Towards greater validity in Schwartz’s portrait values indicator using experimental research

Towards greater validity in Schwartz’s portrait values indicator using experimental research In Schwartz’s 21-item portrait values questionnaire (PVQ) each item consists of two statements which refer to a single underling value. In each of the 21 items the respondents are asked to give a single response to the two statements. Anecdotal evidence and cognitive response theory alert us to potential measurement error in this two-statements-single-response approach. Respondents might be influenced by different themes contained in the statements and their answers might not be comparable. This paper addresses the question: Do the responses to the 21 items in Schwartz’s PVQ (where each item contains two statements) differ significantly when two separate responses are allowed per item (in the split version) compared to when a single response is allowed (in the combined version)? In order to answer this research question we adopted an experimental design in a two-wave panel study. In the first wave we used Schwartz’s combined version of the PVQ. In the second wave we split the two statements and treated each statement as a separate item, thus requiring responses to each statement. Data was collected from Sociology classes at two universities: one in Austria (n = 52) and the other in South Africa (n = 61). We used statistical and non-statistical methods of analysis. The overall statistical assessment (z test) supports the split version although not all the various z test results unanimously concur. The non-statistical assessment does not support either the split version or the combined version. These mixed results necessitate further interrogation of the continued use of the combined version in the PVQ. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Quality & Quantity Springer Journals

Towards greater validity in Schwartz’s portrait values indicator using experimental research

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/towards-greater-validity-in-schwartz-s-portrait-values-indicator-using-LS0kdO0QZ3
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 by Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
Subject
Social Sciences; Methodology of the Social Sciences; Social Sciences, general
ISSN
0033-5177
eISSN
1573-7845
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11135-015-0221-1
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In Schwartz’s 21-item portrait values questionnaire (PVQ) each item consists of two statements which refer to a single underling value. In each of the 21 items the respondents are asked to give a single response to the two statements. Anecdotal evidence and cognitive response theory alert us to potential measurement error in this two-statements-single-response approach. Respondents might be influenced by different themes contained in the statements and their answers might not be comparable. This paper addresses the question: Do the responses to the 21 items in Schwartz’s PVQ (where each item contains two statements) differ significantly when two separate responses are allowed per item (in the split version) compared to when a single response is allowed (in the combined version)? In order to answer this research question we adopted an experimental design in a two-wave panel study. In the first wave we used Schwartz’s combined version of the PVQ. In the second wave we split the two statements and treated each statement as a separate item, thus requiring responses to each statement. Data was collected from Sociology classes at two universities: one in Austria (n = 52) and the other in South Africa (n = 61). We used statistical and non-statistical methods of analysis. The overall statistical assessment (z test) supports the split version although not all the various z test results unanimously concur. The non-statistical assessment does not support either the split version or the combined version. These mixed results necessitate further interrogation of the continued use of the combined version in the PVQ.

Journal

Quality & QuantitySpringer Journals

Published: May 28, 2015

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off