IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v71y1977i02p509-521_26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Stability and Reliability of Political Efficacy: Using Path Analysis to Test Alternative Models

Author

Listed:
  • McPherson, J. Miller
  • Welch, Susan
  • Clark, Cal

Abstract

The reliability and stability of survey items designed to measure political attitudes are important to the study of political behavior. Several past studies have examined the reliability and stability of items measuring one construct, that of political efficacy. The results of this prior research have been contradictory, in part because of the limitations of the methodologies used. In this article, the authors employ path analysis to examine more closely the stability and reliability of the four SRC items commonly used to measure political efficacy. The American Panel Study (1956–1960), in which efficacy is measured at two points in time, is used as the data base. The authors conclude that two of the four items (NO CARE and NO SAY) seem to measure best what is meant by political efficacy. These two items are more stable and reliable than previously thought, while the other items are relatively unstable and unreliable, and they display systematic differences from each other and from the NO CARE and NO SAY items.

Suggested Citation

  • McPherson, J. Miller & Welch, Susan & Clark, Cal, 1977. "The Stability and Reliability of Political Efficacy: Using Path Analysis to Test Alternative Models," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(2), pages 509-521, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:71:y:1977:i:02:p:509-521_26
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400267427/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alan Acock & Harold Clarke, 1990. "Alternative measures of political efficacy: models and means," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 87-105, February.
    2. Anne-Marie Aish & Karl Jöreskog, 1990. "A panel model for political efficacy and responsiveness: an application of LISREL 7 with weighted least squares," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 405-426, November.
    3. Peter Spirtes & Richard Scheines & Clark Glymour, 1990. "Simulation Studies of the Reliability of Computer-Aided Model Specification Using the TETRAD II, EQS, and LISREL Programs," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 19(1), pages 3-66, August.
    4. John, Peter & Sjoberg, Fredrik M, 2020. "Partisan responses to democracy promotion – Estimating the causal effect of a civic information portal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:apsrev:v:71:y:1977:i:02:p:509-521_26. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    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.