IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v45y2016i2p191-230.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Collective Efficacy

Author

Listed:
  • Ross L. Matsueda
  • Kevin M. Drakulich

Abstract

This article specifies a multilevel measurement model for survey response when data are nested. The model includes a test–retest model of reliability, a confirmatory factor model of interitem reliability with item-specific bias effects, an individual-level model of the biasing effects due to respondent characteristics, and a neighborhood-level model of construct validity. We apply this model for measuring informal social control within collective efficacy theory. Estimating the model on 3,260 respondents nested within 123 Seattle neighborhoods, we find that measures of informal control show reasonable test–retest and interitem reliability. We find support for the hypothesis that respondents’ assessments of whether their neighbors would intervene in specific child deviant acts are related to whether they have observed such acts in the past, which is consistent with a cognitive model of survey response. Finally, we find that, when proper measurement models are not used, the effects of some neighborhood covariates on informal control are biased upward and the effect of informal social control on violence is biased downward.

Suggested Citation

  • Ross L. Matsueda & Kevin M. Drakulich, 2016. "Measuring Collective Efficacy," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 45(2), pages 191-230, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:45:y:2016:i:2:p:191-230
    DOI: 10.1177/0049124115578030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0049124115578030
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0049124115578030?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Miloš Kankaraš & Jeroen K. Vermunt & Guy Moors, 2011. "Measurement Equivalence of Ordinal Items: A Comparison of Factor Analytic, Item Response Theory, and Latent Class Approaches," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 40(2), pages 279-310, May.
    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. Jennifer Oser & Marc Hooghe & Zsuzsa Bakk & Roberto Mari, 2023. "Changing citizenship norms among adolescents, 1999-2009-2016: A two-step latent class approach with measurement equivalence testing," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(5), pages 4915-4933, October.
    2. Laura Pasca & María Teresa Coello & Juan Ignacio Aragonés & Cynthia McPherson Frantz, 2018. "The equivalence of measures on the Connectedness to Nature Scale: A comparison between ordinal methods of DIF detection," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-11, November.
    3. Luisa Corrado & Majlinda Joxhe, 2016. "The Effect of Survey Design on Extreme Response Style: Rating Job Satisfaction," CEIS Research Paper 365, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 08 Feb 2016.
    4. Cernat, Alexandru, 2015. "Using equivalence testing to disentangle selection and measurement in mixed modes surveys," Understanding Society Working Paper Series 2015-01, Understanding Society at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.

    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:sae:somere:v:45:y:2016:i:2:p:191-230. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.