Revisiting the trans-situationality of values in Schwartz’s Portrait Values Questionnaire

Abstract

Schwartz in his famous theory of basic values follows Parsons and Rokeach in arguing that human values are trans-situational or context free. For any individual, the same personal value priorities exist across different life contexts such as the workplace, the school or the home. This assumption influenced the design of Schwartz’s Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ), which is widely used in the measurement of values. There is a tendency in the literature on values measurement to take this assumption for granted, but some cross-cultural research questions it. In our quest to improve validity and reliability in the measurement of values we used a quasi-experimental two-wave panel study to test Schwartz’s assumption, in the design of his PVQ, that values are trans-situational. Data was collected from sociology classes at two universities: one in Austria (n = 52) and the other in South Africa (n = 61). In the first wave the respondents completed Schwartz’s context-free version of the PVQ, and thereafter they completed a second PVQ with their family/home context in mind. In the second wave, 2 weeks later, the respondents completed the PVQ with the university context in mind. We used various statistical methods in our analysis of the data including a modified Cronbach’s alpha, the Student t test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Stouffer’s z test and multi-dimensional scaling. Our overall findings support a scenario where respondents have a universal set of values, but the way they prioritise their personal values is somewhat influenced by the value priorities associated with the life context they are thinking about.

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

Fig. 1

Source Schwartz (2012, p. 9) (we use the most recent version of Schwartz’s model, which is marginally different to the model published in 1992. Schwartz has granted us permission to reproduce this diagram)

Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Notes

  1. 1.

    A substantial difference was assumed if the absolute difference in the means was equal or larger than 0.4.

  2. 2.

    In order to measure the similarity of patterns we used the shape-distance formula: \(d(x,y;\,{\text{Edwards/Cavalli{-}Sforza}}) = \sqrt {2 - 2\cos (x,y)}\) (Edwards and Cavalli-Sforza 1964 in Sodeur 1974, p. 92). Only the shape, not the size, was included in the calculation.

References

  1. Borg, I., Groenen, P.J.F.: Modern Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and Applications. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cieciuch, J., Schwartz, S.H., Vecchione, M.: Applying the refined values theory to past data: What can researchers gain? J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 44(8), 1215–1234 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cox, T.F., Cox, M.A.A.: Multidimensional scaling, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cronbach, L.J.: Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16, 297–334 (1951)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Daniel, E., Crabtree, M.: Value differentiation and sexual orientation. Pap. Soc. Represent. 23, 9.1–9.22 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Daniel, E., Schiefer, D., Knafo, A.: One and not the same: the consistency of values across contexts among majority and minority members in Israel and Germany. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 43(7), 1167–1184 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. De Maio, T.J., Landreth, A.: Do different cognitive interview techniques produce different results? In: Presser, S., Rothgeb, J.M., Couper, M.P., Lessler, E., Martin, E., Martin, J.S. (eds.) Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questions, pp. 89–108. Wiley, Chichester (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  8. De Wet, J.P., Bacher, J., Wetzelhütter, D.: Towards greater validity in Schwartz’s portrait values indicator using experimental research. Qual. Quant. 50(4), 1567–1587 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gediga, G.: Skalierung: Eine Einführung in die Methodik zur Entwicklung von Testund Messinstrumenten in den Verhaltenswissenschaften. Lit Verlag, Münster (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Groves, R.M., Fowler, F.J., Couper, M.P., Lepkowski, J.M., Singer, E., Tourangeau, R.: Survey Methodology, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kruskal, J.B.: Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: a numerical method. Psychometrika 29(2), 115–129 (1964)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kruskal, J.B., Wish, M.: Multidimensional Scaling. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, vol. 07-11. Sage, Beverly Hills (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Oyserman, D.: Values, psychology of. In: Wright, J.D. (ed.) International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 25, 2nd edn, pp. 36–40. Elsevier, Oxford (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Parsons, T., Shils, E.A.: Values. Motives, and systems of action. In: Parsons, T., Shils, E.A. (eds.) Toward a General Theory of Action, pp. 47–248. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1951)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Phelan, P., Davidson, A.L., Yu, H.C.: Adolescents’ Worlds—Negotiating, Family, Peers and School. Teachers College Press, New York (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  16. OECD. PISA 2003 Data Analysis Manual: SPSS® Users. Paris: OECD http://www.oecd.org/education/school/programmeforinternationalstudentassessmentpisa/35004299.pdf (2005). Accessed 12 Nov 2017

  17. Rokeach, M.: The Nature of Human Values. The Free Press, New York (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Schwartz, S.H.: Universals in the content and structure of values: theory and empirical tests in 20 countries. In: Zanna, M. (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 25, pp. 1–65. Academic Press, New York (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Schwartz, S.H.: Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values. J. Soc. Issues 50(4), 19–45 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schwartz, S.H.: An overview of the schwartz theory of basic values. Online Read. Psychol. Cult. 2(1), 1–20 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schwartz, S.H.: Basic human values. In: Paper Presented at the Cross-National Comparison Seminar on the Quality and Comparability of Measures for Constructs in Comparative Research: Methods and Applications (QMSS2). Bolzano (Bozen), Italy (2009)

  22. Seligman, C.: Values and political ideology. In: Hösle, V. (ed.) Dimension of Goodness. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Seligman, C., Katz, A.N.: The dynamics of value systems. In: Seligman, C., Olson, J.M., Zanna, M.P. (eds.) The Psychology of Values: The Ontario Symposium, vol. 8, pp. 53–75. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sodeur, W.: Empirische Verfahren zur Klassifikation. Teubner, Stuttgart (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sudman, S., Bradburn, N.M., Schwarz, N.: Thinking About Answers. The Application of Cognitive Process to Survey Methodology. Wiley, New York (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Zeller, R.A., Carmines, E.G.: Measurement in the Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1980)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacques de Wet.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, authorship or publication of this article.

Ethics approval

Ethics approval for the study referred to in this paper was granted by the Humanities Faculty Ethics Committee at the University of Cape Town.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from each respondent who participated in the study.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Schwartz’s PVQ items and values

See Table 8.

Table 8 Schwartz’s PVQ items and values (Female Version) (Schwartz 2009)

Appendix 2: Pairwise differences in the means of the 3 versions of the PVQ for Austria and South Africa

See Tables 9, 10, 11 and 12.

Table 9 Mean differences for Austria using the t test for dependent samples
Table 10 Mean differences for South Africa using the t test for dependent samples
Table 11 Mean differences for Austria using Wilcoxon signed-rank test
Table 12 Mean differences for South Africa using Wilcoxon signed-rank test

Appendix 3: SPSS-syntax

SPSS-syntax for computing Cronbach’s alpha

figurea

SPSS-syntax for parallel analysis

figureb

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

de Wet, J., Wetzelhütter, D. & Bacher, J. Revisiting the trans-situationality of values in Schwartz’s Portrait Values Questionnaire. Qual Quant 53, 685–711 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0784-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Schwartz’s Portrait Values Questionnaire
  • Trans-situationality of values
  • Quasi-experiment
  • Measurement error