The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measurement Equivalence Of 10 Value Types From The Schwartz Value Survey Across 21 Countries
Abstract
Equivalence of measurement across cultures is a prerequisite for the generalization of an instrument. The measurement equivalence of 10 value types derived from Schwartz's structural model of values and measured with the Schwartz Value Survey questionnaire is evaluated in 21 countries. Based on previous research by Schwartz and colleagues, the measurement equivalence of the 10 value types is tested separately using nested multigroup confirmatory factor analyses. Results indicate that it is possible for most value types to reach acceptable levels of configural and metric equivalence; only the dimension of Hedonism is rejected at these two levels of equivalence. Four value types (Benevolence, Conformity, Self-Direction, and Universalism) also show factor variance equivalence. The hypotheses of scalar and reliability equivalence are rejected for all value types. Indications are also given of the number of items to be included for measuring the value types at the different levels of equivalence.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Schwartz, S. H. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6 · Cited by 14,619
Akaike, H. (1987) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02294359 · Cited by 5,264
Bozdogan, H. (1987) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02294361 · Cited by 4,468
Akaike, H. (1987) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-1694-0_29 · Cited by 4,027
Simultaneous Factor Analysis in Several Populations
Jöreskog, K. G. (1971) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291366 · Cited by 2,051
Guttman, L. (1968) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02290164 · Cited by 1,343
Value priorities and readiness for out-group social contact.
Sagiv, L., & Schwartz, S. H. (1995) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.3.437 · Cited by 514
Values, national identification and favouritism towards the in‐group
Feather, N. T. (1994) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01042.x · Cited by 58
Cited by
Modern attitudes toward older adults in the aging world: A cross-cultural meta-analysis.
North, M. S., & Fiske, S. T. (2015) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0039469 · Cited by 560
Time perspective and values: An exploratory study of their relations to environmental attitudes
Milfont, T. L., & Gouveia, V. V. (2006) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.03.001 · Cited by 309
Taking Foreign Policy Personally: Personal Values and Foreign Policy Attitudes
Rathbun, B. C., Kertzer, J. D., Reifler, J., Goren, P., & Scotto, T. J. (2016) · International Studies Quarterly · doi:10.1093/isq/sqv012 · Cited by 266
Patient views on research use of clinical data without consent: Legal, but also acceptable?
Richter, G., Borzikowsky, C., Lieb, W., Schreiber, S., Krawczak, M., & Buyx, A. (2019) · European Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41431-019-0340-6 · Cited by 74
Elliot, A. J., Sedikides, C., Murayama, K., Tanaka, A., Thrash, T. M., & Mapes, R. R. (2012) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/a0027456 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- Spini, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-23
- ISSN
- 0022-0221 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-5422
- OpenAlex
- W2154170645
- Cited by
- 221
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 6.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Measurement Equivalence Of 10 Value Types From The Schwartz Value Survey Across 21 Countries. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0022022102239152
- The paper
- Spini, D. (2003). Measurement Equivalence Of 10 Value Types From The Schwartz Value Survey Across 21 Countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022102239152
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
