1 e

Basic issues in measuring gender attitudes : 

Basic issues in measuring gender attitudes Ko Oudhof Statistics Netherlands

What will I tell you?: 

What will I tell you? Just for a start: your own contribution Subjective indicators What are attitudes Measurement issues Analytic issues Here and there: gender/ international comparability

Before I tell you anything: 

Before I tell you anything Think of one short statement on the role of women or men in decision making that according to yourself would make it possible to distinguish respondents into advocates and opponents of gender equality by looking at their (dis)agreement with your statement

Introductory vocabulary: 

Introductory vocabulary Indicator Cognitive Evaluative Affective Item Scale One digit, evaluating, goal-related About seeing, knowing and thinking About good or bad About like or dislike Statement or question List of items

Policy and role of indicators: 

Policy and role of indicators Selection policy goals Assessing policy process Evaluate policy results

Subjective indicators and policy-1: 

Subjective indicators and policy-1 Selection policy goals what do people (not) want? (Worries, aspirations, satisfactions) what do people need or get rid off? (immaterial needs, happiness) Assessing policy process Public support (trust, support) Assess course of policy (predictions, prognosis) Evaluate policy results Goal attainment (health, inequality, perceived safety, xenophobia)

Subjective indicators and policy-2: 

Subjective indicators and policy-2 No ‘objective’ observation? Subjective condition real policy objective Direct measurement Both subjective and objective indicators depart from implicit assumptions on each other in some implicit psychological model on behavior! Vague? Limits to aggregation! Measuring all possible wrongs? Indicators with a large mandate needed Statistical weaknesses No money and no counting Monetary value or size of subjective condition? Specific measure and methodology Experts needed

Subjective indicators: 

Subjective indicators Policy-relevance (issues) Need- or Behavior-related (predictability) Variability (daily fluctuations versus almost invariable states) Now – indicators In these times – indicators Long term perspective - indicators

Subjective conditions and the world: 

Subjective conditions and the world Needs and wants Emotions Perception Experience Learning Motives Goals Etc. Fysical environment Social environment Now -response Structured stable behavior? Now - feedback

Attitudes (common elements in most definitions): 

Attitudes (common elements in most definitions) Oriented on object, person, institution or event Evaluative component Cognitive component Affective component Stable condition or construct Intermediary between object stimulus and behavioural response: consistency

Relatives with likeness: 

Relatives with likeness Opinions (now) stability less more cognitive and not always evaluative behavioral relation weaker Values (long term) general and less object-oriented stability higher behavioral relation more indirect Norms (derivative) prescription of behavior stability higher behavioral relation stronger and more direct less cognitive and less affective

Relation subjective elements: 

Relation subjective elements Abstraction Time opinion attitude value

Model Theory Planned Behaviour (Ajzen): 

Model Theory Planned Behaviour (Ajzen)

General Model (Van der Pligt & De Vries): 

General Model (Van der Pligt & De Vries)

Relation attitude – behavior ( reasoned action approach in 2004): 

Ajzen & Fishbein, 2004 Relation attitude – behavior ( reasoned action approach in 2004)

Attitudes and gender policy: 

Attitudes and gender policy Hardly any NSI Why gender attitudes? Attitude change as objective? Defensive in discussion? Same question elsewhere? Macro-economy: confidence consumers/producers Business world: marketing Politics : voting behavior Health: perceived health Crime: feeling of insecurity

Gender attitude research and tools in practice: 

Gender attitude research and tools in practice Mainly academic or ad hoc research Few international research projects Gender role (labor market or household) main topic Hardly any standardisation Example: attitudes on female decision making Support preferential policies Attitudes among decision makers Acceptance of female management Effects of leadership styles

Engendering attitudes: 

Engendering attitudes Objects Explaining behavior Measurement tools Analysis Interpretation Presentation Gender Issues Engendered concepts Gender validity By sex or more*? By sex or more*? By sex or more*? More = differences compared to other non-gendered research as consequence of earlier steps

Measurement of attitudes: 

Measurement of attitudes Explicit measurement (under conscious control respondent) one item multi-item Implicit measurement (without conscious control respondent) observation of behavior (non-obtrusive) bodily response response latency  Academic research and less relevant for statistical offices etc.

Quality of measurement - reliability: 

Quality of measurement - reliability equal outcomes of tool when measuring the same? random error inter-items reliability test-retest / split-half interobserver reliability quality measure versus external factors

Quality of measurement - validity : 

Quality of measurement - validity Similar results from other tools when measuring the same Systematic error Construct validity convergent validity – what should divergent validity - not what should not Predictive validity Multitrait-multimethod matrix as solid validity-testing design

Survey?: 

Survey? Insight in own attitude/opinion Can they express the attitudes/opnions: personal conditions (e.g. ability) situational conditions (e.g. individual interview?) Plausibility true answering personal conditions (e.g. strategic response) situational conditions (e.g. interviewer interaction) Alternative informants/ assessing documents General considerations on survey design

Single item or multi-item measurement?: 

Single item or multi-item measurement? Quick  Cheap all or nothing, also in time-series one-dimensional sometimes quite high and reliable how do you assess psychometric properties Response time  Expensive Shortening scale generally possible Multidimensional Scale properties can be assessed International comparability and standardisation of scales (or subscales)

Multi-item variants : 

Multi-item variants Osgood scale Thurstone scale Likert scale Guttman scaling multi-object measuring monetary methods (WTP) General dimensions Pretested dichotomous scaled items Addition of multi-point (3-100) items Scaled statements Conjunct / dominance/ similarity Simulated markets/ hedonic price analysis/ contingent valuation (CV) or ranking (CR)

Likert scale: 

Likert scale Rather simple List of items expressing positive and negative opinions on attitude object Selection of relevant items by content Choice of answering categories Number meaning of scores middle category don’t know: yes or no Scale rating by summing item values (after recoding) Self-made or standard?

Selection of items: 

Selection of items Relevant for all groups (e.g. young + old) Clear and unequivocal interpretation No multiple question items No double negations No questions but statements (response set) No confirmation bias  pos + neg Time spans: now/these days/whole life Suggestive expression (most people…) Biased or suggestive answering categories Personalised or public statements (Hakim)

More possible interferences: 

More possible interferences Character of survey (crime or labour?) Interviewer Order of topics in questionnaire Introduction of scale Interference of different topics in one scale Order of items No repeats or redundancy Social desirability  overreporting or underreporting

So you’ve got your data: 

So you’ve got your data Assessing or reassessing quality of scale? Reliability aspects Validity aspects Deciding what to do considering Objectives (employer/ supervisor) Tools (standards?) Methodological explanations Explanation of results

Item and scale analysis: 

Item and scale analysis Assessing reliability of scale as given Depending on design Without any validity analysis of scale (re)assessing items + scale(s) linearity and other assumptions? multidimensional? dropping items possible? selection of techniques to assess scale Consistency/ homogeneity items Analysis content via Princ.Comp./ factoran./ scaling

Scale ratings: 

Scale ratings Which ratings should be used? sum weighted sum (only part of items needed?) factor scores To be used for what? is level relevant? (breakdowns or time series) is level confusing? (comparability) nature of audience (general public or scientists)

Gender & international: 

Gender & international Which issue or topic? Which concept? Which measurement tool? Main problem for both: validity reduction or prevention of systematic error Analysis: extra = validity analysis Interpretation = plus restraint by validity Presentation = including reserves by limited validity?

More to learn: 

More to learn In hand-out suggestions for further reading Standard handbooks for students social psychology Look on the internet by using searching machines: attitude, gender, survey (e.g. Ajzen) Search for sites on international surveys (e.g. European Social Survey) and research databases

Evaluating both scales: 

Evaluating both scales Gender dimension Inter-item consistency? Homogeneity? Valid multidimensionality? Quality of separate items? Scale quality Etc.