Development and Validation of the Affective Polarization Scale.

IF 1.6 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
International Review of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-06-05 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.5334/irsp.926
Brandon McMurtrie, Michael Philipp, Ross Hebden, Matt Williams
{"title":"Development and Validation of the Affective Polarization Scale.","authors":"Brandon McMurtrie, Michael Philipp, Ross Hebden, Matt Williams","doi":"10.5334/irsp.926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Affective polarization - an expressed aversion and dislike of members of one's political outgroup - has increased in many polities in recent years, and thus published research on the topic has proliferated. Studies have asserted that affective polarization is tied to prejudice and authoritarianism, among other potentially harmful phenomena, and is buffered by intellectual humility. We assert that this literature is hindered by the use of <i>ad hoc</i>, heterogeneous measures of affective polarization which have not been properly psychometrically evaluated, and which limit research clarity and make cumulative science on the topic difficult. Informed by the common extant measures of affective polarization we constructed a new scale and investigated its reliability and construct validity. In Study 1 we generated items and had them rated by subject matter experts for content validity (<i>N</i> = 6). In Study 2, a sample of US participants completed the scale (<i>N</i> = 326), an EFA suggested a three-factor model, which had good reliability. In Study 3, a CFA (<i>N</i> = 331) confirmed that a three-factor model fit the data, with subscales labelled Social Distance, Aversion, and Incivility. We also showed that our Affective Polarization Scale had good reliability, through the results of the α- and ω-indicators of reliability. Construct validity analyses supported all pre-registered hypotheses, showing that scores on our scale were positively correlated with authoritarianism, need for closure, and identity strength, and negatively correlated with intellectual humility. We make suggestions for future research and scale usage, such as investigating measurement invariance in different populations, or with different outgroup targets.</p>","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"37 ","pages":"11"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12372659/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.926","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Affective polarization - an expressed aversion and dislike of members of one's political outgroup - has increased in many polities in recent years, and thus published research on the topic has proliferated. Studies have asserted that affective polarization is tied to prejudice and authoritarianism, among other potentially harmful phenomena, and is buffered by intellectual humility. We assert that this literature is hindered by the use of ad hoc, heterogeneous measures of affective polarization which have not been properly psychometrically evaluated, and which limit research clarity and make cumulative science on the topic difficult. Informed by the common extant measures of affective polarization we constructed a new scale and investigated its reliability and construct validity. In Study 1 we generated items and had them rated by subject matter experts for content validity (N = 6). In Study 2, a sample of US participants completed the scale (N = 326), an EFA suggested a three-factor model, which had good reliability. In Study 3, a CFA (N = 331) confirmed that a three-factor model fit the data, with subscales labelled Social Distance, Aversion, and Incivility. We also showed that our Affective Polarization Scale had good reliability, through the results of the α- and ω-indicators of reliability. Construct validity analyses supported all pre-registered hypotheses, showing that scores on our scale were positively correlated with authoritarianism, need for closure, and identity strength, and negatively correlated with intellectual humility. We make suggestions for future research and scale usage, such as investigating measurement invariance in different populations, or with different outgroup targets.

Abstract Image

情感极化量表的编制与验证。
近年来,情感两极分化——对自己政治外群体成员表达出的厌恶和厌恶——在许多国家都有所增加,因此发表的关于这一主题的研究也层出不穷。研究断言,情感两极分化与偏见和威权主义以及其他潜在的有害现象有关,并被智力上的谦逊所缓冲。我们认为,这一文献受到使用特殊的、异质的情感极化测量方法的阻碍,这些方法没有得到适当的心理测量学评估,并且限制了研究的清晰度,使关于该主题的累积科学变得困难。在现有常用的情感极化量表的基础上,我们编制了一个新的量表,并对其信度和构念效度进行了研究。在研究1中,我们生成项目,并让主题专家对它们进行内容效度评级(N = 6)。在研究2中,美国参与者样本完成量表(N = 326), EFA建议三因素模型,具有良好的信度。在研究3中,一个CFA (N = 331)证实了一个三因素模型适合数据,其子尺度标记为社会距离、厌恶和不文明。通过信度的α-和ω-指标的结果也表明我们的情感极化量表具有良好的信度。结构效度分析支持所有预先登记的假设,表明我们量表上的分数与威权主义、封闭需求和身份强度呈正相关,与智力谦逊负相关。我们对未来的研究和尺度的使用提出了建议,例如研究不同人群或不同外群目标的测量不变性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
8.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Review of Social Psychology (IRSP) is supported by the Association pour la Diffusion de la Recherche Internationale en Psychologie Sociale (A.D.R.I.P.S.). The International Review of Social Psychology publishes empirical research and theoretical notes in all areas of social psychology. Articles are written preferably in English but can also be written in French. The journal was created to reflect research advances in a field where theoretical and fundamental questions inevitably convey social significance and implications. It emphasizes scientific quality of its publications in every area of social psychology. Any kind of research can be considered, as long as the results significantly enhance the understanding of a general social psychological phenomenon and the methodology is appropriate.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信