Testing the discriminant validity of Schwartz’ Portrait Value Questionnaire items – A replication and extension of Knoppen and Saris (2009)

62 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Refining the theory of basic individual values. (2012, background): “Two CFA studies of the PVQ identified a single power factor on which the two dominance items loaded substantially more strongly than the one resource item (Beierlein et al., 2012; Cieciuch & Schwartz, 2012).”
Recent Methods for the Study of Measurement Invariance With Many Groups (2018, unknown): “The data are from the European Social Survey as discussed in Beierlein et al. (2012).”
Testing for Approximate Measurement Invariance of Human Values in the European Social Survey (2018, background): “Therefore, it was not possible to establish sufficient levels of discriminant and convergent validity for the value measurements (see also Beierlein et al. 2012). Moreover, Knoppen and Saris (2009) proposed to use separate models at a time for each pair of adjacent values in the circle (rather than ”
High-Dimension Human Value Representation in Large Language Models (2024, methodology): “…value , we collect reference human values from multiple human value studies including world value survey [30, 87, 31], cultural dimensions theory [25, 88, 89, 26], theory of basic human values [90, 27, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95], the refined theory of values [29] and Rokeach value survey [76, 77, 96, 97].”