Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Politisches Wissen pp 71–93Cite as

Probleme der Messung politischen Wissens im internationalen Vergleich

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Politisches Wissen ((POWI))

Zusammenfassung

Der Beitrag diskutiert die Probleme einer länderübergreifend vergleichenden Messung politischen Wissens. Es wird das Dilemma aufgezeigt, dass es nicht gleichzeitig möglich ist, gleichzeitig einerseits Schwierigkeit und Trennschärfe von Wissensfragen und andererseits die Verteilung des Wissens in einer Population empirisch zu schätzen. Am Beispiel der Daten von Modul II der Comparative Study of Electoral Systems werden diese Probleme illustriert: Die in den CSES-Teilstudien verwendeten Messinstrumente sind so heterogen, dass es unmöglich ist das Ausmaß politischen Wissens über Ländergrenzen hinweg zu vergleichen. Darüber hinaus schwankt die interne Konsistenz der Messinstrumente erheblich zwischen den nationalen Teilstudien, so dass auch Zusammenhänge mit anderen Variablen nicht vergleichbar sind.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   34.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  • Althaus, Scott. L. 2003. Collective Preferences in Democratic Politics: Opinion Surveys and the Will of the People. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barabas, Jason, Jenniffer Jerit, William Pollock und Carlisle Rainey. 2014. The Question(s) of Political Knowledge. American Political Science Review 108 (4): 840–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, Larry M. 1996. Uninformed Votes: Information Effects in Presidential Elections. American Journal of Political Science 40 (1): 194–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berggren, Heidi M. 2001. Institutional Context and Reduction of the Resource Bias in Political Sophistication. Political Research Quarterly 54 (3): 531–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birnbaum, Allan. 1968. Some Latent Trait Models and Their Use in Inferring An Examinee’s Ability. In Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores, Hrsg. Frederic M. Lord und Melvin R. Novick, 397–479. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, R. Darrel, und Marcus Lieberman. 1970. Fitting a Response Model for n Dichotomously Scored Items. Psychometrika 35(2): 179–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philip E. 1990. Popular Representation and the Distribution of Information. In Information and Democratic Processes, Hrsg. John A. Ferejohn und James H. Kuklinski, 369–388. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philip E. 2000. Assessing the Capacity of Mass Electorates. Annual Review of Political Science 3: 331–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CSES. 2007. The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems Module 2 Full Release. June 27, 2007 Version: Code Book. http://www.cses.org. Zugegriffen 27. Juni 2007.

  • Dahl, Robert A. 1998. On Democracy. New Haven; London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delli Carpini, Michael X., und Scott Keeter. 1993. Measuring Political Knowledge: Putting First Things First. American Journal of Political Science 37 (4): 1179–1206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delli Carpini, Michael X., und Scott Keeter. 1996. What Americans Know about Politics and Why it Matters. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, Gerhard H. 1997. Unidimensional Linear Logistic Rasch Models. In Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory, Hrsg. Wim J. van der Linden und Ronald K. Hambleton, 225–243. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, Jean-Paul. 2007. Multilevel IRT Modeling in Practice with the Package mlirt. Journal of Statistical Software 20 (5). https://www.jstatsoft.org/v020/i05. Zugegriffen am 18. Mai 2018.

  • Gilens, Martin. 2001. Political Ignorance and Collective Policy Preferences. American Political Science Review 95 (2): 379–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, Stacy B., und Gary M. Segura. 1997. Cross-National Variation in the Political Sophistication of Individuals: Capability or Choice? Journal of Politics 59 (1): 126–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grönlund, Kimmo, und Henry Milner. 2006. The Determinants of Political Knowledge in Comparative Perspective. Scandinavian Political Studies 29 (4): 386–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krosnik, Jon A. 1991. Response Strategies for Coping with the Cognitive Demands of Attitude Measures in Surveys. Applied Cognitive Psychology 5: 213–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krosnik, Jon A., Arthur Lupia, Matthew DeBell, and Darrell Donakowski. 2008. Problems with ANES Questions Measuring Political Knowledge. http://www.electionstudies.org/announce/newsltr/20080324PoliticalKnowledgeMemo.pdf. Zugegriffen am 18. Mai 2018.

  • Linden, Wim J. van der, und Ronald K Hambleton (Hrsg.). 1997a. Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linden, Wim J. van der, und Ronald K Hambleton. 1997b. Item Response Theory: Brief History, Common Models, and Extensions. In Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory, Hrsg. Wim J. van der Linden und Ronald K. Hambleton, 1-28. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luskin, Robert C., und John G. Bullock. 2011. „Don’t Know“ Means „Don’t Know“: DK Responses and the Public’s Level of Political Knowledge. Journal of Politics 73 (2): 547–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Melissa K., und Shannon K. Orr. 2008. Experimenting with a „Third Way“ in Political Knowledge Estimation. Public Opinion Quarterly 72 (4): 768–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mokken, Robert J. 1997. Nonparametric Models for Dichotomous Responses. In Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory, Hrsg. Wim J. van der Linden und Ronald K. Hambleton, 351–367. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mondak, Jeffery J. 2000. Reconsidering the Measurement of Political Knowledge. Political Analysis 8(1): 57–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mondak, Jeffery J. 2001. Developing Valid Knowledge Scales. American Journal of Political Science 45 (1): 224–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, Russel W. 1986. The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Electorate. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prior, Markus. 2007. Post-Broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prior, Markus, und Arthur Lupia. 2008. Money, Time, and Political Knowledge: Distinguishing Quick Recall and Political Learning Skills. American Journal of Political Science 52 (1): 169–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rizopoulos, Dimitris. 2006. ltm: An R package for Latent Variable Modelling and Item Response Theory Analyses. Journal of Statistical Software, 17 (5). https://www.jstatsoft.org/v017/i05. Zugegriffen am 18. Mai 2018.

  • Schuur, Wijbrandt H. van. 2003. Mokken Scale Analysis: Between the Guttman Scale and Parametric Item Response Theory. Political Analysis 11 (2): 139–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sturgis, Patrick. 2003. Knowledge and Collective Preferences: A Comparison of Two Approaches to Estimating the Opinions of a Better Informed Public. Sociological Methods & Research 31 (4): 453–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lehrstuhl für Politische Soziologie, Zeppelin Universität, Friedrichshafen, Deutschland

    Martin Elff

Authors
  1. Martin Elff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Elff .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Politikwissenschaft, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany

    Bettina Westle

  2. Fakultät für Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften, FernUniversität in Hagen, Hagen, Germany

    Markus Tausendpfund

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Elff, M. (2019). Probleme der Messung politischen Wissens im internationalen Vergleich. In: Westle, B., Tausendpfund, M. (eds) Politisches Wissen. Politisches Wissen. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-23787-5_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-23787-5_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-23786-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-23787-5

  • eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation