Trust in American Government: Longitudinal Measurement Equivalence in the ANES, 1964–2008

Social Indicators Research

Volumn 118, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 741-758

  Poznyak, Dmitriy ^a   Meuleman, Bart ^b   Abts, Koen ^b   Bishop, George F ^c  

^a MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEARCH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI   (United States)

Author keywords

ANES; Comparability; Measurement equivalence; Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis; Political trust; Structural equation modeling

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; FACTOR ANALYSIS; GOVERNMENT; MEASUREMENT METHOD; MODELING; POLITICAL SYSTEM; SURVEY;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84927646287     PISSN: 03038300     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11205-013-0441-5     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Ariely, G., & Davidov, E. (2010). Can we rate public support for democracy in a comparable way? Cross-national equivalence of democratic attitudes in the World value survey. Social Indicators Research,104(2), 271–286.
2. Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Weighted least squares estimation with missing data. Technical report. http://www.statmodel.com/download/GstrucMissingRevision.pdf.
3. Bennett, S. E. (2001). Were the halcyon days really golden? An analysis of Americans’ attitudes about the political system, 1945–1965. In J. R. Hibbing, & E. Theiss-Morse (Eds.), What is it About Government that Americans Dislike (pp. 47–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Bennett, S. E., Rhine, S. L., Flickinger, R. S., & Bennett, L. L. M. (1999). “Video Malaise” Revisited: Public Trust in the Media and Government. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 4(4), 8–23.
5. Bergsma, W., Croon, M., & Hagenaars, J. A. (2009). Marginal models: For dependent, clustered, and longitudinal categorical data. Berlin: Springer.
6. Billiet, J. (2003). Cross-cultural equivalence with structural equation modeling. In J. Harkness, F. Van de Vijver, & P. Mohler (Eds.), Cross-cultural survey methods (pp. 247–264). New York, NY: Wiley.
7. Bishop, G. F. (1990). Issue involvement and response effects in public opinion surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly,54(2), 209–218.
8. Bishop, G. F. (2005). The illusion of public opinion: Fact and artifact in american public opinion polls. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
9. Bishop, G.F., & Mockabee, S.T. (2011). Comparability of measurement in public opinion polls. Survey Practice, 4(5).
10. Bishop, G. F., Oldendick, R. W., & Tuchfarber, A. J. (1982). Political information processing: Question order and context effects. Political Behavior,4(2), 177–200.
11. Blasius, J., & Thiessen, V. (2001). Methodological artifacts in measures of political efficacy and trust: A multiple correspondence analysis. Political Analysis, 9(1), 1–20.
12. Blendon, R. J., Benson, J. M., Morin, R., Altman, D. E., Brodie, M., Brossard, M., & James, M. (1997). Changing Attitudes in America. In J. S. Nye, P. Zelikow, & D. C. King (Eds.), Why people don’t trust government (pp. 205–216). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
14. Bollen, K. A., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110(2), 305–314.
15. Brown, T. A. (2010). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
16. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. O. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin,105(3), 456–466.
17. Chanley, V. A. (2002). Trust in Government in the aftermath of 9/11: Determinants and consequences. Political Psychology,23(3), 469–483.
18. Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,14(3), 464–504.
19. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance evaluating goodness-. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,9(2), 233–255.
20. Citrin, J. (1974). Comment: The political relevance of trust in government. The American Political Science Review, 68(3), 973–988.
21. Citrin, J., & Green, D. P. (1986). Presidential leadership and the resurgence of trust in government. British Journal of Political Science, 16(4), 431–453.
22. Citrin, J., & Muste, C. (1999). Trust in Government. In J. R. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of political attitudes (pp. 465–532). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
23. Cook, T. E., & Gronke, P. (2005). The skeptical American: Revisiting the meanings of trust in government and confidence in institutions. The Journal of Politics, 67(3), 784–803.
24. Davidov, E., Datler, G., Schmidt, P., & Schwartz, S. H. (2011). Testing the invariance of values in the Benelux countries with the European Social Survey: Accounting for ordinality. In E. Davidov, P. Schmidt, & J. Billiet (Eds.), Cross-cultural analysis: Methods and applications (pp. 149–168). London: Routledge.
25. Davidov, E., Schmidt, P., & Schwartz, S. H. (2008). Bringing values back in: The adequacy of the European social survey to measure values in 20 Countries. The Public Opinion Quarterly,72(3), 420–445.
26. De Beuckelaer, A., & Swinnen, G. (2011). Biased latent variable mean comparison due to measurement noninvariance. In E. Davidov, P. Schmidt, & J. Billiet (Eds.), Cross-Cultural Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York: Routledge.
27. DiStefano, C. (2002). The impact of categorization with confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,9(3), 327–346.
28. Donnelan, M. B., & Conger, R. D. (2009). Designing and implementing Longitudinal studies. In R. F. K. Richard, W. Robins, & R. C. Fraley (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (p. 719). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
29. Easton, D. (1965). A systems analysis of political life. New York, NY: Wiley.
30. Eid, M., Langeheine, R., & Diener, E. (2003). Comparing typological structures across cultures by multigroup latent class analysis: A primer. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34(2), 195–210.
31. Gamson, W. A. (1968). Power and discontent. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
32. Groves, R. M. (1989). Survey errors and survey costs. New York, NY: Wiley.
33. Hetherington, M. J. (2005). Why trust matters: Declining political trust and the demise of American Liberalism. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.
34. Hetherington, M. J., & Rudolph, T. J. (2008). Priming, performance, and the dynamics of political trust. The Journal of Politics,70(2), 498–512.
35. Hibbing, J. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (1995). Congress as public enemy: Public attitudes toward American political institutions (p. 186). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. Hibbing, J. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (Eds.). (2001). What is it about government that Americans dislike? (p. 279). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. Hibbing, J. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (2002). Stealth democracy: Americans’ beliefs about how government should work (p. 284). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. Horn, J. L., & McArdle, J. L. (1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research,18(3), 117–144.
39. Johnson, T. P. (1998). Approaches to equivalence in cross-cultural and cross-national survey-research. ZUMA Nachrichten Spezial, Cross-cultural survey equivalence,3, 1–40.
40. Jöreskog, K. G. (1971). Simultaneous factor analysis in several populations. Psychometrika,36(4), 409–426.
41. Jöreskog, K. G. (1990). New developments in LISREL: analysis of ordinal variables using polychoric correlations and weighted least squares. Quality and Quantity, 24(4), 387–404.
42. Kankaraš, M., & Moors, G. (2010). Researching measurement equivalence in cross-cultural studies. Psihologija,43(2), 121–136.
43. Keele, L. (2005). The authorities really do matter: Party control and trust in government. The Journal of Politics,67(3), 873–886.
44. Kent, R. (2001). Data construction and data analysis for survey research. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
45. Levi, M., & Stoker, L. (2000). Political trust and trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 475–507.
46. Lubke, G. H., & Muthén, B. O. (2004). Applying multigroup confirmatory factor models for continuous outcomes to Likert scales complicates meaningful group comparisons. Structural Equation Modeling,11(4), 514–534.
47. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurment invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika,58(4), 525–543.
48. Miller, A. H. (1974). Political issues and trust in government: 1964–1970. The American Political Science Review, 68(3), 951–972.
49. Millsap, R. E., & Meredith, W. (2007). Factorial Invariance: Historical perspectives and new problems. In R. C. M. Cudeck (Ed.), Factor analysis at 100: Historical developments and future directions (pp. 131–152). Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum.
50. Millsap, R. E., & Yun-Tein, J. (2004). Assessing factorial invariance in ordered-categorical measures. Multivariate Behavioral Research,39(3), 479–515.
51. Mulaik, S. A. (2009). Linear causal modeling with structural equations. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
52. Muthén, B. O., & Asparouhov, T. (2002). Latent variable analysis with categorical outcomes: Multiple-group and growth modeling in Mplus. Mplus Web Note No. 4. http://www.statmodel.com/mplus/examples/webnote.html.
53. Muthén, B. O., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology,38, 171–189.
54. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
55. Nye, J. S., Zelikow, P., & King, D. C. (Eds.) (1997). Why people don’t trust government. (p. 337). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
56. Parker, S. L. (1986). The dynamics of changing system support in the United States: 1964–1980. PhD. Dissertation. Florida State University.
57. Poortinga, Y. H. (1989). Equivalence of cross-cultural data: An overview of basic issues. International Journal of Psychology,24, 737–756.
58. Raju, N. S., Laffitte, L. J., & Byrne, B. M. (2002). Measurement equivalence: A comparison of methods based on confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 517–529.
59. Reeskens, T., & Hooghe, M. (2007). Cross-cultural measurement equivalence of generalized trust. Evidence from the European social survey (2002 and 2004). Social Indicators Research,85(3), 515–532.
60. Reise, S. P., Widaman, K. F., & Pugh, R. H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin,113(3), 552–566.
61. Saris, W. E., & Gallhofer, I. N. (2007). Design, evaluation and analysis of questionnaires for survey research. New York, NY: Wiley.
62. Schumacher, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
63. Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1996). Questions and answers in attitude surveys: Experiments on question form, wording, and context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
64. Schwarz, N., & Sudman, S. (1992). Context effects in social and psychological research. New York: Springer.
65. Shevlin, M., Miles, J., & Bunting, B. (1997). Summated rating scales. A Monte Carlo investigation of the effects of reliability and collinearity in regression models. Personality and Individual Differences, 23(4), 665–676.
66. Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. The Journal of Consumer Research,25(1), 78–90.
67. Stegmueller, D. (2011). Apples and oranges? The problem of equivalence in comparative research. Political Analysis,19, 471–487.
68. Steinmetz, H. (2012). Analyzing observed composite differences across groups. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences,1(1), 1–12.
69. Stokes, D. E. (1962). Popular evaluations of Government: An empirical assessment. In H. Cleveland & H. D. Laswell (Eds.), Ethics and business: Scientific academic religious political and military (pp. 61–72). New York: Harper & Brothers.
70. Taylor, A. B. (2008). Two new methods of studying the performance of SEM fit indexes. PhD Diss. Arizona State University.
71. Temme, D. (2006). Assessing measurement invariance of ordinal indicators in cross-national research. In S. Diehl, R. Terlutter, & P. Weinberg (Eds.), International advertising and communication—New insights and empirical findings (pp. 455–472). Gabler.
72. The American National Election Studies Time-Series Cumulative Data File (1948–2008). Stanford University and the University of Michigan [producers and distributors]. http://www.electionstudies.org.
73. Turner, C. F. (1984). Why do surveys disagree? Some preliminary hypotheses and some disagreeable examples. In C. F. Turner & E. Martin (Eds.), Surveying subjective phenomena (pp. 159–214). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
74. Ulbig, S. G. (2002). Subnational contextual influences on political trust. PhD Dissertation. Rice University.
75. Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods,3(1), 4–70.
76. Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.