IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/nonpfo/v8y2017i1p91-110n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Latent Constructs in Nonprofit Surveys with Item Response Theory: The Example of Political Ideology

Author

Listed:
  • Mason Dyana P.

    (Department of Planning, Public Policy and Management, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-1209, USA)

Abstract

Latent constructs are the unobservable characteristics of individuals, groups and organizations. Although researchers use many tools to measure latent constructs, including scaled-items and factor analysis techniques, this study offers a different way to measure these characteristics in nonprofit research. Using Item Response Theory (IRT), this study develops one approach to measure revealed political ideology among leaders in nonprofit social welfare organizations. This approach can also be used to measure a variety of other constructs that may be difficult to measure through traditional approaches, opening up new lines of inquiry for those who study nonprofit organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Mason Dyana P., 2017. "Measuring Latent Constructs in Nonprofit Surveys with Item Response Theory: The Example of Political Ideology," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 91-110, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:nonpfo:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:91-110:n:3
    DOI: 10.1515/npf-2016-0020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2016-0020
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/npf-2016-0020?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bertelli,Anthony Michael, 2012. "The Political Economy of Public Sector Governance," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521736640, October.
    2. Martin, Andrew D. & Quinn, Kevin M., 2002. "Dynamic Ideal Point Estimation via Markov Chain Monte Carlo for the U.S. Supreme Court, 1953–1999," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 134-153, April.
    3. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    4. Anthony M. Bertelli & Christian R. Grose, 2011. "The Lengthened Shadow of Another Institution? Ideal Point Estimates for the Executive Branch and Congress," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(4), pages 767-781, October.
    5. Martin, Andrew D. & Quinn, Kevin M. & Park, Jong Hee, 2011. "MCMCpack: Markov Chain Monte Carlo in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 42(i09).
    6. Moe, Terry M, 1991. "Politics and the Theory of Organization," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(0), pages 106-129, Special I.
    7. McKay Amy, 2010. "The Effects of Interest Groups' Ideology on Their PAC and Lobbying Expenditures," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 1-23, August.
    8. Kenneth Shepsle, 1986. "The positive theory of legislative institutions: an enrichment of social choice and spatial models," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 135-178, January.
    9. McKay, Amy, 2010. "The Effects of Interest Groups' Ideology on Their PAC and Lobbying Expenditures," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, August.
    10. Bertelli,Anthony Michael, 2012. "The Political Economy of Public Sector Governance," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521517829, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Devin Caughey & James Dunham & Christopher Warshaw, 2018. "The ideological nationalization of partisan subconstituencies in the American States," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 133-151, July.
    2. Christopher Hare & Keith T. Poole, 2015. "Measuring ideology in Congress," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 18, pages 327-346, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Mason Dyana P., 2015. "Advocacy in Nonprofit Organizations: A Leadership Perspective," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 6(3), pages 297-324, November.
    4. Eijffinger, Sylvester & Mahieu, Ronald & Raes, Louis, 2018. "Inferring hawks and doves from voting records," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 107-120.
    5. Daniel W. Hill Jr., 2016. "Avoiding Obligation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 60(6), pages 1129-1158, September.
    6. P. Hägg, 1997. "Theories on the Economics of Regulation: A Survey of the Literature from a European Perspective," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 337-370, December.
    7. Alonso, Ricardo & Câmara, Odilon, 2016. "Bayesian persuasion with heterogeneous priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 672-706.
    8. Yiran Chen & Hanming Fang, 2017. "Inferring the Ideological Affiliations of Political Committees via Financial Contributions Networks," NBER Working Papers 24130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. James Lo, 2018. "Dynamic ideal point estimation for the European Parliament, 1980–2009," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 229-246, July.
    10. Juan D. Montoro-Pons, 2013. "Regulator preferences and lobbying efforts in rent-seeking contests," Chapters, in: Francisco Cabrillo & Miguel A. Puchades-Navarro (ed.), Constitutional Economics and Public Institutions, chapter 14, pages 257-278, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Mustafa Yagci & Caner Bakir, 2021. "Bridging international political economy and public policy and administration research on central banking [The missing politics of central banks]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(4), pages 502-521.
    12. Yonatan Lupu & James H. Fowler, 2013. "Strategic Citations to Precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(1), pages 151-186.
    13. Stephen Greasley & Chris Hanretty, 2012. "Culling the quangos: when is delegation revoked," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2012-12, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    14. James D. Morrow & Kevin L. Cope, 2021. "The limits of information revelation in multilateral negotiations: A theory of treatymaking," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(4), pages 399-429, October.
    15. Daniel Lee, 2014. "Third-party threat and the dimensionality of major-party roll call voting," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(3), pages 515-531, June.
    16. Jacobi, Tonja & Kontorovich, Eugene, 2015. "Why judges always vote," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 190-199.
    17. Poole, Keith T. & Lewis, Jeffrey B. & Rosenthal, Howard & Lo, James & Carroll, Royce, 2016. "Recovering a Basic Space from Issue Scales in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 69(i07).
    18. Freille, S. & Avramovich, C. & Moncarz, P. & Sofietti, P., 2019. "Inside the revolving door: campaign finance, lobbying meetings and public contracts. An investigation for Argentina," Research Department working papers 1392, CAF Development Bank Of Latinamerica.
    19. Lskavyan, Vahe, 2014. "Donor–recipient ideological differences and economic aid," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 345-347.
    20. Clark Muntean Susan, 2011. "Corporate Independent Spending in the Post-BCRA to Pre-Citizens United Era," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(1), pages 1-39, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:nonpfo:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:91-110:n:3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.