Wilhelm Gros , Lisa Reuter , Julia Sprich , Dennis Schuldzinski , Julius Fenn , Andrea Kiesel
{"title":"Cognitive-affective maps (CAMs) as measurement tool – Elaboration of quantitative and qualitative test-retest reliability","authors":"Wilhelm Gros , Lisa Reuter , Julia Sprich , Dennis Schuldzinski , Julius Fenn , Andrea Kiesel","doi":"10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Cognitive-Affective Mapping is a novel mind-map like technique enabling to visually represent existing belief systems or any declarative knowledge and can therefore be used in empirical social research. It can be applied broadly, for example to assess technology acceptance, and the obtained data can be analyzed with quantitative and/or qualitative approaches. Here, we aimed for the first time to assess the data quality of Cognitive-Affective Maps (CAMs). To assess whether the findings of CAM studies are due to measurement errors or due to a real effect, we aimed for a quantitative as well as qualitative test-retest reliability approach. Participants (62 in total) drew a CAM online on their cognitions, emotions and experiences regarding the topic \"Universal Basic Income\" twice with delays of the two measurement time points ranging from 7 to 24 days. Assuming that the evaluation of this topic is driven by values, a stable psychological measurement construct, we presume a high test-retest reliability. Pearson's Product-Moment-Correlations and Spearman's Rank Correlations of CAM parameters show quantitative test-retest reliabilities up to 0.78. Furthermore, two raters identified on average 52 % of repeated or at least semantically similar concepts drawn by the participants between the two measurement time points. Taken together, these findings are promising for a method with this amount of degrees of freedom.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47979,"journal":{"name":"Technology in Society","volume":"78 ","pages":"Article 102651"},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X24001994/pdfft?md5=ca85eff0164ae3b0ef4c40883350790d&pid=1-s2.0-S0160791X24001994-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technology in Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X24001994","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL ISSUES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Cognitive-Affective Mapping is a novel mind-map like technique enabling to visually represent existing belief systems or any declarative knowledge and can therefore be used in empirical social research. It can be applied broadly, for example to assess technology acceptance, and the obtained data can be analyzed with quantitative and/or qualitative approaches. Here, we aimed for the first time to assess the data quality of Cognitive-Affective Maps (CAMs). To assess whether the findings of CAM studies are due to measurement errors or due to a real effect, we aimed for a quantitative as well as qualitative test-retest reliability approach. Participants (62 in total) drew a CAM online on their cognitions, emotions and experiences regarding the topic "Universal Basic Income" twice with delays of the two measurement time points ranging from 7 to 24 days. Assuming that the evaluation of this topic is driven by values, a stable psychological measurement construct, we presume a high test-retest reliability. Pearson's Product-Moment-Correlations and Spearman's Rank Correlations of CAM parameters show quantitative test-retest reliabilities up to 0.78. Furthermore, two raters identified on average 52 % of repeated or at least semantically similar concepts drawn by the participants between the two measurement time points. Taken together, these findings are promising for a method with this amount of degrees of freedom.
期刊介绍:
Technology in Society is a global journal dedicated to fostering discourse at the crossroads of technological change and the social, economic, business, and philosophical transformation of our world. The journal aims to provide scholarly contributions that empower decision-makers to thoughtfully and intentionally navigate the decisions shaping this dynamic landscape. A common thread across these fields is the role of technology in society, influencing economic, political, and cultural dynamics. Scholarly work in Technology in Society delves into the social forces shaping technological decisions and the societal choices regarding technology use. This encompasses scholarly and theoretical approaches (history and philosophy of science and technology, technology forecasting, economic growth, and policy, ethics), applied approaches (business innovation, technology management, legal and engineering), and developmental perspectives (technology transfer, technology assessment, and economic development). Detailed information about the journal's aims and scope on specific topics can be found in Technology in Society Briefings, accessible via our Special Issues and Article Collections.