IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0272530.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What is the best proxy for political knowledge in surveys?

Author

Listed:
  • Lauri Rapeli

Abstract

Online surveys are becoming the dominant form for survey data collection. This presents a problem for the measurement of political knowledge, because, according to recent scholarship, unsupervised measurement of political knowledge in web-based surveys suffers from respondent dishonesty. This study examines the validity of five possible survey proxies for political knowledge: self-assessed sophistication, political interest, internal political efficacy, accuracy of party placements on a left-right dimension and political participation. The analysis draws on a 2020 survey data (n = 1,097) and partial replications with identical measures from a 2008 survey data (n = 1,021) from Finland. Through several tests, the five proxies are assessed in terms of convergent validity, criterion validity and predictive validity. Across all tests, political interest performs best on all dimensions of validity and demonstrates largely identical relationships with political knowledge. Although the survey measurement of political interest and political knowledge may partly tap into slightly different constructs, the analysis supports the conclusion that political interest is the most suitable survey proxy for political knowledge from among the five proxy candidates included in the analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Lauri Rapeli, 2022. "What is the best proxy for political knowledge in surveys?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(8), pages 1-18, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0272530
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272530
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0272530
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0272530&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0272530?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tsai, Tsung-han & Lin, Chang-chih, 2017. "Modeling Guessing Components in the Measurement of Political Knowledge," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 483-504, October.
    2. Niemi, Richard G. & Craig, Stephen C. & Mattei, Franco, 1991. "Measuring Internal Political Efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 85(4), pages 1407-1413, December.
    3. Andersen, Robert & Tilley, James & Heath, Anthony F., 2005. "Political Knowledge and Enlightened Preferences: Party Choice Through the Electoral Cycle," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 285-302, April.
    4. Jessee, Stephen A., 2017. "“Don’t Know” Responses, Personality, and the Measurement of Political Knowledge," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 711-731, October.
    5. Mondak, Jeffery J., 1999. "Reconsidering the Measurement of Political Knowledge," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 57-82, January.
    6. Markus Prior & Arthur Lupia, 2008. "Money, Time, and Political Knowledge: Distinguishing Quick Recall and Political Learning Skills," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(1), pages 169-183, January.
    7. Barabas, Jason & Jerit, Jennifer & Pollock, William & Rainey, Carlisle, 2014. "The Question(s) of Political Knowledge," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 108(4), pages 840-855, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carsten Jensen & Jens Thomsen, 2014. "Self-reported cheating in web surveys on political knowledge," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3343-3354, November.
    2. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, "undated". "The Role of Direct Democracy and Federalism in Local Power," IEW - Working Papers 209, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    3. Briole, Simon & Gurgand, Marc & Maurin, Eric & McNally, Sandra & Ruiz-Valenzuela, Jenifer & Santín, Daniel, 2022. "The Making of Civic Virtues: A School-Based Experiment in Three Countries," IZA Discussion Papers 15141, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Daniel Hart & Robert Atkins, 2011. "American Sixteen- and Seventeen-Year-Olds Are Ready to Vote," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 633(1), pages 201-222, January.
    5. Baumberg, Ben, 2016. "Benefit `myths'? The accuracy and inaccuracy of public beliefs about the benefits system," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103512, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Sora Park & Jee Young Lee & Kieran McGuinness & Rebecca Griffiths & Thu Nguyen, 2023. "News Representation and Sense of Belonging Among Multicultural Audiences," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(4), pages 264-273.
    7. Anna Kern, 2017. "The Effect of Direct Democratic Participation on Citizens’ Political Attitudes in Switzerland: The Difference between Availability and Use," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 16-26.
    8. Rong Hu & Ivan Y. Sun & Yuning Wu, 2015. "Chinese Trust in the Police: The Impact of Political Efficacy and Participation," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1012-1026, December.
    9. Simon Richter & Sebastian Stier, 2022. "Learning about the unknown Spitzenkandidaten: The role of media exposure during the 2019 European Parliament elections," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(2), pages 309-329, June.
    10. André Pirralha, 2017. "Political Participation and Wellbeing in the Netherlands: Exploring the Causal Links," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 12(2), pages 327-341, June.
    11. Taufiq Ahmad & Aima Alvi & Muhammad Ittefaq, 2019. "The Use of Social Media on Political Participation Among University Students: An Analysis of Survey Results From Rural Pakistan," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(3), pages 21582440198, July.
    12. Shelleka Gupta & Vinay Chauhan, 2023. "Understanding the Role of Social Networking Sites in Political Marketing," Jindal Journal of Business Research, , vol. 12(1), pages 58-72, June.
    13. Cato Waeterloos & Peter Conradie & Michel Walrave & Koen Ponnet, 2021. "Digital Issue Movements: Political Repertoires and Drivers of Participation among Belgian Youth in the Context of ‘School Strike for Climate’," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-19, September.
    14. Kim Strandberg & Kim Backström & Janne Berg & Thomas Karv, 2021. "Democratically Sustainable Local Development? The Outcomes of Mixed Deliberation on a Municipal Merger on Participants’ Social Trust, Political Trust, and Political Efficacy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-17, June.
    15. Luigi Droste, 2021. "Feeling Left Behind by Political Decisionmakers: Anti-Establishment Sentiment in Contemporary Democracies," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(3), pages 288-300.
    16. Erik Peterson & Shanto Iyengar, 2021. "Partisan Gaps in Political Information and Information‐Seeking Behavior: Motivated Reasoning or Cheerleading?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 133-147, January.
    17. Brad R. Taylor, 2020. "The psychological foundations of rational ignorance: biased heuristics and decision costs," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 70-88, March.
    18. Katherine Haenschen & Jessica R. Collier & John C. Tedesco, 2024. "The normatively troubling impact of attitudes toward the role of money in politics on external political efficacy," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 105(3), pages 666-681, May.
    19. Blesse, Sebastian & Heinemann, Friedrich, 2020. "Citizens’ trade-offs in state merger decisions: Evidence from a randomized survey experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 438-471.
    20. Arthur Lupia & Adam S. Levine & Jesse O. Menning & Gisela Sin, 2005. "Were Bush Tax Cut Supporters “Simply Ignorant?” A Second Look at Conservatives and Liberals in “Homer Gets a Tax Cut”," Public Economics 0510004, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0272530. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.