IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v23y2020i11p1467-1490.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultural theory and cultural cognition theory survey measures: confirmatory factoring and predictive validity of factor scores for judged risk

Author

Listed:
  • Branden B. Johnson
  • Brendon Swedlow
  • Marcus W. Mayorga

Abstract

Two survey approaches to measuring cultural effects on risk views have been developed, both informed by the grid/group approach of Douglas and Wildavsky, well known to many risk analysts. Using data from an online national US panel, confirmatory factor analyses were conducted of ‘cultural theory’ (CT) and ‘cultural cognition theory’ (CCT) measures, which respectively purport to measure (1) four worldviews or cultural biases – hierarchism, individualism, egalitarianism, and fatalism – using both individual items and longer statements, and (2) indices of grid (hierarchism-egalitarianism) and group (individualism-communitarianism) using individual items. Confirmatory factor analyses showed CT measures (items and statements) tended to cluster as expected (i.e. four worldviews), particularly items which on their own exhibited the best fit, while CCT items loaded on the two hypothesized dimensions but with poor fit (particularly the reversed egalitarian and communitarian items to represent high-grid and low-group, respectively). Combining all measures representing the four cultural biases, or adding in the communitarian subscale for CCT, also created plausibly coherent factoring (e.g. hierarchical measures from CT and CCT loaded together, as did the CT-fatalist items and statements with the CCT-communitarian items), but model fit was poor again. Depending upon the criterion used, CT or CCT items’ factor scores appeared the superior predictor of personal and U.S. risk perceptions, but overall predictive validity was modest. These results were somewhat improved among those with high (versus low) political knowledge. If survey-based research on culture’s role in risk views is to thrive, further scholarly attention to such measurement issues is warranted.

Suggested Citation

  • Branden B. Johnson & Brendon Swedlow & Marcus W. Mayorga, 2020. "Cultural theory and cultural cognition theory survey measures: confirmatory factoring and predictive validity of factor scores for judged risk," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(11), pages 1467-1490, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:23:y:2020:i:11:p:1467-1490
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2019.1687577
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2019.1687577
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2019.1687577?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Branden B. Johnson & Brendon Swedlow, 2024. "Scale reliability of alternative cultural theory survey measures," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 527-557, February.
    2. Malkamäki, Arttu & Korhonen, Jaana E. & Berghäll, Sami & Berg Rustas, Carolina & Bernö, Hanna & Carreira, Ariane & D'Amato, Dalia & Dobrovolsky, Alexander & Giertliová, Blanka & Holmgren, Sara & Mark-, 2022. "Public perceptions of using forests to fuel the European bioeconomy: Findings from eight university cities," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).

    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:taf:jriskr:v:23:y:2020:i:11:p:1467-1490. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    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.