Jerry JohnsonCCSR

“A value is an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence” (Rokeach, 1973) 

True definition of values. Fundamental, irreducible and causal character. “most citizens use core principles to derive

issue preferences” (Goren, 2001) – even those who lack political expertise (Goren, 2004).

This treatment of values is taken up by the ESS as “the deeply rooted, abstract orientations that help to guide, justify or explain people’s opinions, attitudes and actions” (Rokeach, 1973).

‘Value-systems’ or ‘ideologies’ which predict political preferences, political behaviour and party affiliations.

Often values and ideology have been defined and operationalised either by the use of some other indicator (e.g. attitudes) (Heath et al, 1985; Budge, 1994; Converse, 1964; Scarbrough, 1984)

Values and ideology have thus been seen as the result rather than the cause of party identification (Inglehart and Klingemann, 1976).

Defined in such ways as to be dependent upon ephemeral political events, or the shifting opinions of a capricious electorate (Sturgis, undated).

European Social Survey (2002, 2004 and 2006).

The latent variables constructed from values scales, can be shown to have a significant influence on party preference.

However, it must be held in mind that attitudes may be more susceptible if, as argued, they are more ephemeral .

Ideological ‘value’ concepts are therefore timeless, perennial, amaranthine.

Causal factors They are unrelated to the ephemera of

everyday politics. They are the small number of axioms which

tend to be held unquestionably 'true' in the face of everyday life including such concepts as human nature, equality, freedom (or liberty), and morality (Feldman, 2003).

From the Greek ‘amaranthos’ meaning everlasting. An amaranth is an imaginary flower which never fades (OED, 1996)

1. Values are not attitudes – they are more abstract (Rokeach, 1973); and transcendent (Schwartz and Bilsky, 1987). Whilst attitudes are positive or negative evaluations on more concrete social and political objects values “hold a higher place in one’s internal evaluative hierarchy” (Hitlin and Piliavin, 2004, p. 360).

2. Values are not norms which are based on the environment – on circumstances. The difference between norms and values neatly illustrate the is-ought problem (Hume, 1739-40). Norms are deontological statements of ‘what ought to be’ whereas values (at least terminal values) are beliefs in ‘what is’.

3. Values are not traits in the sense of psychological predispositions. Traits suggest inherited enduring dispositions whereas values suggest more “cognitive control” toward “enduring goals” (Hitlin and Piliavin, 2004, p. 361).

4. Values are not needs in the sense of human biological needs – they are not contingent on environmental circumstances. It is possible that human needs are one source of values, but they are not identical (Hitlin and Piliavin, 2004).

“One instrument of America power is to better understand and to better use the strength of nongovernmental institutions in promoting American values and interests abroad. In fact, I would call these "universal values," because these are not simply American values. It turns out that when you ask people, "Do you want to speak freely? Do you wish to be able to enjoy the fruits of your labor? Do you wish to be able to be free from arbitrary power?" All people say, yes, they do. These are universal values.” (Condoleeza Rice, United States Institute of Peace Conference, January 17, 2001)

ESS – 560 (ish) questions Core questions – 21 questions values ESS – 2002, 2004, 2006 17 countries

◦ Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK

The Rokeach and Schwartz schemas and the other values suggested in the hypothetical values-list suggest the possibility that a single left-right (Bobbio, 1996), liberal-conservative (Converse, 1964) cooperation-dogmatism (Rokeach, 1960) equality-freedom (Rokeach, 1973) or contextualist-absolutist (Alford, Funk and Hibbing, 2005) dimension may indeed underly these values and be the primary value-dimension.

European Social Survey uses 21 measures.

  Round 1 (2002) Round 2 (2004) Round 3 (2006)  people response  people response  people response 

Austria 2257 60.4 2256 62.4 2405 64Belgium 1899 59.2 1778 61.2 1798 61Denmark 1506 67.6 1487 64.2 1505 50.8Finland 2000 73.2 2022 70.7 1896 64.4France 1503 43.1 1806 43.6 1986 46Germany 2919 55.7 2870 51 2916 54.5Hungary 1685 69.9 1498 65.9 1518 66.1Ireland 2046 64.5 2286 62.5 1800 56.8Netherlands 2364 67.9 1881 64.3 1889 59.8Norway 2036 65 1760 66.2 1750 65.5Poland 2110 73.2 1716 73.7 1721 70.2Portugal 1511 68.8 2052 71.2 2222 72.8Slovenia 1519 70.5 1512 62.7 1766 73.2Spain 1729 53.2 1663 54.9 1876 65.9Sweden 1999 69.5 1948 65.4 1927 65.9Switzerland 2040 33.5 2141 48.6 1804 51.5UK 2052 55.5 1897 50.6 2394 54

           

Total 33,175 32,573 33,173

Long Question Short Descriptor

Important to think new ideas and being creative CreativityImportant to be rich, have money and expensive things WealthImportant that people are treated equally and have equal opportunities

Equality

Important to show abilities and be admired AbilityImportant to live in secure and safe surroundings SecurityImportant to try new and different things in life ExperimentalismImportant to do what is told and follow rules ObedienceImportant to understand different people CosmopolitanismImportant to be humble and modest, not draw attention HumilityImportant to have a good time Fun-SeekingImportant to make own decisions and be free FreedomImportant to help people and care for others well-being PastoralImportant to be successful and that people recognize achievements

Success

Important that government is strong and ensures safety Strong government

Important to seek adventures and have an exiting life AdventurousnessImportant to behave properly Well behavedImportant to get respect from others RespectImportant to be loyal to friends and devote to people close LoyaltyImportant to care for nature and environment EnvironmentalismImportant to follow traditions and customs TraditionalismImportant to seek fun and things that give pleasure Hedonisism

Attitudes – only 4 questions◦ Government should reduce differences in income

levels◦ Gay men and lesbians should be free to live their

own life as they wish◦ Political parties that wish to overthrow democracy

should be banned◦ Modern science can be relied on to solve our

environmental problems Orthogonality? (very different) Values – 21 questions Oblique? (Euclidean space)

Principal Component Analysis Exploratory Factor Analysis Confirmatory Factor Analysis

EFA was initially applied to the pooled information for all 17 countries included in the ESS for all three Rounds (2002, 2004 and 2006). It involved a total of 75,000 respondents. An unrestricted model of ERA was run with no rotation. At this stage the Eigen values >1 rule was not involved. Scree plots were produced for all three Rounds. Very similar scree plots occurred. These showed a large difference between the first three factors with little difference between the remainder, producing an ‘elbow’ effect.

Rotation was used to arrive at a more interpretable, simple factor structure.

Quartimax rotation was used. This rotation simplifies the rows of the factor loading

matrix, so that each variable will only load on a few factors.

The more commonly used varimax rotation simplifies the columns of the factor loading matrix so that each factor only has a few variables with large loadings.

Variables were assessed as being indicative of the factors if the factor loading was above 3 and the difference in factor loadings for the same variable on the different factors was greater than 1.

Factor 1. Extroversion.◦ Extroversion falls into an overall category which is defined as

‘obtaining gratification from what is outside’. The formal indicators might be interpreted as representing fun, sociable behaviour, excitement, accomplishment, daring and pleasure-seeking self satisfaction. It leads to a more precise summary of Extroversion as containing the qualities of: being gregarious, assertiveness, and excitement.

Factor 2. Conservatism. ◦ Protection and safety, duty and conformity, control, discipline,

deference, conventionality and orthodoxy are descriptors associated with this term and might be more formally summarised as : preservation, tradition and unchanging.

Factor 3. Egalitarianism. ◦ This embodies concepts of fairness, impartiality, international,

broad-based outlooks, loyalty and ecology. In this case, a formal summary might incorporate equality, conforming to the law, membership of a wider society and ecology.

 ESS 2002Factor

Extro Con EgaliCreativity 0.394 -0.071 0.363Wealth 0.540 0.182 -0.220Equality 0.039 0.112 0.483Ability 0.592 0.227 -0.016Security 0.066 0.576 0.177Experimentalism 0.533 -0.072 0.318Obedience 0.007 0.588 0.036Cosmopolitanism 0.095 0.079 0.600Humility -0.155 0.355 0.331Fun-Seeking 0.563 -0.073 0.247Freedom 0.363 0.058 0.362Pastoral 0.090 0.260 0.554Success 0.658 0.236 -0.011Strong government 0.100 0.557 0.233Adventurousness 0.636 -0.182 0.053Well behaved 0.028 0.645 0.215Respect 0.392 0.418 -0.032Loyalty 0.157 0.249 0.529Environmentalism 0.079 0.213 0.538Traditionalism 0.000 0.518 0.133Hedonisism 0.575 -0.035 0.169

 ESS 2004 Factor  Extro Con EgaliCreativity 0.370 -0.077 0.346Wealth 0.546 0.132 -0.209Equality 0.024 0.140 0.488Ability 0.588 0.250 -0.009Security 0.034 0.560 0.195Experimentalism 0.519 -0.075 0.345Obedience -0.001 0.532 0.048Cosmopolitanism 0.068 0.104 0.572Humility -0.177 0.337 0.328Fun-Seeking 0.512 -0.121 0.278Freedom 0.330 0.078 0.349Pastoral 0.146 0.231 0.539Success 0.663 0.253 -0.015Strong government 0.085 0.538 0.225Adventurousness 0.626 -0.198 0.053Well behaved -0.034 0.634 0.220Respect 0.355 0.430 -0.005Loyalty 0.126 0.264 0.531Environmentalism 0.048 0.233 0.511Traditionalism -0.029 0.516 0.145Hedonisism 0.545 -0.091 0.217

 ESS 2006 Factor  Extro Con EgaliCreativity 0.413 -0.056 0.245Wealth 0.492 0.202 -0.256Equality 0.058 0.072 0.488Ability 0.570 0.267 -0.053Security 0.041 0.558 0.202Experimentalism 0.576 -0.054 0.263Obedience -0.005 0.565 0.038Cosmopolitanism 0.123 0.056 0.586Humility -0.180 0.272 0.416Fun-Seeking 0.537 -0.108 0.220Freedom 0.338 0.086 0.279Pastoral 0.170 0.174 0.521Success 0.635 0.282 -0.071Strong government 0.068 0.506 0.260Adventurousness 0.640 -0.146 -0.022Well behaved -0.059 0.600 0.260Respect 0.320 0.467 -0.013Loyalty 0.160 0.198 0.520Environmentalism 0.065 0.168 0.532Traditionalism -0.024 0.493 0.186Hedonisism 0.567 -0.067 0.163

◦ Creativity: differences - .4 or higher: Very close to the .4. <.4 Europe, and difference countries (Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, Spain, Finland, France, UK, Ireland); >.4 (Austria, Belgium, Hungary, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal and Sweden). A problem; 50% Extroversion and 50% Egalitarianism. Very weak. Overall, not standing a problem, .305 (UK, Round1) and .514 (Belgium, Round 2). Example1: Finland: Extro - .328, 361, 2.56 and Egali - .333, 358, 416. Example2 Portugal: Extro - .422 .523, .477.

◦ Wealth: usually .4 or 5. Europe, and mostly difference countries. Unusually FI and NL. >.6. Slovenia very weak. >.3.

◦ Equality: Strong – AU, PT; Weak – DK, ES, HU, SI◦ Ability: - Strong – FI, IE; Weak – PL◦ Security: Strong - PT ; Weak - UK◦ Experimentalism: Strong – BE, PT, SI; Weak – DK, FR. Finland and Netherlands – extro

and egali.◦ Obedience: Strong – FI (Con), IR (Con); Weak – HU (Con/Ega)◦ Cosmopolitanism: Strong – ES (Ext): Weak – HU (Ext), PL (Ext), SL (Ext/Ega/Con)◦ Humility: Strong – HU (Ext), PT (Con/Ega), SI (Con/Ega); Weak – ◦ Fun-seeking: Strong – PL (Ext); Weak – HU (Ext)◦ Freedom: Strong – ES (Ext/Ega), PT (Con/Ega), SI (Ext); Weak – ◦ Pastoral: Strong – PT (Ext); Weak – DE (Ega)◦ Success: Strong – FI (Ext), NL (Ext), SE (Ext); Weak – CH (Ext)◦ Strong Govt: Strong – PT (Con); Weak – DK (Con)◦ Adventurousness: Strong – NO (Ext), PL (Ext), PT (Ext); Weak – DK (Ext), HU (Ext), NL

(Ext)◦ Well behaved: Strong – AU (Con), IE (Con/Ega), NL (Con); Weak – BE (Con), CH (Con)◦ Respect: Strong – FI (Ext); Weak – AU (Ext/Con), BE (Con/Ext), HU (Con/Ega/Ext), PL

(Con/Ega/Ext), PT (Con/Ega/Ext)◦ Loyalty: Strong – PT (Ega); Weak – NO (Con/Ega/Ext), SI (Con/Ega/Ext)◦ Environmentalism: Strong – PT (Ega); Weak – NO (Ega), SE (Ega/Con)◦ Traditionalism: Strong – ES (Con), IE (Con/Ega), PL (Con), SI (Con/Ega); Weak – DK (Con)◦ Hedonisism: Strong – FI (Ext), PL (Ext), PT (Ext); Weak – NL (Ext/Ega)

Pool European Similar Countries Don’t know, USA, Russia, China etc...

Left Right

Egalitarianism

Conservatism

Extroversion

Very similar values – Europe Little different the value

◦ PO, HU and PO – 2 factors (Extro and Egali/Conse) Norway/Denmark –

◦ Adventurousness strong NO, weak DK and NL Cosmopolitanism:

◦ Strong: ES, Weak East European (PL, HU, SI) Very stable, not longitudinal, only cross-sectional

studies.