Functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveys

Cross-cultural comparative surveys have become an important tool to investigate social attitudes across different countries. However, this methodology is confronted with a number of challenges. One of the core problems is the functional equivalence of the concepts and indicators used. In this articl...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Franz Höllinger, Anja Eder
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2016-02-01
Series:Methodological Innovations
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2059799115622756
id doaj-d43d3e2dc217491fa198a27bed9a7eca
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d43d3e2dc217491fa198a27bed9a7eca2020-11-25T03:52:34ZengSAGE PublishingMethodological Innovations2059-79912016-02-01910.1177/2059799115622756Functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveysFranz HöllingerAnja EderCross-cultural comparative surveys have become an important tool to investigate social attitudes across different countries. However, this methodology is confronted with a number of challenges. One of the core problems is the functional equivalence of the concepts and indicators used. In this article, we study this problem in regard to the investigation of religiousness in three prominent surveys, the World Value Survey, the International Social Survey Programme, and the Religion Monitor. Our contribution starts with the fundamental question of the intercultural meaning of single items that are commonly used for the measurement of religiosity. From the comparison of the linguistic formulation of these items in different languages and across the three surveys, we obtain evidence of whether the concept of religiousness has the same meaning in different countries and to what extent the results depend on the formulation of the item. Subsequently, we use confirmatory factor analysis to test whether two religiousness scales derived from the International Social Survey Programme are structurally equivalent across countries. In the final step, we proceed to a substantive analysis, comparing religiousness scales from the three surveys in order to examine to what extent scales that claim to measure the same construct in fact produce similar results when applied to different countries. Our findings suggest that the paradigm of “asking the same questions” is difficult to apply and problematical with respect to some core indicators of individual religiousness and that questionnaires that are based on the Western concept of religion will lead to biased results when applied to worldwide cross-cultural comparison.https://doi.org/10.1177/2059799115622756
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Franz Höllinger
Anja Eder
spellingShingle Franz Höllinger
Anja Eder
Functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveys
Methodological Innovations
author_facet Franz Höllinger
Anja Eder
author_sort Franz Höllinger
title Functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveys
title_short Functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveys
title_full Functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveys
title_fullStr Functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveys
title_full_unstemmed Functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveys
title_sort functional equivalence and validity of religiousness indicators in cross-cultural comparative surveys
publisher SAGE Publishing
series Methodological Innovations
issn 2059-7991
publishDate 2016-02-01
description Cross-cultural comparative surveys have become an important tool to investigate social attitudes across different countries. However, this methodology is confronted with a number of challenges. One of the core problems is the functional equivalence of the concepts and indicators used. In this article, we study this problem in regard to the investigation of religiousness in three prominent surveys, the World Value Survey, the International Social Survey Programme, and the Religion Monitor. Our contribution starts with the fundamental question of the intercultural meaning of single items that are commonly used for the measurement of religiosity. From the comparison of the linguistic formulation of these items in different languages and across the three surveys, we obtain evidence of whether the concept of religiousness has the same meaning in different countries and to what extent the results depend on the formulation of the item. Subsequently, we use confirmatory factor analysis to test whether two religiousness scales derived from the International Social Survey Programme are structurally equivalent across countries. In the final step, we proceed to a substantive analysis, comparing religiousness scales from the three surveys in order to examine to what extent scales that claim to measure the same construct in fact produce similar results when applied to different countries. Our findings suggest that the paradigm of “asking the same questions” is difficult to apply and problematical with respect to some core indicators of individual religiousness and that questionnaires that are based on the Western concept of religion will lead to biased results when applied to worldwide cross-cultural comparison.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2059799115622756
work_keys_str_mv AT franzhollinger functionalequivalenceandvalidityofreligiousnessindicatorsincrossculturalcomparativesurveys
AT anjaeder functionalequivalenceandvalidityofreligiousnessindicatorsincrossculturalcomparativesurveys
_version_ 1724482064293560320