Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T07:03:11.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing the Validity of the Postmaterialism Index

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Darren W. Davis  and
Christian Davenport
Darren W. Davis
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Christian Davenport
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Inglehart's postmaterialism thesis describes an individual-level process of value change. Little attention has been devoted to validating the responses to his postmaterialist-materialist index. The aggregate-level distributions may appear to reflect a postmaterialist-materialist dimension, even if at the individual level responses on the questions making up the index are random. The logic of the survey questions used for the index defines a baseline against which the actual distribution of responses can be compared. Using such a standard, we find that individual responses are not constrained by an underlying value dimension, in the sense that the observed patterns of responses increasingly do not differ from what one would expect by chance. Furthermore, as one would expect for a random variable, index scores are virtually unexplainable as a dependent variable, and they cannot be used to predict support for various political and social issues, said to flow from attitudes measured by the index.

Type
Forum
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 93 , Issue 3 , September 1999 , pp. 649 - 664
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Books and Periodicals

Abramson, Paul R., and Inglehart, Ronald. 1987. “Generational Replacement and the Future of Post-Materialist Values.” Journal of Politics 49 (February): 231–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramson, Paul R., and Inglehart, Ronald. 1992. “Generational Replacement and Value Change in Eight Western European Societies.” British Journal of Political Science 22 (April): 183–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramson, Paul R., and Inglehart, Ronald. 1994. “Education, Security and Postmaterialism: A Comment on Duch and Taylor's ‘Postmaterialism and the Economic Condition.’” American Journal of Political Science 38 (August): 797–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramson, Paul R., and Inglehart, Ronald. 1995. Value Change in Global Perspective. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrich, John H., and Nelson, Forrest D. 1990. Linear Probability, Logit, and Probit Models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Anderson, Leslie R. 1990. “Postmaterialism from a Peasant Perspective: Political Motivation in Costa Rica and Nicaragua.” Comparative Political Studies 23 (April): 80–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bean, Clive, and Papadakis, Elim. 1994. “Polarized Priorities or Flexible Alternatives? Dimensionality in Inglehart's Materialism-Postmaterialism Scale.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 6 (3): 264–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, Clem, and Manza, Jeff. 1994. “Do Changing Values Explain the New Politics? A Critical Assessment of the Postmaterialist Thesis.” Sociological Quarterly 35 (4): 541–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Robert D., and Carmines, Edward G. 1995. “Materialists, Postmaterialists, and the Criteria for Political Choice in U.S. Presidential Elections.” Journal of Politics 57 (May): 483–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., and Dutt, Nitish. 1991. “Measuring Value Change in Western Industrialized Societies: The Impact of Unemployment.” American Political Science Review 85 (September): 905–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., Dutt, Nitish, and Rapkin, Jonathan. 1997. “Conversations in Context: The (Mis)Measurement of Value Change in Advanced Industrial Societies.” Political Behavior 19 (March): 19–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, Russell J. 1996. Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies, 2d ed. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.Google Scholar
Davis, Darren W., Dowley, Kathleen M., Silver, Brian D. 1998. “Postmaterialism in World Societies: Is It Really a Value Dimension?” Paper presented at the 1998 annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Flanagan, Scott C. 1982. “Changing Values in Advanced Industrial Societies: Inglehart's Silent Revolution from the Perspective of Japanese Findings.” Comparative Political Studies 14 (January): 403–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., and Duch, Raymond M. 1994. “Postmaterialism and the Emerging Soviet Democracy.” Political Research Quarterly 47 (March): 5–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granato, Jim, Inglehart, Ronald, and Leblang, David. 1996. “Cultural Values, Stable Democracy, and Economic Development: Theory, Hypotheses, and Some Empirical Tests.” American Journal of Political Science 40 (August): 607–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald. 1971. “The Silent Revolution in Europe: Inter-generational Change in Post-Industrial Societies.” American Political Science Review 65 (December): 991–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald. 1977. The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles among Western Publics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald. 1987. “Value Change in Industrial Societies.” American Political Science Review 81 (December): 1289–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald. 1990. Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald. 1997. Modernization and Postmodemization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackman, Robert W., and Miller, Ross A. 1996. “A Renaissance of Political Culture?” American Journal of Political Science 40 (August): 632–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Peter. A Guide to Econometrics, 3d ed. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kim, Jae-On, and Mueller, Charles W. 1990. Factor Analysis: Statistical Methods and Practical Issues. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Opp, Karl-Dieter. 1990. “Postmaterialism, Collective Action, and Political Protest.” American Journal of Political Science 34 (Febru-ary): 212–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of the Census. 1997. Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1997. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, James A., and Smith, Tom W. 1994. General Social Survey, 1972–1994 [compute file/. National Opinion Research Center [producer], 1994. The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research [distributor], 1994.Google Scholar
Miller, Warren E., Kinder, Donald R., Rosenstone, Steven J., and The National Election Studies. 1993. American National Election Study, 1992: Pre- and Post-Election Survey [enhanced with 1990 and 1991 data] [computer file] (Study #6067). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies/Inter-University Consortium for Political Studies/Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [producers]. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].Google Scholar
World Values Study Group. 1994. World Values Survey, 1981–1984 and 1990–1993. [computer file] (Study #6160). Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research [producer], Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor].Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.