Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:08:31.389Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measuring Internal Political Efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Richard G. Niemi ,
Stephen C. Craig  and
Franco Mattei
Richard G. Niemi
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
Stephen C. Craig
Affiliation:
University of Florida
Franco Mattei
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Political efficacy has been studied extensively since the 1950s, hut analysts have never been fully satisfied with its measurement. After considerable testing, four new questions tapping internal political efficacy were added to the 1988 National Election Study. Our investigation shows that inter-item correlations among these questions indicate high internal consistency, that by both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis the items measure a single concept distinct from external efficacy and political trust, that the measurement model is robust across major subgroups, and that the overall scale is externally valid and provides a good distribution of efficacy scores across the population. Further, the results of an order experiment in the survey suggest that responses are unaffected by mode of presentation. In short, the four new questions constitute the most satisfactory measure of internal political efficacy to date.

Type
Research Notes
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 85 , Issue 4 , December 1991 , pp. 1407 - 1413
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acock, Alan C., and Clarke, Harold D.. 1990. “Alternative Measures of Political Efficacy: Models and Means.” Quality and Quantity 24:87–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acock, Alan C., Garke, Harold D., and Stewart, Marianne C.. 1985. “A New Model for Old Measures: A Covariance Structure Analysis of Political Efficacy.” Journal of Politics 47:1062–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batch, George I. 1974. “Multiple Indicators in Survey Research: The Concept ‘Sense of Political Efficacy.’” Political Methodology 1:1–43.Google Scholar
Bennett, Stephen Earl. 1984. “Change in the Public's Perceptions of Governmental Attentiveness, 1964–1980.” Micropolitics 3:309–48.Google Scholar
Coleman, Kenneth M., and Davis, Charles L.. 1976. “The Structural Context of Politics and Dimensions of Regime Performance: Their Importance for the Comparative Study of Political Efficacy.” Comparative Political Studies 9:189–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1972. “Change in the American Electorate.” In The Human Meaning of Social Change, ed. Campbell, Angus and Converse, Philip E.. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Craig, Stephen C., and Maggiotto, Michael A.. 1982. “Measuring Political Efficacy.” Political Methodology 8:85–109.Google Scholar
Craig, Stephen C., Niemi, Richard G., and Silver, Glenn E.. 1990. “Political Efficacy and Trust: A Report on the NES Pilot Study Items.” Political Behavior 12:289–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, Herbert. 1971. “Problems of Scale Equivalency in Measuring Attitudes in American Subcultures.” Social Science Quarterly 52:61–75.Google Scholar
Jöreskog, Karl G., and Sörbom, Dag. 1988. PRELIS: A Preprocessor for LISREL. 2d ed.Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.Google Scholar
Jöreskog, Karl G., and Sörbom, Dag. 1989. LISREL 7: User's Reference Guide. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.Google Scholar
Lane, Robert E. 1959. Political Life: Why and How People Get Involved in Politics. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
McPherson, J. Miller, Welch, Susan, and Clark, Cal. 1977. “The Stability and Reliability of Political Efficacy: Using Path Analysis To Test Alternative Models.” American Political Science Review 71:509–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Warren E., Miller, Arthur H., and Schneider, Edward J.. 1980. American National Election Studies Data Sourcebook, 1952–1978. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar