Programme 2013

Tuesday 16th July       Wednesday 17th July       Thursday 18th July       Friday 19th July      

Download the conference book
Download the program

Wednesday 17th July 2013, 16:00 - 17:30, Room: No. 21

Basic Human Values 3

Convenor Professor Eldad Davidov (University of Zurich)
Coordinator 1Dr Constanze Beierlein (Goethe University of Frankfurt)
Coordinator 2Professor Peter Schmidt (Higher School of Economics Moscow)

Session Details

Values have held an important position in the social sciences since their inception. Max Weber treated values as a central component in his analysis of capitalist society, linking the development of capitalism to the values of the Protestant Ethic. Values played an important role not only in sociology, but in social psychology, anthropology, political science and related disciplines as well. They have been used to explain the motivational bases of attitudes and behavior and to characterize differences between both individuals and societies.

Until recently, application of the values construct in the social sciences has suffered from the absence of an agreed-upon conception of basic values and reliable methods designed to measure these values (Hitlin and Piliavin 2004). In 1992, Schwartz introduced a theory of ten basic human values, building on common elements in earlier approaches. The designers of the European Social Survey (ESS) chose this theory as the basis for developing a human values scale to include in the core of the survey. Recently, this theory has been extended to include 19 values (Schwartz et al., in press).

In this session continuing work on basic human values as postulated by Schwartz will be presented. Presentations which discuss (1) The measurement of human values; (2) Values as predictors of attitudes, opinions or behaviour; (3) Value change; and related topics using the theory are welcome. Both substantive and methodological papers using cross-sectional, cross-cultural or longitudinal datasets are welcome.

The 3rd co-organizer of the session is Dr. Jan Cieciuch, University of Zurich, jancieciuch@gmail.com

Paper Details

1. Self- other agreement in personal values
Mr Henrik Dobewall (University of Tartu)
Dr Anu Realo (University of Tartu)
Dr Toivo Aavik
Dr Kenn Konstabel

Are values too individually subjective to be judged by others? To test this claim, self- and other-ratings of personal values and personality traits were compared. Observed self-other agreement in Schwartz's higher-order values ranged from r = .31 (Self-Transcendence) to .47 (Self-Enhancement) as compared to consensus in the Big-Five personality domains ranging from r = .51 (Agreeableness) to .75 (Extraversion). When corrected for attenuation, the self-other agreement of personal values (median r = .59) was interpreted matching those of personality traits (median r = .68). A second study - using a culture specific inventory of values - found substantial agreement also in the more narrow value types (median r = .52). Our results suggest that other-ratings of personal values can be used to validate the content of self-report measures.



2. Factors of socio-cultural adaptation of young people in Yakutia
Dr Mariya Abramova (Institute philosophy and law SB RAS Department of ethno-social research, Russia, Novosibirsk)

Current paper describes the results of sociological research conducted in 2006-2010 of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia, Russia). The main purpose of the research is to investigate factors and strategies of youth adaptation. Research tools included: a questionnaire, a questionnaire Schwartz and test L.N. Sobchik. In total 3843 persons took part in the survey. Among them there were 1208 Russians, 1943 Sakhas, 319 North indigenous small in number peoples.
Major socio-cultural patterns of youth acculturation are pointed out.
Under the socio-cultural adaptation, we understand a certain mode of interaction of social subjects (individuals, groups, communities) in their socio-cultural integrity (indissoluble triad of "personality -society-culture") with socio-cultural systems (society as a whole or its subsystems as "milieu") which result in condition of relative adjustment (compliance) of their elements (characteristics).
It is determined that integration (multicultural) adaptation model prevails when ethnic and All Russian (civil) self identification is important for respondents. Thus, an individual is inclined to cross-cultural interaction which makes for his high adaptedness independently of his ethnicity.
Subjective factors: shaped ethnic self-consciousness, positive attitude to traditional value system and desire to maintain traditions in his own family, optimistic expectations of his folk future -favourably affect youth adaptation.
Psychological peculiar features of respondents are also important: in adaptation: extraverts, who are of optimistic spirit, have features of a leader, socio-politically active, share collectivism values, have actual financial claims, hardworking, are better at adaptation.


3. Basic values of Russian Orthodox Church members: an application of Schwartz Portrait Value Questionnaire
Mrs Elena Prutskova (St. Tikhon's Orthodox University)

The paper focuses on relationship between religiosity and basic human values. The dataset used to measure this relation is the third wave of "Orthodox Monitor" survey conducted in Russia in December 2012. The survey was designed by "Sociology or Religion" project at OSTHU, and the fieldwork was carried out by the "Public Opinion Foundation" (FOM). Multistage stratified random sample design was applied and 806 active Russian Orthodox Church members (those who participate in the Eucharist 3 times a year and more often) were interviewed. Values are measured via the Schwartz 21-item Portrait Value Questionnaire (Schwartz 2003). To compare the values of active Church members with the values of less- and non-religious people we look at the data of European Social Survey (ESS) where the same questions are asked on the basis of the general population sample.
Basic human values within the Schwartz value theory are defined as beliefs about what is important for a person. Ten basic values constitute a dynamic circular structure: Power, Achievement, Hedonism, Stimulation, Self Direction, Universalism, Benevolence, Tradition, Conformity, and Security. Ten basic values in their turn form two generalized value dimensions (indexes): Conservation vs. Openness to Change and Self-Enhancement vs. Self-Transcendence. Comparison of the average values of the indexes reveal significant differences between active Church members, less religious, and non-religious Russians. The results of linear regression analysis show that these differences are partly due to different socio-demographic structure of the groups considered, and partly are due to religiosity influence.


4. Locating individuals on Schwartz value dimensions
Mr Marko Somer (Tallinn University)

The theory of basic human values by Shalom Schwartz (1992) presents a value structure formed by interrelations between different values. The theory has been validated and assessed in extensive cross-cultural studies using mostly multidimensional scaling and confirmatory factor analysis. Both of these approaches are so-called variable-centered approaches. In current study, different, person-centered approach is used to verify the validity of Schwartz value theory in cross-cultural context. Namely, multigroup confirmatory latent class analysis is applied to the data of European Social Survey. The new perspective derived from that more holistic treatment of personal value systems, enables us to describe more precisely the typology and specificity of congruent value groups within societies, to relate individual value preferences to overall value dimensions, and also to determine the extent of their equivalence between societies.
The results indicate that individuals (within societies) in different value groups construct their value systems according to different relations between values, which are not always in one-to-one correspondence with logic underlying Schwartz value dimensions (although originating from it). Also, these relations are not always comparable between societies and cultures.