Longitudinal Surveys for Comparative Analyses of Poland and Romania: The Polish Panel Survey (POLPAN), 2013–2018 and the Romanian World Values Survey Panel (WVS-RO), 2012–2018

• Authors: Słomczyński Kazimierz M. , Voicu Malina , Dubrow Joshua K. , Stănescu Simona Maria , Tomescu-Dubrow Irina
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

If researchers wish to use surveys to understand the attitudes and behaviors of those who live in former State Socialist countries, they face a research landscape densely populated by cross-sectional studies. Panel surveys with individuals as the units of analysis, which are ideal for understanding change within people over time, are rare. As a service to researchers, this article presents possibilities for cross-national comparison via two sets publicly available panel data: the Polish Panel Survey POLPAN (focusing on its 2013 and 2018 waves) and the novel Romanian World Values Survey Panel RO-WVS (2012 and 2018 waves), which is the only panel version of World Values Survey (WVS). We present the research designs of each, and explore their ex-post harmonization. Conceptual overlap between these sources occurs mainly (but not only) with major socio-demographics and with political attitudes and behavior, including interest in politics, political participation, democratic values, and institutional trust. Whereas POLPAN is relatively well known, we argue that RO-WVS panel stands out as a unique resource that provides data on the dynamic nexus between social structure and cultural context. Keeping RO-WVS alive for a long period would help researchers to understand Romanian society in the European context, and provide for future comparisons between it and its neighbors.

• Publisher: Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Polish Academy of Sciences
• Journal: ASK. Research and Methods
• Year: 2020
• Volume: 29
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 29-53

Contributors

author

Słomczyński Kazimierz M.

author

Voicu Malina

author

Dubrow Joshua K.

author

Stănescu Simona Maria

author

Tomescu-Dubrow Irina

References

• Alwin, Duane F. (1992). Information transmission in the survey interview: Number of response categories and the reliability of attitude measurement. Sociological Methodology 22: 83-118. https://doi.org/10.2307/270993
• Alwin, Duane F. (1997). Fling thermometers versus 7-point scales: Which are better? Sociological Methods & Research 3 (25): 318-340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124197025003003
• Alwin, Duane F. (2007). Margins of Errors: A Study of Reliability in Survey Measurement. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470146316
• Andreß, Hans-Jürgen, Katrin Golsch, and Alexande Schmidt. Eds. (2013). Applied Panel Data Analysis for Economic and Social Surveys. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32914-2
• Baltagi, Badi, Ed. (2004). Panel Data: Theory and Applications. Berlin: Springer.
• Davidov, Eldad , Bart Meuleman, Jan Cieciuch, Peter Schmidt, and Jaak Billiet, Jaak (2014). Measurement equivalence in cross-national research. Annual Review of Sociology 40: 55-75. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043137
• Dawes, John. (2002). Five-point vs. eleven-point scales: Does it make a difference to data characteristics? Australasian Journal of Market Research 10 (1): 39–47.
• Eurostat. (2020). European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/microdata/european-union-statisticson-income-and-living-conditions [Accessed March 29, 2020].
• Garner, Wendell R. (1960). Rating scales, discriminability, and information transmission. Psychological Review 67 (6): 343–352. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043047
• Granda, Peter and Emily Blasczyk. 2010. Data Harmonization. Guidelines for Best Practices in Cross-Cultural Surveys. Ann Arbor, MI: Survey Research Center at the Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.
• Granda, Peter, Christof Wolf, and R. Hadorn (2010). Harmonizing survey data. Pp. 315-334 in Survey Methods in Multinational, Multiregional, and Multicultural Contexts, edited by Jannet Harkness, M. Braun, B. Edwards, T.P. Johnson, Lars
• Lyberg, Peter Mohler, B-E Pennell, and Tom Smith. New York: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470609927.ch17
• Groves, Robert M., and Lyberg, Lars E. (2010). Total survey error: Past, present, and future. Public Opinion Quarterly 74 (5): 849–879. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq065
• Halaby, Charles N. (2004). Panel models in sociological research: Theory into practice. Annual Review of Sociology 30: 507–544. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.012703.110629
• Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik, Jurgen H. P. (2016). Standardisation and Harmonisation of SocioDemographic Variables. GESIS Survey Guidelines. Mannheim, Germany: GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.15465/gesis-sg_en_012
• Hsiao, Cheng. (2007). Panel data analysis—advantages and challenges. Test 16 (1): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11749-007-0046-x
• Hsiao, Cheng. (2014). Analysis of Panel Data, 3rd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139839327
• Inglehart, Ronald. (1997) Modernization and Postmodernization, Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv10vm2ns
• Inglehart, Ronald. (2018). Cultural Evolution. People’s Motivations are Changing and Reshaping the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108613880
• Inglehart, Ronald and Christian Welzel. (2005). Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kasprzyk, Daniel, Greg Duncan, Graham Kalton, and M. P. Singh, Eds. (1989). Panel Surveys. New York: Wiley
• Kiersztyn, Anna. (2019). The cross-national biographies: Young (CNB-Young) project. Harmonizing panel data for the study of youth employment precarity. Harmonization: Newsletter on Survey Data Harmonization in the Social Sciences 5 (2): 41–42.
• Kohn, Melvin. L. (1987). Cross-national research as an analytic strategy: 1987 Presidential Address. American Sociological Review 52 (6): 713–731. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095831
• Kołczyńska, Marta. (2014). Representation of Southeast European countries in international survey projects: Assessing data quality. Ask: Research and Methods 23(1): 57–78.
• Krosnick, Jon and Leandre R Fabrigar. (1997). Designing rating scales for effective measurement in surveys. Pp 141–164 in Survey Measurement and Process Quality, edited by Lars Lyberg, E. Paul P. Biemer, Martin Collins, Edith D. de Leeuw, Cathryn Dippo, Norbert Schwarz, Dennis Trewin. New York, NY: John Wiley.
• Laurie, Heather. 2003. From PAPI to CAPI: consequences for data quality on the British Household Panel Study, ISER Working Paper Series, No. 2003-14. Available online at https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/92209/1/2003-14.pdf (last accessed October 1, 2020)
• Linz, Juan J., and Alfred Stepan. (1996).Problems of democratic transition and consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and post-communist Europe. JHU Press.
• Lyberg, Lars E. and D.M. Stukel. (2010). Quality assurance and quality control in cross-national comparative studies. Pp.225-249 in Survey Methods in Multinational, Multiregional, and Multicultural Contexts, edited by Janet A. Harkness, Michael Braun, Brad Edwards, Timothy P. Johnson, Lars Lyberg, Peter Ph. Mohler, BethEllen Pennell, and W Tom Smith. Ney York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470609927.ch13
• Lyberg, Lars E., and Weisberg, H. (2016). Total survey error: A paradigm for survey methodology. Pp. 27-42 C. Wolf, D. Joye, T. Smith, & Y. Fu, The SAGE Handbook of Survey Methodology (pp. 27–42). London, UK: SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957893.n3
• Østerås, Nina., Pål Gulbrandsen, Andrew Garratt, Jūratë Šaltytë Benth, Fredrik A. Dahl, Bård Natvig, and Søren Brag. (2008). A randomised comparison of a four- and a fivepoint scale version of the Norwegian Function Assessment Scale. Health Quality and Life Outcomes 6 (14): 2–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-6-14
• Quandt, Markus and Insa Bechert. (2013) Assessing trends in religiosity with ISSP data. Pp. 89-98 in ISSP Data Report: Religious Attitudes and Religious Change, edited by Insa Bechert and Markus Quandt. (GESISSchriftenreihe, 13). Köln: GESIS – Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.21241/ssoar.37204
• Pforr, Klaus and Jette Schröder. (2016). Why Panel Surveys? GESIS Survey Guidelines.
• Mannheim, Germany: GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences. http://doi.org/10.15465/gesis-sg_en_008
• Revilla, Melanie A., Willem E. Saris, and Jon A. Krosnick. (2014). Choosing the number of categories in Agree–Disagree scales. Sociological Methods & Research 43(1):73–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113509605
• Schräpler, Jörg-Peter, Jürgen Schupp, and Gert G. Wagner. (2010). Changing from PAPI to CAPI: Introducing CAPI in a longitudinal study. Journal of Official Statistics 26 (2): 239–269.
• Schmidt-Catran, Alexander W. and Malcom Fairbrother, M. (2015). The random effects in multilevel models: Getting them wrong and getting them right. European Sociological Review 32(1): 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcv090
• Slomczynski, Kazimierz M. and Irina Tomescu-Dubrow. 2006. Representation of European post-communist countries in cross-national public opinion surveys.” Problems of PostCommunism 53 (4): 42–52. https://doi.org/10.2753/PPC1075-8216530404
• Slomczynski, Kazimierz M, Irina Tomescu-Dubrow, Joshua Kjerulf Dubrow. 2015. Changes in social structure, class, and stratification: The Polish Panel Survey (POLPAN). ASK: Research and Methods 24: 19–37.
• Slomczynski, Kazimierz M., Irina Tomescu-Dubrow, J. Craig Jenkins with Marta Kołczyńska, Przemek Powałko, Ilona Wysmułek, Olena Oleksiyenko, Marcin Zieliński and Joshua K. Dubrow. (2016). Democratic Values and Protest Behavior: Harmonization of Data from International Survey Projects. Warsaw: IFiS Publishers. University of Finance and Management. (2020). Social Diagnosis 2000–2013: Objective and Subjective Quality of Life in Poland. Available at: http://www.diagnoza.com/index-en.html [Accessed March 29, 2020]
• TARKI. 2020. Hungarian Household Panel Study (1992–1997). Available at: https://tarki.hu/eng/hungarian-household-panel-study-1992-1997 [Accessed March 29, 2020] Tomescu-Dubrow, Irina, Kazimierz M. Slomczynski, Henryk Domanski, Joshua Kjerulf
• Dubrow, Zbigniew Sawinski, and Dariusz Przybysz. 2018. Dynamics of Class and Stratification in Poland. Budapest: CEU Press.
• Wolf, Christof, Silke L. Schneider, Dorothée Behr, and Dominique Joye. (2016). Harmonizing survey questions between cultures and over time. Pp. 502–524 in The SAGE Handbook of Survey Methodology, edited by Christof Wolf, Dominique Joye, Tom W. Smith, and Yang-chi Fu. London, UK: SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957893.n33
• Wysmułek, Ilona. 2018. Europe of uneven data: Country representation in international surveys on corruption, 1989–2017. Ask: Research & Methods 27: 87–104. https://doi.org/10.18061/ask.v27i1.0005