Prediction versus explanation in the measurement of values

Michael Hechter, Hyojoung Kim, Justin Baer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although economists and sociologists have often concluded that values and other internal states have little causal weight in determining behaviour, there is some evidence that the tide is turning in this respect. This article contributes to the recent revival of interest in subjectivity by comparing two different kinds of survey methods that can be used to measure values in general, and the value of civic mindedness in particular. The explicit approach -widely used in current empirical research - derives value measures on the basis of direct questions asked in nationally representative surveys such as the General Social Survey and the National Election Studies. The factorial approach imputes values indirectly from answers to vignettes. In this study, the explicit approach is revealed to have greater predictive validity but substantially lower construct validity than the factorial approach. This finding highlights the distinction between prediction and explanation in social research, and casts doubt on the adequacy of revealed preference theory.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)91-108
Number of pages18
JournalEuropean Sociological Review
Volume21
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Values
election research
construct validity
social research
sociologist
economist
subjectivity
empirical research
evidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Prediction versus explanation in the measurement of values. / Hechter, Michael; Kim, Hyojoung; Baer, Justin.

In: European Sociological Review, Vol. 21, No. 2, 2005, p. 91-108.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hechter, Michael ; Kim, Hyojoung ; Baer, Justin. / Prediction versus explanation in the measurement of values. In: European Sociological Review. 2005 ; Vol. 21, No. 2. pp. 91-108.
@article{6e43b0e82799423599049b1bbf32a461,
title = "Prediction versus explanation in the measurement of values",
abstract = "Although economists and sociologists have often concluded that values and other internal states have little causal weight in determining behaviour, there is some evidence that the tide is turning in this respect. This article contributes to the recent revival of interest in subjectivity by comparing two different kinds of survey methods that can be used to measure values in general, and the value of civic mindedness in particular. The explicit approach -widely used in current empirical research - derives value measures on the basis of direct questions asked in nationally representative surveys such as the General Social Survey and the National Election Studies. The factorial approach imputes values indirectly from answers to vignettes. In this study, the explicit approach is revealed to have greater predictive validity but substantially lower construct validity than the factorial approach. This finding highlights the distinction between prediction and explanation in social research, and casts doubt on the adequacy of revealed preference theory.",
author = "Michael Hechter and Hyojoung Kim and Justin Baer",
year = "2005",
doi = "10.1093/esr/jci006",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "91--108",
journal = "European Sociological Review",
issn = "0266-7215",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prediction versus explanation in the measurement of values

AU - Hechter, Michael

AU - Kim, Hyojoung

AU - Baer, Justin

PY - 2005

Y1 - 2005

N2 - Although economists and sociologists have often concluded that values and other internal states have little causal weight in determining behaviour, there is some evidence that the tide is turning in this respect. This article contributes to the recent revival of interest in subjectivity by comparing two different kinds of survey methods that can be used to measure values in general, and the value of civic mindedness in particular. The explicit approach -widely used in current empirical research - derives value measures on the basis of direct questions asked in nationally representative surveys such as the General Social Survey and the National Election Studies. The factorial approach imputes values indirectly from answers to vignettes. In this study, the explicit approach is revealed to have greater predictive validity but substantially lower construct validity than the factorial approach. This finding highlights the distinction between prediction and explanation in social research, and casts doubt on the adequacy of revealed preference theory.

AB - Although economists and sociologists have often concluded that values and other internal states have little causal weight in determining behaviour, there is some evidence that the tide is turning in this respect. This article contributes to the recent revival of interest in subjectivity by comparing two different kinds of survey methods that can be used to measure values in general, and the value of civic mindedness in particular. The explicit approach -widely used in current empirical research - derives value measures on the basis of direct questions asked in nationally representative surveys such as the General Social Survey and the National Election Studies. The factorial approach imputes values indirectly from answers to vignettes. In this study, the explicit approach is revealed to have greater predictive validity but substantially lower construct validity than the factorial approach. This finding highlights the distinction between prediction and explanation in social research, and casts doubt on the adequacy of revealed preference theory.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=24144485951&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=24144485951&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/esr/jci006

DO - 10.1093/esr/jci006

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:24144485951

VL - 21

SP - 91

EP - 108

JO - European Sociological Review

JF - European Sociological Review

SN - 0266-7215

IS - 2

ER -