IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v53y2019i6d10.1007_s11135-019-00913-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Putting ‘political’ back in political trust: an IRT test of the unidimensionality and cross-national equivalence of political trust measures

Author

Listed:
  • T. W. G. Meer

    (University of Amsterdam)

  • E. Ouattara

    (University of Amsterdam)

Abstract

Much research intro political trust—its causes, correlates and trends—builds on the twin assumptions that trust in a wide range of political institutions is ultimately an expression of (1) a singular and (2) a cross-nationally equivalent underlying attitude. Yet, the widespread assumptions of unidimensionality and cross-national equivalence of political trust is at odds with the dominant conceptual understanding of political trust as a relational concept, driven by subjects, objects, and their interplay. This paper employs Rasch modelling as a direct, strict test of unidimensionality, equivalence and item hierarchy. We test the fit of the Rasch model on political trust items in seven widely used, cross-national surveys (World Values Survey, Afrobarometer, Arabbarometer, Asian Barometer, Eurobarometer, European Social Survey, and Latinobarometro), covering 161 national surveys in 119 countries across the globe. We find that the unidimensional specification of the Rasch model does not fit the standard political trust question batteries. Political trust is not cross-nationally equivalent; trust in specific political institutions is more than a mere indicator of an underlying attitude. This conclusion does not impede cross-national research into political trust; rather it illustrates the need for consistent robustness checks across a range of objects of political trust. Our findings open up new venues for substantive research questions on specific objects of political trust and their relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • T. W. G. Meer & E. Ouattara, 2019. "Putting ‘political’ back in political trust: an IRT test of the unidimensionality and cross-national equivalence of political trust measures," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(6), pages 2983-3002, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:53:y:2019:i:6:d:10.1007_s11135-019-00913-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-019-00913-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-019-00913-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-019-00913-6?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yeon-Tae Choi & Gyeong-Hoan Kwon, 2019. "New forms of citizen participation using SNS: an empirical approach," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Hakhverdian, Armen & Mayne, Quinton, 2012. "Institutional Trust, Education, and Corruption: A Micro-Macro Interactive Approach," Scholarly Articles 9639965, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    3. Stegmueller, Daniel, 2011. "Apples and Oranges? The Problem of Equivalence in Comparative Research," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(4), pages 471-487.
    4. Anna Ruelens & Bart Meuleman & Ides Nicaise, 2018. "Examining Measurement Isomorphism of Multilevel Constructs: The Case of Political Trust," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 907-927, December.
    5. Ferdinand A. Gul & Judy S. L. Tsui, 2004. "Introduction and overview," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: The Governance of East Asian Corporations, chapter 1, pages 1-26, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Paola Annoni & Nicholas Charron, 2019. "Measurement Assessment in Cross-Country Comparative Analysis: Rasch Modelling on a Measure of Institutional Quality," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 31-60, January.
    7. Erika Elsas, 2015. "Political Trust as a Rational Attitude: A Comparison of the Nature of Political Trust across Different Levels of Education," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 63(5), pages 1158-1178, December.
    8. Irena Schneider, 2017. "Can We Trust Measures of Political Trust? Assessing Measurement Equivalence in Diverse Regime Types," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 133(3), pages 963-984, September.
    9. Dmitriy Poznyak & Bart Meuleman & Koen Abts & George F. Bishop, "undated". "Trust in American Government: Longitudinal Measurement Equivalence in the ANES, 1964-2008," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 793d3fc1192d44d4afdba8fa7, Mathematica Policy Research.
    10. Chalmers, R. Philip, 2012. "mirt: A Multidimensional Item Response Theory Package for the R Environment," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i06).
    11. Dmitriy Poznyak & Bart Meuleman & Koen Abts & George Bishop, 2014. "Trust in American Government: Longitudinal Measurement Equivalence in the ANES, 1964–2008," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 741-758, September.
    12. K. Sijtsma & P. Debets & I. Molenaar, 1990. "Mokken scale analysis for polychotomous items: theory, a computer program and an empirical application," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 173-188, May.
    13. Michael Gillespie & Elisabeth Tenvergert & Johannes Kingma, 1987. "Using Mokken scale analysis to develop unidimensional scales," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 393-408, December.
    14. van Schuur, Wijbrandt H., 2003. "Mokken Scale Analysis: Between the Guttman Scale and Parametric Item Response Theory," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 139-163, April.
    15. Enzo Loner, 2016. "A new way of looking at old things. An application of Guttman errors analysis to the study of environmental concern," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 823-847, March.
    16. Sedef Turper & Kees Aarts, 2017. "Political Trust and Sophistication: Taking Measurement Seriously," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 415-434, January.
    17. Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E M & Baumgartner, Hans, 1998. "Assessing Measurement Invariance in Cross-National Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(1), pages 78-90, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Claire Durand & Luis Patricio Peña Ibarra & Nadia Rezgui & David Wutchiett, 2022. "How to combine and analyze all the data from diverse sources: a multilevel analysis of institutional trust in the world," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1755-1797, June.

    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. Meral Ugur-Cinar & Kursat Cinar & Tekin Kose, 2020. "How Does Education Affect Political Trust?: An Analysis of Moderating Factors," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 152(2), pages 779-808, November.
    2. Sedef Turper & Kees Aarts, 2017. "Political Trust and Sophistication: Taking Measurement Seriously," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 415-434, January.
    3. Daniel L. Oberski, 2016. "A Review of Latent Variable Modeling With R," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 41(2), pages 226-233, April.
    4. Isabella Mingo & Maria Paola Faggiano, 2020. "Trust in Institutions Between Objective and Subjective Determinants: A Multilevel Analysis in European Countries," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 815-839, October.
    5. Dmitriy Poznyak & Bart Meuleman & Koen Abts & George Bishop, 2014. "Trust in American Government: Longitudinal Measurement Equivalence in the ANES, 1964–2008," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 741-758, September.
    6. Anna Ruelens & Bart Meuleman & Ides Nicaise, 2018. "Examining Measurement Isomorphism of Multilevel Constructs: The Case of Political Trust," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 907-927, December.
    7. Büchi, Moritz, 2016. "Measurement invariance in comparative Internet use research," MediArXiv 42h39, Center for Open Science.
    8. Kim-Lee Tuxhorn & John W. D'Attoma & Sven Steinmo, 2019. "Trust in institutions: Narrowing the ideological gap over the federal budget," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 2(1).
    9. Merton S. Krause, 2017. "Item response theory requires logically unjustifiable assumptions," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 1549-1561, July.
    10. Boris Sokolov, 2019. "Sensitivity Of Goodness Of Fit Indices To Lack Of Measurement Invariance With Categorical Indicators And Many Groups," HSE Working papers WP BRP 86/SOC/2019, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    11. Irena Schneider, 2017. "Can We Trust Measures of Political Trust? Assessing Measurement Equivalence in Diverse Regime Types," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 133(3), pages 963-984, September.
    12. Huong Nguyen & Chengshi Shiu & Naomi Farber, 2016. "Prevalence and Factors Associated with Teen Pregnancy in Vietnam: Results from Two National Surveys," Societies, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-16, May.
    13. Molini, A. & Talkner, P. & Katul, G.G. & Porporato, A., 2011. "First passage time statistics of Brownian motion with purely time dependent drift and diffusion," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 390(11), pages 1841-1852.
    14. Izolda Pristojkovic Suko & Magdalena Holter & Erwin Stolz & Elfriede Renate Greimel & Wolfgang Freidl, 2022. "Acculturation, Adaptation, and Health among Croatian Migrants in Austria and Ireland: A Cross-Sectional Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-15, December.
    15. César Merino-Soto & Gina Chávez-Ventura & Verónica López-Fernández & Guillermo M. Chans & Filiberto Toledano-Toledano, 2022. "Learning Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-L): Psychometric and Measurement Invariance Evidence in Peruvian Undergraduate Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-17, September.
    16. Joseph A Hamm & Corwin Smidt & Roger C Mayer, 2019. "Understanding the psychological nature and mechanisms of political trust," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, May.
    17. Tsukasa Kato, 2021. "Measurement Invariance in the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D) Scale among English-Speaking Whites and Asians," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-10, May.
    18. Nana Kim & Daniel M. Bolt & James Wollack, 2022. "Noncompensatory MIRT For Passage-Based Tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 992-1009, September.
    19. Knoppen, Desirée & Sáenz, María Jesús, 2017. "Interorganizational teams in low-versus high-dependence contexts," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 15-25.
    20. Anselmsson, Johan & Burt, Steve & Tunca, Burak, 2017. "An integrated retailer image and brand equity framework: Re-examining, extending, and restructuring retailer brand equity," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 194-203.

    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:spr:qualqt:v:53:y:2019:i:6:d:10.1007_s11135-019-00913-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.