Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorLytkina, Ekaterinade
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-10T11:37:33Z
dc.date.available2020-11-10T11:37:33Z
dc.date.issued2020de
dc.identifier.issn1864-3361de
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/70484
dc.description.abstractThe article contributes to the issue how to deal with measurement non-variance. I address a well-established scale by Middleton (1963) which was created to measure alienation. However, unlike commonly treated in literature, there is evidence that the scale is two-dimensional, and consists of the measures of anomie and alienation. I use the data from two datasets, where the scale was most recently applied, World Values Survey (2011), and Euromodule (1999-2002), for a set of diverse countries representing Western, post-communist, and Eastern societies. The datasets are analyzed separately. Results of confirmatory factor analysis followed by multigroup comparisons give evidence that for a set of countries the two-dimensional scale is applicable or preferable. Full measurement invariance is reached for Russia and Kazakhstan in the World Values Survey, and Slovenia, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Turkey, and South Korea in the Euromodule. Approximate measurement invariance using Bayesian statistics enabled to reach approximate scalar invariance in Russia and Kazakhstan in the World Values Survey and in Slovenia, and Switzerland in the Euromodule dataset. Additionally, to be sure that the two dimensions are indeed distinct, I used a set of indicators to predict each of the factors.de
dc.languageende
dc.subject.ddcSozialwissenschaften, Soziologiede
dc.subject.ddcSocial sciences, sociology, anthropologyen
dc.subject.otheralienation; anomie; measurement invariance; approximate measurement invariancede
dc.titleRevisiting the Middleton Alienation Scale: In Search of a Cross-Culturally Valid Instrumentde
dc.description.reviewbegutachtet (peer reviewed)de
dc.description.reviewpeer revieweden
dc.source.journalSurvey Research Methods
dc.source.volume14de
dc.publisher.countryDEU
dc.source.issue4de
dc.subject.classozErhebungstechniken und Analysetechniken der Sozialwissenschaftende
dc.subject.classozMethods and Techniques of Data Collection and Data Analysis, Statistical Methods, Computer Methodsen
dc.subject.thesozDatengewinnungde
dc.subject.thesozdata captureen
dc.subject.thesozMessinstrumentde
dc.subject.thesozmeasurement instrumenten
dc.subject.thesozMessungde
dc.subject.thesozmeasurementen
dc.subject.thesozEntfremdungde
dc.subject.thesozalienationen
dc.subject.thesozAnomiede
dc.subject.thesozanomieen
dc.subject.thesozvergleichende Forschungde
dc.subject.thesozcomparative researchen
dc.subject.thesozinterkultureller Vergleichde
dc.subject.thesozintercultural comparisonen
dc.rights.licenceDeposit Licence - Keine Weiterverbreitung, keine Bearbeitungde
dc.rights.licenceDeposit Licence - No Redistribution, No Modificationsen
internal.statusformal und inhaltlich fertig erschlossende
internal.identifier.thesoz10040547
internal.identifier.thesoz10041769
internal.identifier.thesoz10036930
internal.identifier.thesoz10042133
internal.identifier.thesoz10035709
internal.identifier.thesoz10068092
internal.identifier.thesoz10047773
dc.type.stockarticlede
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.source.pageinfo365-397de
internal.identifier.classoz10105
internal.identifier.journal674
internal.identifier.document32
internal.identifier.ddc300
dc.source.issuetopicMeasurement Equivalence: Testing for It and Explaining Why It is Absentde
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2020.v14i4.7421de
dc.description.pubstatusVeröffentlichungsversionde
dc.description.pubstatusPublished Versionen
internal.identifier.licence3
internal.identifier.pubstatus1
internal.identifier.review1
ssoar.urn.registrationfalsede


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record