Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How to classify political cultures? A comparison of three methods of classification

  • Published:
Quality & Quantity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To study the composition of political cultures, it is necessary to classify citizens according to a theoretical typology of political subcultures. Different methods of classification have been used for confronting this challenge, but the choice of method is rarely discussed in any detail because most studies apply a method without considering implications or possible alternatives. This is unfortunate because the choice of method has important consequences for the ensuing results. With this article, we aim to determine the implications of different methods for classification and hereby call attention to the importance of this choice for comparative research on political culture. We compare three commonly used methods of classification: critical thresholds, factor analysis and cluster analysis. These methods are used for classifying respondents from the 2008 European Social Survey according to a typology of political subcultures. Based on empirical analyses, we conclude that: (a) the choice of method of classification affects the outcome of the analysis, (b) cluster analysis and factor analysis may result in classifications that do not adequately reflect the theoretical typology, and (c) cluster analysis and factor analysis provide classifications that differ depending on analytical level. While the results do not show that either method is inherently superior, they clearly demonstrate that the choice of method should be recognized as a critical part of the research process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Political culture is an ambiguous concept that may refer to attitudinal and behavioral aspects as well as political traditions and symbols (Johnson 2003; Lane 1992; Laitin 1995; Patrick 1984; Street 1994).

  2. The Civic Culture was originally published in 1963. The page numbers refer to the 1965 paperback version.

  3. Similar ideas with different labels have been proposed by Inglehart (1997), Dalton (2004) and Rosanvallon (2008).

  4. Stealth citizens do not necessarily trust the existing authorities, but their ideal representative system is one where the political actors are trustworthy and their involvement is therefore unnecessary. This description has some commonalities with monitorial (Schudson 1996; Hooghe and Dejaeghere 2007) or stand-by citizens (Amnå and Ekman 2014). However, since these descriptions also rely on behavioural attributes in addition to attitudinal ones (Hooghe and Dejaeghere 2007, p. 260; Amnå and Ekman 2014, pp. 272–274) they are not applicable for the current purposes where the focus is on attitudinal attributes.

  5. We do not claim to provide an empirical assessment of the theoretical framework in Civic Culture, or indeed any other work on political culture. We merely assess the merits of the methods available for empirically operationalizing such empirical frameworks.

  6. The concordance coefficient indicates the number of cases that are classified in the same way by two or more methods divided by the total number of cases. When all cases are classified in the same way, the concordance coefficient is 1. If the coefficient is 0, all cases are classified differently by the methods.

  7. We use Denmark to illustrate the differences since Denmark when analyzing the European sample has mean values that deviate considerably from the European mean values on both dimensions. This example therefore shows the differences between the pooled and national samples in the most distinctive way.

References

  • Abdelzadeh, A., Ekman, J.: Understanding critical citizenship and other forms of public dissatisfaction: an alternative framework. Polit. Cult. Social. 3(1–2), 179–196 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldenderfer, M.S.: Cluster Analysis. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  • Almond, G.A., Verba, S.: The Civic Culture—Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Little, Brown and Company, Boston (1963/1965)

  • Amnå, E., Ekman, J.: Standby citizens: diverse faces of political passivity. Eur. Polit. Sci. Rev. 6, 261–281 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, K.D.: Typologies and Taxonomies—An Introduction to Classification Techniques. Sage Publications, London (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bethlehem, J., Medrano, J.D., Groves, R.M., Gundelach, P., Norris, P.: Report of the Review Panel for the European Social Survey. European Science Foundation, Standing Committee for Social Sciences (SCSC). http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/docs/about/ESS_review_panel_report.pdf (2008). Accessed 22 Feb 2014

  • Byrne, D.: Cluster Analysis. Sage Publications, London (2012)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Child, D.: Essentials of Factor Analysis. Continuum International Publishing Group, London (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, R.J.: Democratic Challenges, Democratic Choices—The Erosion of Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2004)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Denk, T.: Politisk kultur [Political Culture]. Liber, Malmö (2009)

  • Diamond, L.: Developing Democracy—Toward Consolidation. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • Geissel, B.: Reflections and findings on the critical citizens: civic education—what for? Eur. J. Polit. Res. 47, 34–63 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerring, J.: Social Science Methodology: A Unified Framework. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Goertz, G., Mahoney, J.: A Tale of Two Cultures—Qualitative and Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorsuch, R.L.: Factor Analysis. Taylor and Francis, London (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hay, C.: Why We Hate Politics. Polity, Cambridge (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hay, C., Stoker, G.: Revitalising Politics: Have We lost the Plot? Representation 45(3), 225–236 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hibbing, J.R., Theiss-Morse, E.: Stealth Democracy—Americans’ Beliefs About How Government Should Work. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2002)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe, M., Dejaeghere, Y.: Does the ‘Monitorial Citizen’ exist? An empirical investigation into the occurrence of postmodern forms of citizenship in the Nordic countries. Scand. Polit. Stud. 30(2), 249–271 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R.: The renaissance of political culture. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 82(04), 1203–1230 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R.: Modernization and Postmodernization—Cultural, Economic, and Political Chance in 43 Societies. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R., Welzel, W.: Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy—The Human Development Sequence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jackman, R.W., Miller, R.A.: A renaissance of political vulture? Am. J. Polit. Sci. 40, 632–659 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J.: Conceptual problems as obstacles to progress in political science: four decades of political culture research. J. Theor. Polit. 15(1), 87–115 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J.-O.: Factor Analysis—Statistical Methods and Practical Issues. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  • Laitin, D.D.: The civic culture at 30. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 89(1), 168–173 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, R.: Political cultural: residual category or general theory. Comp. Polit. Stud. 25(3), 362–368 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linz, J.J., Stepan, A.: Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation—Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mainwaring, S., Pérez-Liñán, A.: Democracies and Dictatorships in Latin America: Emergence, Survival, and Fall. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2013)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, P. (ed.): Critical Citizens—Global Support for Democratic Government. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • Norusis, M.: IBM SPSS Statistics 19 Statistical Procedures Companion. Addison Wesley, Boston (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  • Patrick, G.: Political culture. In: Sartori, G. (ed.) Social Science Concept: A Systematic Analysis, pp. 265–314. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettai, V.: Studying political culture in post-Communist Europe. In: Berglund, S., Henningsen, B., Schartau, M.-B. (eds.) Political Culture: Values and Identities in the Baltic Sea Region, pp. 83–97. Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag, Berlin (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R.D.: Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosanvallon, P.: Counter-Democracy—Politics in the Age of Distrust. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R., Mishler, W., Haerpfer, C.: Democracy and Its Alternatives—Understanding Post-Communist Societies. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, C.Q., Wagnemann, C.: Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences—A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2012)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schudson, M.: What if civic life didn’t die? Am. Prospect 25, 17–20 (1996)

  • Stoker, G.: Why Politics Matters—Making Democracy Work. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoker, G.: The rise of political disenchantment. In: Hay, C. (ed.) New Directions in Political Science: Responding to the Challenges of an Interdependent World, pp. 43–63. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Street, J.: Political culture: from civic culture to mass culture. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 24(1), 95–114 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van de Vijver, F., Leung, K.: Methods and Data Analysis for Cross-Cultural Research. Sage Publications, London (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R.W.: The many voices of political culture: assessing different approaches. World Polit. 52(2), 246–273 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Åbo Akademi University, Åbo, Finland

    Thomas Denk & Henrik Serup Christensen

Authors
  1. Thomas Denk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Henrik Serup Christensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Denk.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Denk, T., Christensen, H.S. How to classify political cultures? A comparison of three methods of classification. Qual Quant 50, 177–191 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-014-0143-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-014-0143-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation