SEMINAR AT HIVA RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR WORK AND SOCIETY Friday, 18 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

SEMINAR AT HIVA ■ RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR WORK AND SOCIETY Friday, 18 November 2016 The use of f auxiliary and event data in in tr tracking an in inhomogeneity of f substantive data in in lo longitudinal stu tudies. The e cases es of of ESS Rou ound 7th th and EWCS CS Wave e 5th th Teresa Żmijewska - Jędrzejczyk Ins nsti titute of of Phil hilosophy and and So Soci ciology at t the the Poli olish Academy of of Sci Sciences PhD hD Stu Student: : Uni niversi sity ty of of War arsa saw Ques uestio ions: ter eresa.zmij ijewska@if ifispan.waw.pl This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Programme for Research, www.inclusivegrowth.be Technological Development and Demonstration under Grant Agreement No 312691

Agenda  Homogeneity of a data in longitudinal crossnational studies – why important?  The necessity to track transitory factors in trend analysis  Why EWCS and ESS data?  EWCS and ESS data – results of the study  Summary and problems to be solved  Disscussion 2

Why im important?  Standardization as a key premise of survey  The challenges of measurement validity in broad sense: non-response bias, measurement equivalence » Ref.: Jowell 2004, Billiet 2015 » Ref.: Commission de sondages  Statistical analysis of hierarchical models 3

Surv rveys are prone to the dif ifferent effects Among long list of the different surveys’ effects, three types are rele levant to o th the le length of of th the su survey peri riod  Con ontext Effects  Surv Survey clim climate (R (Ref.: Loo Loosveldt & & Jo Joye 2016 2016)  Su Sudden an and lon ong- lasting events’ effects  In Interv rviewer Effects  Fati tigue Effects (in interv rviewer lose oses foc ocus, , be become tir ired)  Lea Learnin ing Effects (in interv rvie iewer kn knows by y hea heart a a qu questi tionnaire)  Effects con onnted wi with th the (in (in)stabili ility of of th the attitudes  Mod ode effects  Man any ot others (R (Ref.: Weis isberg H. . F. . 2005 2005) 4

Pattern rns of f the an in inhomogeneit ity of f su substantive data - example les 5

The necessity to track transitory ry factors  In In tr trend an analysis is fr from lon longitudin inal stu tudies th the pos ostulates of of hom omogeneity of of th the data  As a result of the different conditions under which cross-country and longitudinal studies are carried out, it is necessary to collect contextual data about the economic situation, the level of democratization, political regime, political events like the imminence of general elections  Th That im impose als also th the necessity to o control l th the im impact of of tr tran ansitory ry factors - events  Su Such factors mig ight bias iased th the lon long-term tr trends in in attitudes! 6

Rationale for selecting data Cross-country with long tradition Longitudinal and long fieldwork period High quality data and different topics 7

Procedure • All ll varia iable les • All ll countries 1 step • Se Sele lect th the countries for fu further analy lysis • Varia iable le prone to be an in inhomogeneous 2 step • Marked variables and countries • Additional controlled variables 3 step 8

European Work rkin ing Co Condit itio ions Su Survey 5th th wave (2 (2010) Representative sample le based on the whole country pop opulation 15+ or 16+ (Spain, UK, Norway) Coverage: EU27, Norway, Croatia, FYROM, Turkey, Albania, Co Montenegro and Kosovo Main in subject: provide an overview of the every eryday rea ealit ity of of men en and women at t wor ork Frequency: since 1990 every ery 5 yea ears

1st step All ll varia iable les and all ll countrie ies Aim im: deriv ive those varia iables and those countrie ies prone to be an in inhomogeneous (red fla lags)

Method and assumptions  DV: lis list of of 39 390 0 var aria iable les - all for which the scale level was know were used (ISCO occupation classification excluded)  IV IV: date of of th the fie fieldwork (month)  No weights applied   =.001  The estimation method (and test stat) for the variables  Metrics: OLS (F-test),  Ordinal: ordered probit (chi2)  Nominal: multinomial logit regression (chi2)  No control var aria iable les Sem Vandekerckhove 12

Results: : red fla flags Country red flags Country red flags Country red flags Sweden N=1004 5 Turkey N=2100 64 UK N=1575 14 Spain N=1007 4 France N=3037 50 FYROM N=1100 14 Italy N=1500 4 Albania N=1000 48 Malta N=1000 13 Hungary N=1006 4 Belgium N=3995 40 Ireland N=1003 12 Romania N=1017 4 Portugal N=1000 30 Norway N=1085 11 Czech Rep. N=1000 3 Luxembourg N=999 27 Montenegro N=1041 11 Cyprus N=1000 3 Latvia N=1001 22 Kosovo N=1018 10 Lithuania N=1004 3 Croatia N=1100 21 Bulgaria N=1014 8 Denmark N=1069 1 Germany N=2133 17 Estonia N=1000 8 Slovakia N=1002 1 Slovenia N=1404 17 Netherlands N=1017 8 Finland N=1028 1 Greece N=1037 15 Austria N=1003 7 Poland N=1497 7 13

Results: : red fla flags by scale and topic Country Total Nominal Ordinal Metrics Topics All Turkey N=2100 64 31 30 3 All France N=3037 50 29 18 3 All Albania N=1000 48 21 24 3 All Belgium N=3995 40 23 14 3 Portugal N=1000 30 11 14 5 All  Different sample size: Belgium, France vs. Albania, Portugal  Differnt suvey climate across Europe  Variable prone to be an inhomogeneous are from different topics 14

European So Socia ial l Su Survey 7th th round of f ESS SS (2015/2016) an academic icall lly driv riven Sample based on the whole country pop opula lation 15+ + Co Coverage: crosseuropean – in 2015/16: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom Main in subject: since 2001 every ry 2 years measures the attitudes, beliefs and behavior patterns of diverse populations across Europe

Method and assumptions  DV: : Sub ubstantiv ive que questio ions selected from the core questionnaire, e.g.: trust in public institutions, assessment of the public institutions (incl. the European Parliament and the attitude to European integration), political activity, subcetive well-being, happiness  IV IV: da date of of the the fi field ldwork rk (days)  No weights applied  The estimation method (and test stat) for the variables – 11 point numeric scales: linear regression – ordinal variables: ordinal logistic regression (PLUM) – dichotomous variables: binary logistic regression  No o con ontrol vari ariable les 16

Results for France b Trust: parliment 0,013*** Trust: legal system 0,007** Trust: police 0,011*** Trust: politicians 0,009*** Trust: political parties 0,010*** Trust in the European Parliament 0,010*** How satisfied with the national government 0,013*** How satisfied with the way democracy works in country 0,016*** State of health services in country nowadays 0,005* *p<0,1 **p<0,05 ***p=<0,001 17

Summary  Varia iable le prone to o be an an in inhomogeneous ar are fr from dif ifferent top opics an and th they have more country sp specific patterns  Th Thus fie fieldwork peri riod is is an im important element in the proces of assessment the data homogeneity, both in terms of measurement equivalence and statistical analysis (e.g.: hierarchical models) in cross-country comparisons  Tracing the homogeneity of the data is still a challenge for researchers. Why? In cross-countries data sets it may be dif ifficult to o for ormulate even prelimin inary ry hyp ypotheses what kin kind of of tr transit itory factors, effects or or events ar are rele levant an and what var ariable les mig ight be affected 18

Where’s varia iable le quali lity hid idin ing? The im impact of f tr transitory and non-transitory ry factors

Other effects – example fr from the ESS De Demographics  Ge Gender  Age ge  Education  Ru Rural vs. s. urb rban ar area Event data to o control th the im impact of of tr tran ansitory ry factors 20

Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack France, 7. 7.-9. . 01.2015 r. Fr Char arlie ie Hebdo sa satir irical l weekly magazin ine. The mag agazin ine has has be been the target of of two te terroris ist attacks, s, in 201 2011 an and 201 2015. Bot Both wer ere pr presumed to to be be in n res esponse se to to a a nu number of of controversia ial Muhammad car artoons it t pu published. In In the sec second of of these se attacks, , 12 12 peo people wer ere kill killed, , including pu publis ishing di director or Ch Charb an and se several ot other pr prominent car artoonists. 21

Charlie Hebdo solid lidarity acts  Paris  London The Je suis Charlie ("I am Charlie") slogan became an endorsement of freedom of speech and press. 22