Skip to main content

Basic Personal Values Underlie and Give Coherence to Political Values: A Cross National Study in 15 Countries

Political Behavior volume 36, pages 899–930 (2014)Cite this article

Abstract

Do the political values of the general public form a coherent system? What might be the source of coherence? We view political values as expressions, in the political domain, of more basic personal values. Basic personal values (e.g., security, achievement, benevolence, hedonism) are organized on a circular continuum that reflects their conflicting and compatible motivations. We theorize that this circular motivational structure also gives coherence to political values. We assess this theorizing with data from 15 countries, using eight core political values (e.g., free enterprise, law and order) and ten basic personal values. We specify the underlying basic values expected to promote or oppose each political value. We offer different hypotheses for the 12 non-communist and three post-communist countries studied, where the political context suggests different meanings of a basic or political value. Correlation and regression analyses support almost all hypotheses. Moreover, basic values account for substantially more variance in political values than age, gender, education, and income. Multidimensional scaling analyses demonstrate graphically how the circular motivational continuum of basic personal values structures relations among core political values. This study strengthens the assumption that individual differences in basic personal values play a critical role in political thought.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Notes

  1. We refer to ‘political values’ because that term is common in the political science literature. They might also be called ‘political attitudes’ because they are generally conceptualized and measured as evaluations of politically relevant objects.

  2. We provide relatively brief rationales for each hypothesis. By considering the congruence of the core political values with the definitions of the basic personal values and with their dynamic underpinnings described above, one can elaborate these rationales more fully.

  3. Hypotheses that differ for the post-communist countries appear in parentheses.

  4. We excluded the three countries that had negative net migration during the years preceding the study (Brazil, Poland, and Ukraine) from consideration because the questions about accepting immigrants may not have been meaningful there. We also excluded Israel, for reasons noted below.

  5. Across countries, the majority of high modification indexes referred to cross-loadings of negatively worded items or to correlated uniqueness among items worded in the same direction. Numerous negatively worded items had standardized loadings <0.3 on their presumed factor and/or reduced the internal reliability of the summed scale of their political value.

  6. Kenny and McCoach (2003) note that even in correctly specified models CFI tends to worsen as the number of variables in a model grows large.

  7. One of the two positively worded civil liberties items was inadvertently left out in the German study. Hence, we could not include civil liberties in the German analyses.

  8. The correlations for each country are available from the first author.

  9. We do not include hypotheses for accepting immigrants in this count because we did not test them in Poland and Ukraine (see footnote 3). In Slovakia, all seven hypotheses for accepting immigrants were supported.

  10. The coordinates for the overall MDS and for each country are available from the first author.

References

  • Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other “authoritarian personality”. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 47–92). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, M. C., Danso, H. A., Maio, G. R., Esses, V. M., Bond, M. H., & Keung, D. K. Y. (2005). Two dimensions of political attitudes and their individual difference correlates: A cross-cultural perspective. In R. M. Sorrentino, D. Cohen, J. M. Olson, & M. Zanna (Eds.), Culture social behavior: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 10, pp. 1–29). London: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardi, A., & Schwartz, S. H. (1996). Relations among socio-political values in Eastern Europe: Effects of the communist experience? Political Psychology, 17, 525–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnette, J. J. (2000). Effects of stem and Likert response option reversals on survey internal consistency: If you feel the need, there is a better alternative to using those negatively worded stems. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 361–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benoit, K., & Laver, M. (2006). Party policy in modern democracies. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilsky, W., Janik, M., & Schwartz, S. H. (2011). The structural organization of human values—Evidence from three rounds of the European Social Survey (ESS). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42, 759–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, V. (1997). Harmony and security value orientations in political evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 401–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buksinski, T. (2003). Liberalisation and transformation of morality in post-Communist countries: Polish philosophical studies, IV. Washington: The Council for Research in Values & Philosophy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cieciuch, J., & Schwartz, S. H. (2012). The number of distinct basic values and their structure assessed by PVQ-40. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94, 321–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohrs, J. C., Moschner, B., Maes, J., & Kielmann, S. (2005). The motivational bases of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation: Relations to values and attitudes in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1981). Origins and meaning of liberal/conservative self-identifications. American Journal of Political Science, 25, 617–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206–261). New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daigle, J., Hrubes, D., & Ajzen, I. (2002). A comparative study of beliefs, attitudes, and values among hunters, wildlife viewers, and other outdoor recreationists. Human Dimensions of Wildlife: An International Journal, 7, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dollinger, S. J., Burke, P., & Gump, N. W. (2007). Creativity and values. Creativity Research Journal, 19, 91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, G., Heath, A., & Lalljee, M. (1996). Measuring left-right and libertarian-authoritarian values in the British electorate. The British Journal of Sociology, 47, 93–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, S. (1988). Structure and consistency in public opinion: The role of core beliefs and values. American Journal of Political Science, 32, 416–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, S. (2003). Values, ideology, and structure of political attitudes. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 477–508). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontaine, J. R., Poortinga, Y. H., Delbeke, L., & Schwartz, S. H. (2008). Structural equivalence of the values domain across cultures: Distinguishing sampling fluctuations from meaningful variation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39, 345–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardikiotis, A., & Baltzis, A. (2012). ‘Rock music for myself and justice to the world!’: Musical identity, values, and music preferences. Psychology of Music, 40, 143–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, R., & Tinker, M. (2002). Value priorities and preferences for a relationship partner. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1339–1349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goren, P. (2000). Political expertise and principled political thought. Political Research Quarterly, 53, 117–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goren, P. (2005). Party identification and core political values. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 881–896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunther, R., & Kuan, H. C. (2007). Value cleavages and partisan conflict. In R. Gunther, J. R. Montero, & H. J. Puhle (Eds.), Electoral intermediation, values, and political support in old and new democracies: Europe, East Asia, and the Americas in comparative perspective (pp. 255–320). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunther, R., Montero, J. R., & Puhle, H. J. (2007). Op. cit.

  • Heath, A., Jowell, R., & Curtice, J. (1985). How Britain votes. Oxford: Pergamum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitlin, S., & Piliavin, J. A. (2004). Values: Reviving a dormant concept. Annual Review of Sociology, 30, 359–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, M. M. (2003). The weakness of civil society in post-communist Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, C. (2008). Civil liberties in Australia: A review article. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 27, 72–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurwitz, J., & Peffley, M. (1987). How are foreign policy attitudes structured? A hierarchal model. American Political Science Review, 81, 1099–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, W. G. (1995). The structure of ideological thinking in the American public. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 314–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, W. G. (2006). Value choices and American public opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 706–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. A., & McCoach, D. B. (2003). Effect of the number of variables on measures of fit in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10, 333–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerlinger, F. N. (1984). Liberalism and conservatism: The nature and structure of social attitudes. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinder, D. R. (1998). Opinion and action in the realm of politics. In D. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 778–867). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinder, D. R., & Sears, D. O. (1985). Public opinion and political action. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, Vol. II (3rd ed., pp. 659–741). NY: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirisci, K. (2003). Turkey: A transformation from emigration to immigration. Washington: Migration Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knafo, A., Daniel, E., & Khoury-Kassabri, M. (2008). Values as protective factors against violent behavior in Jewish and Arab high schools in Israel. Child Development, 79, 652–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M., Whitehead, J., Ntoumanis, N., & Hatzigeorgiadis, A. (2008). Relationships among values, achievement orientations and attitudes in youth sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 30, 588–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, J. A. (1997). Electoral choices and core value change: The 1992 presidential campaign. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 564–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFarland, S. G., Ageyev, V. S., & Abalakina-Paap, M. A. (1992). Authoritarianism in the former Soviet Union. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 1004–1010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, P., & Ruslan, Y. (2007). Increasing inequality in transition economies: Is there more to come? In F. Bourguignon & B. Pleskovic (Eds.), Annual world bank conference on development economics, regional: beyond transition (pp. 59–102). Washington: The International bank for reconstruction and development/the world bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (1998). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

    Google Scholar 

  • No shooting please, we’re German. (2012). The Economist. Retrieved July, 27, 2013 from http://www.economist.com/node/21564617.

  • Peffley, M. A., & Hurwitz, J. (1985). A hierarchical model of attitude constraint. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 871–890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pepper, M., Jackson, T., & Uzzell, D. (2009). An examination of the values that motivate socially conscious and frugal consumer behaviors. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33, 126–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poznanski, K. Z. (2001). Building capitalism with communist tools: Eastern Europe’s defective transition. East European Politics and Societies, 15, 320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roccas, S., Schwartz, S. H., & Amit, A. (2010). Personal value priorities and national identification. Political Psychology, 31, 393–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohan, M. J. (2000). A rose by any name? The values construct. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 4, 255–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R. (1997). How patient are people in post-communist societies? World Affairs, 159, 130–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sagiv, L. (2002). Vocational interests and basic values. Journal of Career Assessment, 10, 233–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saroglou, V., Delpierre, V., & Dernelle, D. (2004). Values and religiosity: a meta-analysis of studies using Schwartz’s model. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 721–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schatz, R. T., Staub, E., & Lavine, H. (1999). On the varieties of national attachment: Blind versus constructive patriotism. Political Psychology, 20, 151–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubot, D. B., Eliason, B. C., & Cayley, W, Jr. (1995). Personal values and primary care specialty aspirations. Academic Medicine, 70, 952–953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the content and structure of values? Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (2003). Value orientations. European Social Survey Core Questionnaire Development, Chapter 07. Retrieved from http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=83&Itemid=80..

  • Schwartz, S. H. (2006). Les valeurs de base de la personne: Théorie, mesures et applications [Basic human values: Theory, measurement, and applications]. Revue Française de Sociologie, 47, 249–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (2010). Basic values: How they motivate and inhibit prosocial behavior. In M. Mikulincer & P. Shaver (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior: The better angels of our nature (pp. 221–241). Washington: American Psychological Association Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H., Caprara, G. V., & Vecchione, M. (2010). Basic personal values, core political values, and voting: A longitudinal study. Political Psychology, 31, 421–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S. A. M., & Harris, M. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 32, 519–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, P. E., Van Katwyk, P. T., Brannick, M. T., & Chen, P. Y. (1997). When two factors don’t reflect two constructs: How item characteristics can produce artifactual factors. Journal of Management, 23, 659–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, N., Rindfleisch, A., & Borroughs, J. E. (2003). Do reverse-worded items confound measures in cross-cultural consumer research? The case of the material values scale. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 72–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper was partly supported by the HSE Basic Research Program (International Laboratory of Socio-cultural Research).

Ethics

This research complies with the laws of the countries in which it was conducted.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel

    Shalom H. Schwartz

  2. Laboratory of Socio-cultural Research, National Research University—Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia

    Shalom H. Schwartz

  3. Department of Psychology, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Rome, Italy

    Gian Vittorio Caprara & Michele Vecchione

  4. School of Psychology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Paul Bain

  5. Department of Social and Biological Communication, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia

    Gabriel Bianchi

  6. Universidad a Distancia de Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Maria Giovanna Caprara

  7. Faculty of Psychology, University of Finance and Management, Warsaw, Poland

    Jan Cieciuch

  8. University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

    Jan Cieciuch

  9. Department of Economics, Istanbul Bilgi University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Hasan Kirmanoglu & Cem Baslevent

  10. Swedish School of Social Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    Jan-Erik Lönnqvist

  11. Department of Philosophy, University of Wisconsin-Platteville, Platteville, WI, USA

    Catalin Mamali

  12. Department of Psychology, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile

    Jorge Manzi

  13. Department of Psychology, University of Athens, Athens, Greece

    Vassilis Pavlopoulos

  14. Practical Psychology Department, Chernivtsy Yuri Fedkovych National University, Chernivtsi, Ukraine

    Tetyana Posnova

  15. Department of Political Sociology, University of Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany

    Harald Schoen

  16. Department of Psychology, City University London, London, UK

    Jo Silvester

  17. Department of Psychology, University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain

    Carmen Tabernero

  18. Institute of Psychology, University of Brasilia, Brasilia, Brazil

    Claudio Torres

  19. Institute of Behavioral Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    Markku Verkasalo

  20. Faculty of Social Sciences and Health Care, Constantine the Philosopher University, Nitra, Slovak Republic

    Eva Vondráková

  21. Institute of Political Science and Center for the Study of Democracy, Leuphana University Lueneburg, Lüneburg, Germany

    Christian Welzel

  22. Department of Psychology, Catholic University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland

    Zbigniew Zaleski

Authors
  1. Shalom H. Schwartz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gian Vittorio Caprara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michele Vecchione
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul Bain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gabriel Bianchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Maria Giovanna Caprara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jan Cieciuch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Hasan Kirmanoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Cem Baslevent
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Jan-Erik Lönnqvist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Catalin Mamali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Jorge Manzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Vassilis Pavlopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Tetyana Posnova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Harald Schoen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Jo Silvester
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Carmen Tabernero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Claudio Torres
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Markku Verkasalo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Eva Vondráková
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Christian Welzel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Zbigniew Zaleski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shalom H. Schwartz.

Appendices

Appendix A: Exemplary PVQ Items, Organized by Higher Order Values, Male & Female Examples

Here we briefly describe some people. Please read each description and think about how much each person is or is not like you. Put an X in the box to the right that shows how much the person in the description is like you.

Self Enhancement

  • [Power] It is important to him to be in charge and tell others what to do. He wants people to do what he says.

  • [Achievement] Being very successful is important to her. She likes to impress other people.

Openness to Change

  • [Hedonism] Enjoying life’s pleasures is important to him. He likes to ‘spoil’ himself.

  • [Stimulation] She likes surprises. It is important to her to have an exciting life.

  • [Self-Direction] It is important to him to be independent. He likes to rely on himself.

Self-Transcendence

  • [Universalism] She wants everyone to be treated justly, even people she doesn’t know. It is important to her to protect the weak in society.

  • [Benevolence] It’s very important to him to help the people around him. He wants to care for their well-being.

Conservation

  • [Tradition] She thinks it is best to do things in traditional ways. It is important to her to keep up the customs she has learned.

  • [Conformity] It is important to him always to behave properly. He wants to avoid doing anything people would say is wrong.

  • [Security] It is important to her to live in secure surroundings. She avoids anything that might endanger her safety.

Appendix B: Items used to measure seven core political values used in the study

Table 6
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schwartz, S.H., Caprara, G.V., Vecchione, M. et al. Basic Personal Values Underlie and Give Coherence to Political Values: A Cross National Study in 15 Countries. Polit Behav 36, 899–930 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-013-9255-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-013-9255-z

Keywords

  • Political values
  • Basic personal values
  • Value coherence
  • Structure of political thought