Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A hierarchical generalised Bayesian SEM to assess quality of democracy in Europe

  • Published:
METRON Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

During the last decades, many studies have documented a persistent and widespread decline in satisfaction in some established democracies, giving empirical support to the heterogeneity of democratic systems in terms of their quality. The main implication is that if democracies vary in terms of their performance, such variation should be reflected in citizens’ satisfaction and support for democratic institutions and in citizens’ political trust. In this paper, we examine which factors are related to democracy satisfaction and political trust in the European countries, with a particular focus on the role of quality of democracy in shaping these attitudes. To comply with the aim of the study, we formulate a Hierarchical Generalised Bayesian Structural Equation Model (SEM). The proposed model combines the advantages of multilevel-multidimensional IRT models and SEM and accounts for explanatory variables and indicators at country and individual levels. To explain cross-national variations in the variables of interest, we rely on data from the European Social Survey (EES) and from the Democracy Barometer. The results show that trust in political institutions goes along with satisfaction with democracy. In addition, our findings highlight the existence of a spatial heterogeneous gap between citizens’ expectations and evaluations of democracy across ESS countries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adams, R.J., Wilson, M., Wang, W.: The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 21(1), 1–23 (1997). doi:10.1177/0146621697211001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Andrich, D.: Models for measurement, precision, and the nondichotomisation of graded responses. Psychometrika 60(1), 7–26 (1995). doi:10.1007/BF02294426

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Andrich, D.: Understanding the response structure and process in the polytomous Rasch model. In: Nering, M.L., Ostini, R. (eds.) Handbook of Polytomous Item Response Theory Models. Routledge, New York (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Béguin, A., Glas, C.: MCMC estimation and some model-fit analysis of multidimensional IRT models. Psychometrika 66(4), 541–561 (2001). doi:10.1007/BF02296195

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Beretvas, S.N., Kamata, A.: The multilevel measurement model: introduction to the special issue. J. Appl. Meas. 6(3), 247–254 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Charron, N., Lapuente, V.: Does democracy produce quality of government? Eur. J. Polit. Res. 49(4), 443–470 (2010). doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2009.01906.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Coppedge, M., Gerring, J., Altman, D., Bernhard, M., Fish, S., Hicken, A.: Conceptualizing and measuring democracy: a new approach. Perspect. Polit. 9(2), 247–267 (2011). doi:10.1017/S1537592711000880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cowles, M.: Accelerating Monte Carlo Markov chain convergence for cumulative-link generalized linear models. Stat. Comput. 6(2), 101–111 (1996). doi:10.1007/BF00162520

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. de Ayala, R.J.: The Theory and Practice of Item Response Theory. The Guilford Press, New York (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  10. De Battisti, F., Nicolini, G., Salini, S.: The Rasch model to measure the service quality. ICFAI J. Serv. Mark. 3(3), 58–80 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  11. de Jong, M.G., Steenkamp, J.B.E.M., Fox, J.P.: Relaxing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research using a hierarchical IRT model. J. Consum. Res. 34(2), 260–278 (2007). doi:10.1086/518532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. DeMars, C.: Item Response Theory, Understanding Statistics Measurement. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2010)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Diamond, L., Morlino, L.: Assessing the Quality of Democracy. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. ESS (2012a) Data file edition 2.1. Norwegian Social Science Data Services, Norway Data Archive and distributor of ESS data

  15. ESS: ESS Round 6 Translation Guidelines. Mannheim, European Social Survey GESIS (2012b)

  16. ESS: Sampling for the European Social Survey Round VI: Principles and Requirements. Mannheim, European Social Survey GESIS (2012c)

  17. Gasiorowski, M.J.: An Overview of the Political Regime Change Dataset. Comp Polit Stud 29(4), 469–483 (1996). doi:10.1177/0010414096029004004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gelman, A., Meng, X.L., Stern, H.: Posterior predictive assessment of model fitness via realized discrepancies. Stat. Sin. 6, 733–807 (1996)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Gelman, A., Carlin, J.B., Stern, H.S., Dunson, D.B., Vehtari, A., Rubin, D.B.: Bayesian Data Analysis, 3rd edn., Chapman and Hall/CRC (2013)

  20. de Jong, M.G., Steenkamp, J.B.E.M.: Finite mixture multilevel multidimensional ordinal IRT models for large scale cross-cultural research. Psychometrika 75(1), 3–32 (2010). doi:10.1007/s11336-009-9134-z

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Kamata, A.: Item analysis by the hierarchical generalized linear model. J. Educ. Meas. 38(1), 79–93 (2001). doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.2001.tb01117.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kriesi, H., Lavenex, S., Esser, F., Matthes, J., Bühlmann, M., Bochsler, D.: Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization. Palgrave Macmillan (2013)

  23. Little, R.J.: The Bayesian approach to sample survey inference. In: Chambers, R.L., Skinner, C.J. (eds.) Analysis of Survey Data, pp. 49–57. Wiley, Chichester (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Maier, K.S.: A Rasch hierarchical measurement model. J. Educ. Behav. Stat. 26(3), 307–330 (2001). doi:10.3102/10769986026003307

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Morlino, L.: Legitimacy and the Quality of Democracy. Int. Soc. Sci. J. 60(196), 211–222 (2010). doi:10.1111/j.1468-2451.2010.01717.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Norris, P.: Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2011)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Parasuraman, A., Zheitmal, V.A., Berry, L.L.: SERVQUAL: a conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. J. Mark. 49(1), 41–50 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rubin, D.B.: Inference and missing data. Biometrika 63(3), 581–592 (1976). doi:10.1093/biomet/63.3.581

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Samejima, F.: Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores, Psychometric Monograph, vol. 17. Psychometric Society, Richmond (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Sheng, Y., Wikle, C.K.: Comparing multiunidimensional and unidimensional item response theory models. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 67(6), 899–919 (2007). doi:10.1177/0013164406296977

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. Sheng, Y., Wikle, C.K.: Bayesian multidimensional IRT models with a hierarchical structure. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 68(3), 413–430 (2008). doi:10.1177/0013164407308512

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Sinharay, S., Johnson, M.S., Stern, H.S.: Posterior predictive assessment of item response theory models. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 30(4), 298–321 (2006). doi:10.1177/0146621605285517

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  33. Skrondal, A., Rabe-Hesketh, S.: Generalized Latent Variable Modeling: Multilevel, Longitudinal, and Structural Equation Models. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton (2004)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Tanner, M.A., Wong, W.H.: The Calculation of Posterior Distributions by Data Augmentation. J. Am. Stat. Ass. 82(398), 528–540 (1987). doi:10.1080/01621459.1987.10478458

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Thulin, M.: Decision-theoretic justifications for bayesian hypothesis testing using credible sets. J. Stat. Plan. Inference 146, 133–138 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2013.09.014

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Tuerlinckx, F., De Boeck, P.: Two interpretations of the discrimination parameter. Psychometrika 70(4), 629–650 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the editor and the anonymous reviewers whose comments and criticisms have greatly improved this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Legal and Social Sciences, “G.d’Annunzio” Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy

    Lara Fontanella & Simone Di Zio

  2. Department of Economics-University, “G.d’Annunzio” Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy

    Annalina Sarra & Pasquale Valentini

Authors
  1. Lara Fontanella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Annalina Sarra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Simone Di Zio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pasquale Valentini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annalina Sarra.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (pdf 11590 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fontanella, L., Sarra, A., Di Zio, S. et al. A hierarchical generalised Bayesian SEM to assess quality of democracy in Europe. METRON 74, 117–138 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40300-016-0081-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40300-016-0081-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation