Pitfalls of International Comparative Research: Taking Acquiescence into Account
-
Axel Franzen
und
Dominikus Vogl
Summary
Acquiescence can be the source of a serious response bias in international comparative research. We demonstrate this by referring to an example taken from environmental sociology. The effect of wealth on individuals’ willingness to pay for environmental protection is controversially discussed in the literature. Studies analyzing the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) report that individuals in wealthier nations are more concerned about the environment, while studies using the World Values Survey (WVS) or the European Values Study (EVS) come up with the opposite finding. The puzzle is resolved when the different levels of acquiescence are taken into consideration. As it turns out, respondents in poorer nations in Asia and Eastern Europe have higher levels of acquiescence than respondents in richer Western nations. Thus, acquiescence conceals the wealth effect of studies analyzing the WVS or EVS and the issue is resolved when acquiescence is properly controlled for in multivariate statistical models.
© 2011 by Lucius & Lucius, Stuttgart
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Titelei
- Inhalt / Contents
- Guest Editorial
- Abhandlungen / Original Papers
- The Production of Historical “Facts”: How the Wrong Number of Participants in the Leipzig Monday Demonstration on October 9, 1989 Became a Convention
- “True Believers” or Numerical Terrorism at the Nuclear Power Plant
- One-eyed Epidemiologic Dummies at Nuclear Power Plants
- Are Most Published Research Findings False?
- What Fuels Publication Bias?
- The Identification and Prevention of Publication Bias in the Social Sciences and Economics
- Benford’s Law as an Instrument for Fraud Detection in Surveys Using the Data of the Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP)
- When Does the Second-Digit Benford’s Law-Test Signal an Election Fraud?
- Difficulties Detecting Fraud? The Use of Benford’s Law on Regression Tables
- Plagiarism in Student Papers: Prevalence Estimates Using Special Techniques for Sensitive Questions
- Pitfalls of International Comparative Research: Taking Acquiescence into Account
- Buchbesprechungen / Book Reviews
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Titelei
- Inhalt / Contents
- Guest Editorial
- Abhandlungen / Original Papers
- The Production of Historical “Facts”: How the Wrong Number of Participants in the Leipzig Monday Demonstration on October 9, 1989 Became a Convention
- “True Believers” or Numerical Terrorism at the Nuclear Power Plant
- One-eyed Epidemiologic Dummies at Nuclear Power Plants
- Are Most Published Research Findings False?
- What Fuels Publication Bias?
- The Identification and Prevention of Publication Bias in the Social Sciences and Economics
- Benford’s Law as an Instrument for Fraud Detection in Surveys Using the Data of the Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP)
- When Does the Second-Digit Benford’s Law-Test Signal an Election Fraud?
- Difficulties Detecting Fraud? The Use of Benford’s Law on Regression Tables
- Plagiarism in Student Papers: Prevalence Estimates Using Special Techniques for Sensitive Questions
- Pitfalls of International Comparative Research: Taking Acquiescence into Account
- Buchbesprechungen / Book Reviews
