Testing and extending Schwartz refined value theory using a best–worst scaling approach

Julie Lee, Joanne Sneddon, Timothy Daly, Shalon Schwartz, Geoffrey Soutar, Jordan Louviere

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The theory of human values discriminated 10 basic values arrayed in a quasicircular structure. Analyses with several instruments in numerous samples supported this structure. The refined theory of human values discriminates 19 values in the same circle. Its support depends on one instrument, the revised Portrait Values Questionnaire. We introduce a forced choice method, the Best–Worst Refined Values scale (BWVr), to assess the robustness of the refined theory to method of measurement and also assess the distinctiveness and validity of a new animal welfare value. Three studies (N = 784, 439, and 383) support the theory and the new value. Study 3 also demonstrates the convergent and discriminant validity of the 19 values by comparing the BWVr, the revised Portrait Values Questionnaire, and value-expressive behaviors and confirms the test–retest reliability of BWVr responses. These studies provide further information about the order of values in the value circle.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)166-180
Number of pages15
JournalAssessment
Volume26
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2019

Fingerprint

Animal Welfare
Surveys and Questionnaires

Cite this

Lee, Julie ; Sneddon, Joanne ; Daly, Timothy ; Schwartz, Shalon ; Soutar, Geoffrey ; Louviere, Jordan. / Testing and extending Schwartz refined value theory using a best–worst scaling approach. In: Assessment. 2019 ; Vol. 26, No. 2. pp. 166-180.
@article{25b09c7263224b7ea24988f4ee4a5d32,
title = "Testing and extending Schwartz refined value theory using a best–worst scaling approach",
abstract = "The theory of human values discriminated 10 basic values arrayed in a quasicircular structure. Analyses with several instruments in numerous samples supported this structure. The refined theory of human values discriminates 19 values in the same circle. Its support depends on one instrument, the revised Portrait Values Questionnaire. We introduce a forced choice method, the Best–Worst Refined Values scale (BWVr), to assess the robustness of the refined theory to method of measurement and also assess the distinctiveness and validity of a new animal welfare value. Three studies (N = 784, 439, and 383) support the theory and the new value. Study 3 also demonstrates the convergent and discriminant validity of the 19 values by comparing the BWVr, the revised Portrait Values Questionnaire, and value-expressive behaviors and confirms the test–retest reliability of BWVr responses. These studies provide further information about the order of values in the value circle.",
author = "Julie Lee and Joanne Sneddon and Timothy Daly and Shalon Schwartz and Geoffrey Soutar and Jordan Louviere",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1177/1073191116683799",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "166--180",
journal = "Assessment",
issn = "1073-1911",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "2",

}

Testing and extending Schwartz refined value theory using a best–worst scaling approach. / Lee, Julie; Sneddon, Joanne; Daly, Timothy; Schwartz, Shalon; Soutar, Geoffrey; Louviere, Jordan.

In: Assessment, Vol. 26, No. 2, 03.2019, p. 166-180.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Testing and extending Schwartz refined value theory using a best–worst scaling approach

AU - Lee, Julie

AU - Sneddon, Joanne

AU - Daly, Timothy

AU - Schwartz, Shalon

AU - Soutar, Geoffrey

AU - Louviere, Jordan

PY - 2019/3

Y1 - 2019/3

N2 - The theory of human values discriminated 10 basic values arrayed in a quasicircular structure. Analyses with several instruments in numerous samples supported this structure. The refined theory of human values discriminates 19 values in the same circle. Its support depends on one instrument, the revised Portrait Values Questionnaire. We introduce a forced choice method, the Best–Worst Refined Values scale (BWVr), to assess the robustness of the refined theory to method of measurement and also assess the distinctiveness and validity of a new animal welfare value. Three studies (N = 784, 439, and 383) support the theory and the new value. Study 3 also demonstrates the convergent and discriminant validity of the 19 values by comparing the BWVr, the revised Portrait Values Questionnaire, and value-expressive behaviors and confirms the test–retest reliability of BWVr responses. These studies provide further information about the order of values in the value circle.

AB - The theory of human values discriminated 10 basic values arrayed in a quasicircular structure. Analyses with several instruments in numerous samples supported this structure. The refined theory of human values discriminates 19 values in the same circle. Its support depends on one instrument, the revised Portrait Values Questionnaire. We introduce a forced choice method, the Best–Worst Refined Values scale (BWVr), to assess the robustness of the refined theory to method of measurement and also assess the distinctiveness and validity of a new animal welfare value. Three studies (N = 784, 439, and 383) support the theory and the new value. Study 3 also demonstrates the convergent and discriminant validity of the 19 values by comparing the BWVr, the revised Portrait Values Questionnaire, and value-expressive behaviors and confirms the test–retest reliability of BWVr responses. These studies provide further information about the order of values in the value circle.

U2 - 10.1177/1073191116683799

DO - 10.1177/1073191116683799

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 166

EP - 180

JO - Assessment

JF - Assessment

SN - 1073-1911

IS - 2

ER -