrument: A Walk through the Process." Psicothema 20 (4): 872-882.
  9. Byrne, B. M. 2010. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Second Edition. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.
  10. Byrne, B. M., R. J. Shavelson, B. Muthén. 1989. "Testing for the Equivalence of Factor Covariance and Mean Structures: The Issue of Partial Measurement Invariance." Psychological Bulletin 105 (3): 456-466, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456. Go to original source...
  11. Byrne, B. M., D. Watkins. 2003. "The Issue Of Measurement Invariance Revisited." Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 34 (2): 155-175, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022102250225. Go to original source...
  12. Cieciuch, J., E. Davidov. 2012. "A Comparison of the Invariance Properties of the PVQ-40 and the PVQ-21 to Measure Human Values across German and Polish Samples." Survey Research Methods 6 (1): 37-48.
  13. Davidov, E. 2008. "A Cross-Country and Cross-Time Comparison of the Human Values Measurements with the Second Round of the European Social Survey." Survey Research Methods 2 (1): 33-46.
  14. Davidov, E. 2010. "Testing for Comparability of Human Values across Countries and Time with the Third Round of European Social Survey." International Journal of Comparative Sociology 51 (3): 171-191, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0020715210363534. Go to original source...
  15. Davidov, E. 2012. Comparability of Measurement Instruments across Countries or Time Points [online]. Prezentace. University of Tartu, 4. 10. 2012 [cit. 22. 1. 2014]. Dostupné z: http://www.ssi.ut.ee/sites/default/files/ssi/davidov_lecture2.pdf.
  16. Davidov, E., A. De Beuckelaer. 2010. "How Harmful are Survey Translations? A Test with Schwartz's Human Values Instrument." International Journal of Public Opinion Research 22 (4): 485-510, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq030. Go to original source...
  17. Davidov, E., F. Depner. 2011. "Testing for Measurement Equivalence of Human Values across Online and Paper-and-pencil Surveys." Quality & Quantity 45: 375-390, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135-009-9297-9. Go to original source...
  18. Davidov, E., P. Schmidt, P., S. H. Schwartz. 2008. "Bringing Values Back In: Testing the Adequacy of the European Social Survey to Measure Values in 20 Countries." Public Opinion Quarterly 72 (3): 420-445, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfn035. Go to original source...
  19. DiStefano, C. 2002. "The Impact of Categorization with Confirmatory Factor Analysis." Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 9 (3): 327-346, http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0903_2. Go to original source...
  20. Dorer, B. 2012. Round 6 Translation Guidelines. Mannheim: European Social Survey, GESIS.
  21. European Social Survey. 2012. Sampling for the European Social Survey Round VI: Principles and Requirements. Mannheim: European Social Survey, GESIS.
  22. Flora, D. B., P. J. Curran. 2004. "An Empirical Evaluation of Alternative Methods of Estimation for Confirmatory Factor Analysis with Ordinal Data." Psychological Methods 9 (4): 466-491, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466. Go to original source...
  23. Gao, S., P. L. Mokhtarian, R. A. Johnston. 2008. "Nonnormality of Data in Structural Equation Models." Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2082 (1): 116-124, http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2082-14. Go to original source...
  24. Harkness, J. A., F. J. R. Van de Vijver, P. Ph. Mohler (eds.). 2003. Cross-cultural Survey Methods. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
  25. Hofstede, G. 2001. Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  26. Horáková, N. 2005. "Co je pro nás v životě důležité?" Naše společnost [online] (2): 8-12 [cit. 10. 6. 2012]. Praha: Sociologický ústav AV ČR. Dostupné z: http://cvvm.soc.cas.cz/media/com_form2content/documents/c3/a3943/f11/100045s_horakova-hodnoty.pdf.
  27. Horn, J. L., J. J. McArdle. 1992. "A Practical and Theoretical Guide to Measurement Invariance in Aging Research." Experimental Aging Research 18 (3): 117-144, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03610739208253916. Go to original source...
  28. Hox, J. J., E. D. de Leeuw, M. J. S. Brinkhuis. 2010. "Analysis Models for Comparative Surveys." Pp. 395-418 in J. A. Harkness et al. (eds). Survey Methods in Multinational, Multiregional,and Multicultural Contexts. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470609927.ch21. Go to original source...
  29. Cheung, G. W., R. B. Rensvold. 2002. "Evaluating Goodness-of-fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance." Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 9 (2): 233-255, http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5. Go to original source...
  30. Inglehart, R. 1977. The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles among Western Publics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  31. Johnson, T. P. 1998. "Approaches to Equivalence in Cross-Cultural and Cross-National Survey Research." Pp. 1-40 in J. A. Harkness (ed.). Cross-Cultural Survey Equivalence. ZUMA-Nachrichten Spezial, Band 3. Mannheim: ZUMA.
  32. Jöreskog, K. G. 1971. "Simultaneous Factor Analysis in Several Populations." Psychometrika 36 (4): 409-426, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02291366. Go to original source...
  33. Jöreskog, K. G. 1990. "New Developments in LISREL: Analysis of Ordinal Variables Using Polychoric Correlations and Weighted Least Squares." Quality and Quantity 24 (4): 387-404, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00152012. Go to original source...
  34. Jöreskog, K. G. 2002. Structural Equation Modeling with Ordinal Variables using LISREL [online]. [cit. 14.1.2012]. Dostupné z: http://www.ssicentral.com/lisrel/techdocs/ordinal.pdf.
  35. Kankaras, M., G. Moors. 2009. "Measurement Equivalence in Solidarity Attitudes in Europe: Insights from a Multi-Group Latent-Class Factor Approach." International Sociology 24 (4): 557-579, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0268580909334502. Go to original source...
  36. Kluckhohn, C. K. M. 1951. "Values and Value Orientations in the Theory of Action." Pp. 388-433 in T. Parsons, E. Shils (eds.). Toward a General Theory of Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  37. Knoppen, D., W. Saris. 2009. "Do We Have to Combine Values in the Schwartz' Human Values Scale? A Comment on the Davidov Studies." Survey Research Methods 3 (2): 91-103.
  38. Meade, A. W., G. J. Lautenschlager. 2004. "Comparison of Item Response Theory and Confirmatory Factor Analytic Methodologies for Establishing Measurement Equivalence/Invariance." Organizational Research Methods 7 (4): 361-388, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1094428104268027. Go to original source...
  39. Meredith, W. 1993. "Measurement Invariance, Factor Analysis and Factorial Invariance." Psychometrika 58 (4): 525-543, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02294825. Go to original source...
  40. Meuleman, B., E. Davidov, J. Billiet. 2009. "Changing Attitudes toward Immigration in Europe, 2002-2007: A Dynamic Group Conflict Theory Approach." Social Science Research 38 (2): 352-365, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2008.09.006. Go to original source...
  41. Milfont, T. L., R. Fisher. 2010. "Testing Measurement Invariance across Group: Applications in Cross-cultural Research." International Journal of Psychological Research 3 (1): 111-121. Go to original source...
  42. Mîndrilă, D. 2010. "Maximum Likelihood (ML) and Diagonally Weighted Least Squares (DWLS) Estimation Procedures: A Comparison of Estimation Bias with Ordinal and Multivariate Non-normal Data." International Journal of Digital Society 1 (1): 60-66. Go to original source...
  43. Prudký, L. a kol. 2009. Inventura Hodnot: Výsledky sociologických výzkumů hodnot ve společnosti České republiky. Praha: Academia.
  44. Prüfer, P., M. Rexroth, F. J. Fowler. 2004. Quest 2003. Questionnaire Evaluation Standards. ZUMA-Nachrichten Spezial, Band 9. Mannheim: ZUMA.
  45. Rabušic, L. 2000. "Je česká společnost, postmaterialistická'?" Sociologický časopis 36 (1): 3-22.
  46. Raju, N. S., L. J. Laffitte, B. M. Byrne. 2002. "Measurement Equivalence: A Comparison of Methods Based on Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Item Response Theory." Journal of Applied Psychology 87 (3): 517-529, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.517. Go to original source...
  47. Rokeach, M. 1973. The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press.
  48. Řeháková, B. 2001. "Změna hodnot v České republice a Inglehartova hodnotová typologie." Pp. 47-71 in L. Rabušic (ed.). České hodnoty 1991-1999. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
  49. Řeháková, B. 2006. "Měření hodnotových orientací metodou hodnotových portrétů S. H. Schwartze." Sociologický časopis 42 (1): 107-128.
  50. Sagiv, L., S. H. Schwartz. 1995. "Value Priorities and Readiness for Out-group Social Contact." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69 (3): 437-448, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.3.437. Go to original source...
  51. Saris, W. E., I. N. Gallhofer. 2007. Design, Evaluation and Analysis of Questionnaires for Survey Research. New York: Wiley, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470165195. Go to original source...
  52. Schwartz, S. H. 1992. "Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries." Pp. 1-65 in M. Zanna (ed.). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press. Go to original source...
  53. Schwartz, S. H. 2003a. "A Proposal for Measuring Value Orientations across Nations" [online]. Pp. 259-319 in European Social Survey Core Questionnaire Development. ESS central co-ordinating team [cit. 26. 2. 2014]. Dostupné z: http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/docs/methodology/core_ess_questionnaire/ESS_core_questionnaire_human_values.pdf.
  54. Schwartz, S. H. 2003b. "Basic Human Values: Their Content and Structure Across Countries." Pp. 1-65 in A. Tamayo, J. Porto (eds.). Valores e trabalho [Values and Work]. Brasilia: Editora Universidade de Brasilia.
  55. Schwartz, S. H. 2006. "Les valeurs de base de la personne: Théorie, mesures et applications [Basic Human Values: Theory, Measurement, and Applications]." Revue française de Sociologie [online v anglické verzi pod názvem "Basic Human Values: An Overview] 42: 249-288 [cit. 7. 6. 2012]. Dostupné z: http://www.ccsr.ac.uk/qmss/seminars/2009-06-10/documents/Shalom_Schwartz_1.pdf.
  56. Schwartz, S. H., K. Boehnke. 2004. "Evaluating the Structure of Human Values with Confirmatory Factor Analysis." Journal of Research in Personality 38 (3): 230-255, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00069-2. Go to original source...
  57. Schwartz, S. H., G. Melech, A. Lehmann, S. Burgess, M. Harris. 2001. "Extending the Cross-cultural Validity of the Theory of Basic Human Values with a Different Method of Measurement." Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32 (5): 519-542, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022101032005001. Go to original source...
  58. Sociological Methods & Research. August 2004, 33 (1), November 2004, 33 (2).
  59. Soukup, P. 2010. "Nesprávná užívání statistické významnosti a jejich možná řešení." Data a výzkum - SDA Info 4 (2): 77-104.
  60. Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., H. Baumgartner. 1998. "Assessing Measurement Invariance in Cross-National Consumer Research." Journal of Consumer Research 25 (1): 78-90, http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/209528. Go to original source...
  61. Urbánek, T. 2000. Strukturální modelování v psychologii. Brno: Psychologický ústav AV ČR a Nakladatelství Pavel Křepela.
  62. Vandenberg, R. J., C. E. Lance. 2000. "A Review and Synthesis of the Measurement Invariance Literature: Suggestions, Practices, and Recommendations for Organizational Research." Organizational Research Methods 3 (1): 4-70, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002. Go to original source...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.