Schwarz Value Surveys Presentation

  • Published on

  • View

  • Download

Embed Size (px)


This is an overview presentation about Schwarz value surveys and brief comparison of it with the value measuring approach suggested by World Values Surveys


<p>OverviewBy Liubov V. Borisova</p> <p>December 8, 2009</p> <p>Overview2</p> <p>Theories of Values Introduction Theory of Basic Human Values individual levelTheory of Cultural Values cultural level Schwartz Value Survey (SVS) Validation of Theories and Empirical Results Theory of Basic Human Needs Theory of Cultural Values</p> <p>Critical Assessment and Discussion</p> <p>Theories of Values (1)3</p> <p>Theory inspired by the works of Rokeach (1973) and Hofstede (1980, 1982, 1983) the early classics of value research. Schwartz developed a theory of content and structure of values on the basis of empirical cross-cultural studies (Schwartz 1992; Schwartz &amp; Bilsky, 1987, 1990). Methodologically arises from the idea of circumplex structure of personality:Personality or affect variables lie on the circumference of a circle, and the strength of the association between variables decreases as the distance between variables on the circle increases (Schwartz &amp; Boehnke, 2004). Idea of competing and complementary types of values (Schwartz, 1996)</p> <p>Theories of Values (2)4</p> <p>Three major questions within the project (Schwartz, 1992): </p> <p>How are the value priorities of individuals affected by their social experiences? How do the value priorities held by individuals affect their behavioural orientations and choices? How do value priorities from matched groups in various countries differ between each other?</p> <p>According to Schwartz, integrated values on the individual level (in terms of motivational types of values and their goals) are distinguished from cultural orientations:</p> <p>While motivational dimensions are found in every culture, the level of importance of each dimension varies from one culture to the next</p> <p>Concept of Values5</p> <p>Values are conceptions of the desirable that guide the way social actors (e.g. organizational leaders, policy-makers, individual persons) select actions, evaluate people and events, and explain their actions and evaluations. [Values] are transsituational criteria or goals, ordered by importance as guiding principles of life (Schwartz, 1999).</p> <p>Theory of Basic Human Values6</p> <p>The type of motivational goal the values express distinguishes among different values Three universal requirements of human existence (Schwartz, 1996): Biological</p> <p>needs Coordinated social interaction Demand of group survival and functioning</p> <p>Schwartz creates 10 motivational types, which are comprised of 57 (45) single values and plots them in the circumplex structure within the two dimensions.</p> <p>Motivational Types and Individual Values (1)7</p> <p>Power: motivational goal of power values is the attainment of social status and prestige, and the control or dominance over people and resources.</p> <p>Social Power, Authority, Wealth Successful, Capable, Ambitious, Influential</p> <p>Achievement: personal success through demonstrated competence.</p> <p>Hedonism: pleasure or sensuous gratification for oneself. This value type is derived from physical needs and the pleasure associated with satisfying them.</p> <p>Pleasure, Enjoying Life Daring, a Varied Life, an Exciting Life</p> <p>Stimulation: excitement, novelty, and challenge in life.</p> <p>Self-Direction: independent thought and action (for example, choosing, creating, exploring).</p> <p>Creativity, Freedom, Independent, Curious, Choosing Own GoalsFrom SVS Official Web-site</p> <p>Motivational Types and Individual Values (2)8</p> <p>Universalism: understanding, appreciation, tolerance, and protection of the welfare for all people and for nature.</p> <p>Broadminded, Wisdom, Social Justice, Equality, a World at Peace, a World of Beauty, Unity with Nature, Protecting the Environment</p> <p>Benevolence: preserving and enhancing the welfare of people with whom one is in frequent personal contact.</p> <p>Helpful, Honest, Forgiving, Loyal, Responsible</p> <p>Tradition: respect, commitment, and acceptance of the customs and ideas that one's culture or religion imposes on the individual.</p> <p>Humble, Accepting my Portion of Life, Devout, Respect for Tradition, Moderate</p> <p>Conformity: restraint of actions, inclinations, and impulses likely to upset or harm others and violate social expectations or norms.</p> <p>Politeness, Obedient, Self-Discipline, Honoring Parents and Elders Family Security, National Security, Social Order, Clean, Reciprocation of Favours</p> <p>Security: safety, harmony, and stability of society, relationships, and of self.</p> <p>Originally there was 11th type Spirituality, but it was not found to be universalFrom SVS Official Web-site</p> <p>Motivational Types and Individual Values (3)9</p> <p>All the 10 motivational types/integrated values can be summarised in terms of the two-dimensional structure (this is empirically driven):</p> <p>Openness to change vs. Conservation (conflict between emphasis on own independent thought and action, and favouring change vs. selfrestriction, preservation of traditional practices, protection of stability).Self-Transcendence vs. Self-Enhacement (conflict of acceptance of others as equals and concern for their welfare vs. pursuit of own relative success and dominance over others)</p> <p>Theorised Structure of the Individual-Level Motivational Types10</p> <p>Schwartz &amp; Rubel, 2005: 1011</p> <p>Theory of Cultural Values (1)11</p> <p>Cultural values implicitly or explicitly shared abstract ideas about what is good, right, and desirable in a society (Schwartz, 1999) According to Schwartz, the way the societal institutions function and their goals express cultural value priorities. Individual value priorities are a product of a)shared culture and b)personal experiences. Individuals learn to accept shared social values through adaptation to social reality, formal and informal socialisation. Thus, Schwartz infers societal value priorities by aggregating the value priorities of individuals.</p> <p>Theory of Cultural Values (2)12</p> <p>Three major issues which confront all societies, on which cultural values can be compared: Relationship Responsible Hierarchy</p> <p>between individual and group:vs. (Intellectual and Affective) Autonomy</p> <p> Conservatism</p> <p>behaviour to preserve social fabric:</p> <p>vs. Egalitarianism</p> <p> The</p> <p>relation to the natural and social worldvs. Harmony</p> <p> Mastery</p> <p>The seven value types form three bipolar dimensions</p> <p>Theorised Structure of the Culture-Level Value Types13</p> <p>Schwartz, 1999: 29</p> <p>Schwartz Value Survey (SVS) (1)14</p> <p>Established 1987 by Schwartz and Bilsky 1988-1992: survey administered within 41 cultural groups in 38 nations 38 samples of school teachers, 38 of university students</p> <p>Reasoning: school teachers may have a number of advantages for characterizing cultural priorities. they play an explicit role in value socialization, they are presumably key carriers of culture and they probably reflect the mid-range of prevailing value priorities in most societies (Schwartz, 1999:34) . To argue for his point, Schwartz compares the order of different nations from the teacher samples with student samples and finds many similarities.</p> <p>By now: more than 60,000 individuals in 64 nations on all continents</p> <p>Schwartz Value Survey (SVS) (2)15</p> <p>Structure:</p> <p>2 sets of single items/values (56 or 57 total)</p> <p>21 values identical to those proposed by Rokeach (1973) Terminal vs. instrumental values (Schwartz, 1992) </p> <p>Terminal end states, expressed in nouns: equality Instrumental modes of behaviour, phrased as adjectives: independent Some divergence of responses to terminal and instrumental values But also Schwartz and Bilsky discuss the possibility of the order of values influencing the answers</p> <p>Each item followed in parentheses by a short explanatory phrase. E.g. EQUALITY (equal opportunities for all) Respondents need to rate each item as a guiding principle in their life on a 9-point scale: from 7 (of supreme importance) through 0 (not important) to -1 (opposed to my principles)</p> <p>Demographic questionnaire</p> <p>Address:</p> <p>Motivational Types and Individual Items16</p> <p>Miao et al., 2009:671</p> <p>Validation of Theory Individual Level17</p> <p>Validation of Theory of Basic Human Values through empirical analysis Smallest</p> <p>Space Analysis (Schwartz, 1992) OR Similarity Structure Analysis (Schwartz, 1999) both SSA Intercorrelation</p> <p>matrix of Pearson correlations between the importance of ratings within samples Computed on the multidimensional space through MDS (nonmetric multidimensional scaling) the closer the points are, the more similar they are (separate samples)</p> <p>Value Structure, averaged18</p> <p>Schwartz, 1992: 24</p> <p>Value Structure, teacher sample19</p> <p>Schwartz, 1992: 34</p> <p>Value Structure, student sample20</p> <p>Schwartz, 1992: 33</p> <p>Example21</p> <p>Comparison of sportsmen and trainers with teachers. By Dr Nicholas G. Aplin in The Values of Physical Education Trainees in Singapore</p> <p>Validation of Theory Cultural Level22</p> <p>Validation of Theory of Cultural Values through empirical analysis (Schwartz, 1999) SSA Means</p> <p>of each of the single items for each of the 122 samples Correlations between items within sample Covariation in the mean importance ratings across samples determines the culture-level dimensions</p> <p>Value structure, culture-level23</p> <p>Schwartz, 1999: 31</p> <p>Empirical implications24</p> <p>Comparing culturesAssumption: teachers are a good representation of national value priorities Finding the importance attributed to each dimension through averaging the values which represent each dimension creating a mean for each nation/sample for each dimension</p> <p>Thus, for example, mean for Intellectual Autonomy would consist of average of Creativity, Broadminded and Curious</p> <p>Comparing nations in terms of relative importance ascribed to each value type taken alone</p> <p>Co-plot technique</p> <p>Co-plot of nations25</p> <p>Schwartz, 1999: 36</p> <p>WVS vs. SVS26</p> <p>WVS Website,</p> <p>Schwartz, 1999: 36</p> <p>Critical Assessment27</p> <p>Pros</p> <p>Cons</p> <p>SVS provides less limited aspects of culture, trying to seek for a fuller range of value dimensions Not politically-driven, but rather value-driven Developed structure of values on both individual and nation level</p> <p>Problem of sampling the main assumption is too stretched? Problem of measuring is rating importance really expresses a value The usual dilemma in value research do people across nations understand similar concepts under one phrasing? Very theory-based, values might be too sensitive to change, and theory might work ONLY for this type of study. In cross-country research no attention to value change.</p> <p>Sources28</p> <p>Maio, Gregory R.; Pakizeh, Ali; Cheung, Wing-Yee; Rees, Kerry J. Changing, priming, and acting on values: Effects via motivational relations in a circular model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol 97(4), Oct 2009, 699-715 Schwartz, Shalom H. A Theory of Cultural Values and Some Implications for Work. APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, 1999, 48 (1), 2347 Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 165). New York: Academic Press. Schwartz, Shalom H.; Boehnke, Klaus. Evaluating the structure of human values with confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Research in Personality 38 (2004) 230255 Schwartz, Shalom H.; Rubel, Tammy. Sex Differences in Value Priorities: CrossCultural and Multimethod Studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2005, Vol. 89, No. 6, 10101028 Schwartz, S. H. (1996). Value priorities and behavior: Applying a theory of integrated value systems. In C. Seligman, J. M. Olson, &amp; M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The psychology of values: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 124). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.</p>