Advertisement

Quality and Quantity

, Volume 31, Issue 3, pp 269–285 | Cite as

Tests of stability in attitude research

  • J.M. Batista-Foguet
  • Willem E. Saris
Article

Abstract

Some researchers suggest that panel data be used with simplex models in order to evaluate stability of opinions before drawing the conclusion that an attitude is detected. They have carried out studies showing that it is not always true that an attitude exists, mainly because the opinion is unstable. This paper proposes to continue this line of research, presenting both a new conceptualization of attitude stability and a way to evaluate it by using simplex models. The paper will show that when evaluating attitude stability, researchers' models must not only take into account the structure of the variances/covariances but also the structure of the means. The authors demonstrate that this new definition of change makes a difference in the conclusions with respect to the stability of opinions with respect to the role of women in society.

Keywords

Panel Data Attitude Stability Attitude Research Simplex Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abelson, R.P. (1986). Beliefs are like possessions. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 16: 223–250.Google Scholar
  2. Amemiya, Y. & Anderson, T.W. (1990). Asymptotic chi-square test for a large class of factor analysis models, The Annals of Statistics 3: 1453–1463.Google Scholar
  3. Bentler, P.M. (1989, 1991). EQS Structural Equations Program Manual. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical Software, Inc.Google Scholar
  4. Billict, J.G., Loosveldt, J. & Waterplats, L. (1986). Hct survey-interview onderzocht. Leuven: Department of Sociologie.Google Scholar
  5. Blok, H. & Saris, W.E. (1983). Using longitudinal data to estimate reliability. Public Opinion Q. 8: 409–442.Google Scholar
  6. Converse, P. (1970). Attitudes and nonattitudes: continuation of a dialogue, in E.R. Tufte, (ed.), The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems, Reading, M.A., Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  7. de Pijper, W.M. & Saris, W.E. (1986). The Formulation of Interviews Using the Program INTERV. Amsterdam: Sociometric Research Foundation.Google Scholar
  8. Duncan, O.D. (1984). Notes on Special Measurement: Historical and Critical. New York: Russell, Sage Publishers.Google Scholar
  9. Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior. Reading: Mass. Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  10. Groves, R.M. (1989). Survey Errors and Survey Costs. Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
  11. Grouters, G., Heyt, R., v.d., Leycke, M., Oprinsen, P., Pronk, C. (1988). De houding t.o.v. mannen en vrouwen. Inter Verslag: Faculty of Psychology, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  12. Guttman, L. (1954). A new approach to factor analysis: the Radex. In P.F. Lazarsfeld (ed.), Mathematical Thinking in Social Sciences. Chicago: Free University PressGoogle Scholar
  13. Heise, D. (1969). Separating reliability and stability in test-retest correlation. American Sociological Review 34: 93–101.Google Scholar
  14. Hubbard, F.O.A., van Ijzendoorn, M.H. & Tavecchio, L.W.C. (1982). Validation of a questionnaire measuring attitudes toward females' social roles for a Dutch population. Psychological Reports 51: 491–498.Google Scholar
  15. Jagodzinsky, W. & Kühnel, S.M. (1988). Estimation of reliability and stability in single indicator multiple-wave models, Sociological Methods & Research 15: 219–258.Google Scholar
  16. Jöreskog, K.G. (1970). Estimation and testing of simplex models, British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 23: 121–145.Google Scholar
  17. Jöreskog, K.G. & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural Equation Modelling with the SIMPLIS Command Language. SSI. LEA.Google Scholar
  18. Norušis, M.J. (1993). Statistical Package for Social Sciences: SPSS for Windows. Advanced Statistics. Release 6.0. SPSS Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Saris, W.E. (1993). Attitude measurement: is there still hope. In Krebs, D. & Schmidt, P. (eds), New Directions in Attitude Measurement. Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  20. Saris, W.E. & B. Van den Putte (1988). True score of factor models: a secondary analysis of the ALLBUS-test-retest data. Sociological Methods and Research 17: 123–157.Google Scholar
  21. Saris, W.E. & Hartman, H. (1990). Common factors can always be found but can they also be rejected? Quality & Quantity 24: 471–490.Google Scholar
  22. Satorra, A. (1993). Asymptotic robust inferences in multi-sample analysis of augmented-moment structures. In C.M. Cuadras & C.R. Rao (eds.), Multivariate Analysis: Future Directions 2. Elsevier Sciences Publishers, B.V.Google Scholar
  23. Satorra, A. & Bentler, P.M. (1988). Scaling corrections for chi-square statistics in covariance structure analysis. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association 308–313.Google Scholar
  24. Schuman, H. and Presser, S. (1981). Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  25. Smith, T.W. (1984). Nonattittudes: a review and evaluation. In C.F. Turner & E. Martin (eds), Surveying Subjective Phenomena, Vol. 2, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 215–255.Google Scholar
  26. Spence, J.T. & Helmereich, R. (1972). The attitudes towards women scale: an objective instrument to measure attitudes toward the rights and roles of women in contemporary society. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology 2, 66.Google Scholar
  27. Spence, J.T. & Helmereich, R. & Stapp (1973). A short version of the attitudes towards women scale (AWS), Bull. Psychon. Soc. 2(4).Google Scholar
  28. Wiley, D.E. & Wiley, J.A. (1970). The estimation of measurement error in panel data, American Sociological Review 35: 112–117.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • J.M. Batista-Foguet
    • 1
  • Willem E. Saris
    • 2
  1. 1.Departamento de Métodos, ESADE (Universidad Ramón Llull)BarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Methodology Department, Political Sciences Faculty (University of Amsterdam)AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations