On the Use of Microsimulation for Investigating Ideological Dissent: Exemplary Analyses of the Values of the European Political Left

• Authors: Georg P. Mueller
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

This article presents a new approach to the comparison of the meaning of social or political key terms in different national contexts. Instead of relying on classical statistical instruments such as t-tests of the mean attitudes, the author proposes to analyze value conflicts between the mentioned groups. In international surveys like the European Values Study (EVS) the related conflict data are not directly available but can be generated by microsimulation: for this purpose the article proposes to look at the value differences of randomly matched artificial pairs of respondents. The resulting dyadic data-records correspond to simulated virtual encounters of persons with the same or different opinions about a political issue. In this way it becomes possible to measure the amount and the thematic focus of the value conflicts between the protagonists of a key term in different countries: the absence of conflicts between these groups points to the same meaning of the key term, whereas dissent about its attributes is an indicator of semantic differences. The benchmark for assessing these international inter-group conflicts are the national intra-group conflicts, which are generally underestimated. Consequently, an application of the proposed method to an artificial dataset with systematically varying statistical properties suggests that the traditional t-tests of mean attitudes overestimate the international group differences. By considering the internal ideological variation of the compared groups we probably get a more realistic assessment of their international similarities and differences. Thus we dare to tackle with the proposed virtual encounter method a real world problem: the comparative analysis of the values of the political left in Sweden, France, and the UK on the basis of attitudes gathered in the European Values Study (2008). A major result is that income equality is revealed to be an important common value of the political left in the three countries mentioned. Finally, the article points to the possibility of comparing different intra-national groups with regard to their ideologies. By the virtual encounter method it is possible to focus the analysis on a particular country and compare e.g. its national parties or different generations of partisans.

Keywords

EN

microsimulation; network analysis; virtual encounters; interview data; political semantics; left ideologies

• Publisher: Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Polish Academy of Sciences
• Journal: ASK. Research and Methods
• Year: 2017
• Volume: 26
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 61-80

Contributors

author

Georg P. Mueller

• University of Fribourg

References

• Ackland, R., & Shorish, J. (2014). Political Homophily on the Web. In M. Cantijoch & al. (Eds), Analysing Social Media Data and Web Networks (pp.25–46). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Bartolini, S. (2000). The Political Mobilization of the European Left, 1860–1980: The Class Cleavage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511521560
• Bauer, P. & al. (2017). Is the Left-Right Scale a Valid Measure of Ideology? Political Behaviour, 39(3), 553–583.
• Callon, M., Courtial, J.-P., & Penan, H. (1993). La scientométrie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
• Cramer, D., & Howitt, D. (2004). The Sage Dictionary of Statistics. London: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857020123
• Crow, I. (2006). Ecological Fallacy. In V. Jupp (Ed.), The Sage Dictionary of Social Research Methods (pp.82–83). London: Sage Publications.
• de Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis. Toronto: Scarecrow Press.
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1993). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• ESS (2015). European Social Survey: Overview. http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/(accessed on 11/5/2015).
• EVS (2008). European Values Study: Survey 2008. http://www.europeanvaluesstudy.eu/page/survey-2008.html (accessed on 6/5/2017).
• Gelissen, J. (2002). Worlds of Welfare, Worlds of Consent? Public Opinion on the Welfare State. Leiden: Brill.
• Guo, S., & Fraser, M. (2010). Propensity Score Analysis. Los Angeles: Sage.
• Hantrais, L. (2007). Contextualization in Cross-National Comparative Research. In L. Hantrais & al. (Eds), Cross-National Research Methodology & Practice (pp.3–18). London: Routledge.
• Harkness, J., Van de Vijver, F., & Mohler, P. (Eds) (2003). Cross-Cultural Survey Methods. Hoboken: John Wiley.
• Harkness, J. (2007). Improving the Comparability of Translations. In R. Jowell & al. (Eds), Measuring Attitudes Cross-Nationally: Lessons from the European Social Survey (pp.79–94). London: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209458.n4
• Harkness, J. & al. (Eds) (2010). Survey Methods in Multinational, Multiregional, and Multicultural Contexts. Hoboken: John Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470609927
• ISSP (2015). International Social Survey Programme: Overview. http://www.issp.org/(accessed on 11/5/2015).
• Lewis, P. (2000). Political Parties in Post-Communist Eastern Europe. London: Routledge.
• Mooney, Ch., & Duval, R. (1993). Bootstrapping: A Nonparametric Approach to Statistical Inference. Newbury Park: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412983532
• Mueller, G. (2011). Microsimulation of Virtual Encounters: A New Methodology for the Analysis of Socio-Cultural Cleavages. International Journal of Microsimulation 4(1), 21–34.
• Mueller, G. (2016). On the Use of Interview Data for the Microsimulation of Ideological Conflicts: An Analysis of the Political Cleavages of the European Left. (Working Paper SES 471). Fribourg: Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences of the University of Fribourg.
• Rae, M. & Taylor, M. (1970). The Analysis of Political Cleavages. New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Rodon T. (2015). Do All Roads Lead to the Centre? The Unresolved Dilemma of Centrist Self-Placement. Int. J. of Public Opinion Research 27(2), 177–196. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edu028
• Saris, W., & Gallhofer, I. (2007). Can Questions Travel Successfully? In R. Jowell & al. (Eds), Measuring Attitudes Cross-Nationally: Lessons from the European Social Survey (pp.53–78). London: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209458.n3
• Scholz, E., & Zuell, C. (2016). Methodological Aspects of Central Left-Right Scale Placement in a Cross-national Perspective. Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique 132(1), 44–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0759106316662588
• Smith, T. & al. (2009). Methods for Assessing and Calibrating Response Scales across Countries and Languages. In M. Sasaki (Ed.), New Frontiers in Comparative Sociology (pp. 45–94). Leiden: Brill.
• SPSS (2015). http://www-01.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss/products/statistics/ (accessed on 3/12/2015).
• Svallfors, S. (1999). The Class Politics of Swedish Welfare Politics. In G. Evans (Ed.), The End of Class Politics? Class Voting in Comparative Context (pp.203–230). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198296347.003.0008
• Toennies, F. (1979). Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft (Community and Society). Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
• Vincent, A. (2010). Modern Political Ideologies (3rd edition). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (2007). Social Network Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Weakliem, D., & Heath, A. (1999). The Secret Life of Class Voting: Britain, France, and the United States Since the 1930s. In G. Evans (Ed.), The End of Class Politics? Class Voting in Comparative Context (pp.97–136). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198296347.003.0005