Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

‘Polarized Priorities Or Flexible Alternatives? Dimensionality in Inglehart's Materialism–Postmaterialism Scale’: A ...

‘Polarized Priorities Or Flexible Alternatives? Dimensionality in Inglehart's... International Journal of Public Opinion Research Vol. 6 NO.3 FORUM IJPOR operates-as its readers and authors most probably know--on a professional referee system. Every once in a while, our reviewers produce stimulating comments on manuscripts-comments that help to clarify crucial points in research. Such was the case with the article by Clive Bean and Elim Papadakis on the dimensionality ofInglehart's Postmaterialism scale. Both reviewers-Ronald Inglehart and Ottar Hellevik-suggested that we print their arguments as a Forum, and both agreed to revise their texts for publication. Of course, a reply by Bean and Papadakis is added. We publish this Forum to stimulate methodological and substantive discussion on value orientations. We also do it as a tribute to the efforts and the thinking that our reviewers invest in order to keep IJPOR going. Wolfgang Donsbach 'POLARIZED PRIORITIES OR FLEXIBLE ALTERNATIVES? DIMENSIONALITY IN INGLEHART'S MATERIALISM­ POSTMATERIALISM SCALE': A COMMENT Ronald Inglehart 'Polarized Priorities or Flexible Alternatives' is an interesting and well-written article that raises an important methodological point. The analysis is well-executed and I agree with most ofwhat it says-but disagree with a central point of how the authors interpret their findings. Bean and Papadakis compare ranking and rating approaches to the http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Public Opinion Research Oxford University Press

‘Polarized Priorities Or Flexible Alternatives? Dimensionality in Inglehart's Materialism–Postmaterialism Scale’: A ...

Download PDF
9 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/polarized-priorities-or-flexible-alternatives-dimensionality-in-zpe0LQAua7

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© World Association for Public Opinion Research
ISSN
0954-2892
eISSN
1471-6909
DOI
10.1093/ijpor/6.3.289-a
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

International Journal of Public Opinion Research Vol. 6 NO.3 FORUM IJPOR operates-as its readers and authors most probably know--on a professional referee system. Every once in a while, our reviewers produce stimulating comments on manuscripts-comments that help to clarify crucial points in research. Such was the case with the article by Clive Bean and Elim Papadakis on the dimensionality ofInglehart's Postmaterialism scale. Both reviewers-Ronald Inglehart and Ottar Hellevik-suggested that we print their arguments as a Forum, and both agreed to revise their texts for publication. Of course, a reply by Bean and Papadakis is added. We publish this Forum to stimulate methodological and substantive discussion on value orientations. We also do it as a tribute to the efforts and the thinking that our reviewers invest in order to keep IJPOR going. Wolfgang Donsbach 'POLARIZED PRIORITIES OR FLEXIBLE ALTERNATIVES? DIMENSIONALITY IN INGLEHART'S MATERIALISM­ POSTMATERIALISM SCALE': A COMMENT Ronald Inglehart 'Polarized Priorities or Flexible Alternatives' is an interesting and well-written article that raises an important methodological point. The analysis is well-executed and I agree with most ofwhat it says-but disagree with a central point of how the authors interpret their findings. Bean and Papadakis compare ranking and rating approaches to the

Journal

International Journal of Public Opinion Research – Oxford University Press

Published: Oct 1, 1994

There are no references for this article.