Keynote Speakers
Measurement Equivalence? A Tale of False Obsessions and a Cure
April 9th, 12:00-13:30
Due to the exponential growth of computational power in statistics software, “Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis” (MGCFA) has quickly become the gold standard of establishing measurement equivalence in cross-cultural research. The key premise of MGCFA is that country-wise variability in the factor solutions of multi-item constructs renders country means incomparable, which essentially debunks the affected constructs as useless in cross-cultural research. We argue that this approach gets the dependency structure of country means and factor solutions wrong and has, thus, established a flawed logic of cross-cultural comparison. To support our argument, we reveal a basic but widely ignored truth: when country means scatter over most of the scale range of a construct—which is certain in cross-cultural settings—variability in factor solutions is inevitable. The reason for this truism is strikingly simple (although largely unknown): factor solutions are a mathematical derivative of the means’ scale positions. In other words, factor solutions depend on country means. Given this dependency structure, the MGCFA-assumption that country means are incomparable across varying factor solutions needs to be turned upside down to get the logic of comparison straight again: factor solutions are incomparable across varying country means. After establishing this logical principle, we demonstrate empirically that MGCFA’s focus on variability in factor solutions is altogether irrelevant to measurement equivalence properly understood, which is present when similar country means map in similar fashion on other variables of interest. Our insights re-enforce Welzel and Inglehart’s conclusion that the cross-cultural comparability of multi-item constructs should be judged by the strength of their external linkages, instead of the invariance of their internal cohesion.
From Authoritarian Personality to Authoritarian Reflex: Evolving Views of an Enduring Phenomenon
April 10th, 17:00-18:30
This article hypothesizes that, despite being based on quite different theories, two widely-investigated constructs-- the Authoritarian Personality and Materialism/Postmaterialism-- actually tap the same underlying phenomenon. To test this hypothesis in global perspective, we interviewed representative samples of the publics of the U.S., Canada, Mexico and India’s Karnataka state, using a now-standard battery to measure Authoritarianism that was developed in the 1980s, and Inglehart’s 12-item measure of Postmaterialism developed in 1973. The results indicate that Postmaterialism is the opposite pole of Authoritarianism. Moreover, both Authoritarianism and Postmaterialism seem tap the same underlying phenomenon that has been measured by many other investigators under such names as “Individualism-Collectivism," "Autonomy-Embeddedness" and "Tight vs Loose" cultures. We present evidence that high or low levels of this phenomenon are driven by high or low levels of existential security, and that it plays a major role in generating support for xenophobic populist movements. Finally, we propose an explanation for the currently high levels of support for xenophobic populism in seemingly secure high-income societies.
The Political Consequences of the Great Recession: Key Results of the POLCON Project
April 11th, 10:00-11:30
The keynote will attempt to provide an overview over key results from the POLCON project, which has studied the political consequences of the Great Recession in the electoral arena and in the protest arena in the three regions of Europe (northwestern, southern and central-eastern Europe). Based on the results of the project, I will address the question of whether the Great Recession was a critical juncture for European politics. The answer will differ according to the region considered. While northwestern Europe followed a scenario of continuity, central-eastern Europe one of consolidation, it was above all in southern Europe that we witnessed a profound transformation of political competition in the party system. This transformation, I am going to argue, was to an important extent driven by a wave of public economic protest which swept across southern Europe during the Euro crisis and which was the combined result of deep economic and political grievances.
Beliefs about Climate Change and Support for Fossil Fuel Taxes: The Role of Political Trust
April 12th, 10:00-11:30
Carbon taxes are an important policy instrument for mitigating climate change, but politically they are challenging to introduce, as most people do not want them. Prior studies have found that people’s opinions of carbon and other environmental taxes depend not just on their perceptions of the problems the taxes address, but also on their political trust. Using new data from 23 European countries, we show for the first time that these two factors interact: if people are politically distrusting, concerns about the risks of climate change make little difference to their support for carbon taxes. Consequently, countries that are most supportive of higher carbon taxes are not those most concerned about the dangers of climate change, but those with more political trust translating such positive concerns into normative support. Public scepticism about climate change is less of a barrier to the introduction of higher carbon taxes than is political distrust.
Have you spotted a typo?
Highlight it, click Ctrl+Enter and send us a message. Thank you for your help!
To be used only for spelling or punctuation mistakes.