Equivalence in cross-national research

Adam Przeworski; Henry Teune

doi:10.1086/267455

Equivalence in cross-national research

Adam Przeworski, Henry Teune

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

How can valid comparisons be made in crossnational research when so many terms and concepts differ in their meanings from country to country? In this paper the authors argue and illustrate the significant claim that by using equivalent indicators in different countries and relating them to identical indicators, the validity of cross-national research can be safeguarded. Only by combining cross-national and nation-specific indicators can reliable and valid assessments be made.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	551-568
Number of pages	18
Journal	Public Opinion Quarterly
Volume	30
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1086/267455
State	Published - 1966

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Communication
History
Sociology and Political Science
Social Sciences(all)
History and Philosophy of Science

Access to Document

10.1086/267455

Cite this

@article{3323e46146aa4363ae2d8ecbd7ad2a72,

title = "Equivalence in cross-national research",

abstract = "How can valid comparisons be made in crossnational research when so many terms and concepts differ in their meanings from country to country? In this paper the authors argue and illustrate the significant claim that by using equivalent indicators in different countries and relating them to identical indicators, the validity of cross-national research can be safeguarded. Only by combining cross-national and nation-specific indicators can reliable and valid assessments be made.",

author = "Adam Przeworski and Henry Teune",

note = "Funding Information: •The authors wish to express their gratitude to the International Studies of Values in Politics for creating this opportunity to work toegther. This paper represents some preliminary work in preparation for a large-scale cross-national study supported in part by the Department of State and in part by the participating institutions. i The data for France were gathered by the Institut Francais d'Opinion Publique. These 1947 data are reported in Arnold M. Rose, Theory and Method in the Social Sciences, Minneapolis, The University of Minnesota Press, 1954, p. 107. U.S. polls report a high proportion of affirmative answers to the question, {"}Do you believe in God?{"}",

year = "1966",

doi = "10.1086/267455",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "30",

pages = "551--568",

journal = "Public Opinion Quarterly",

issn = "0033-362X",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Equivalence in cross-national research

AU - Przeworski, Adam

AU - Teune, Henry

N1 - Funding Information: •The authors wish to express their gratitude to the International Studies of Values in Politics for creating this opportunity to work toegther. This paper represents some preliminary work in preparation for a large-scale cross-national study supported in part by the Department of State and in part by the participating institutions. i The data for France were gathered by the Institut Francais d'Opinion Publique. These 1947 data are reported in Arnold M. Rose, Theory and Method in the Social Sciences, Minneapolis, The University of Minnesota Press, 1954, p. 107. U.S. polls report a high proportion of affirmative answers to the question, "Do you believe in God?"

PY - 1966

Y1 - 1966

N2 - How can valid comparisons be made in crossnational research when so many terms and concepts differ in their meanings from country to country? In this paper the authors argue and illustrate the significant claim that by using equivalent indicators in different countries and relating them to identical indicators, the validity of cross-national research can be safeguarded. Only by combining cross-national and nation-specific indicators can reliable and valid assessments be made.

AB - How can valid comparisons be made in crossnational research when so many terms and concepts differ in their meanings from country to country? In this paper the authors argue and illustrate the significant claim that by using equivalent indicators in different countries and relating them to identical indicators, the validity of cross-national research can be safeguarded. Only by combining cross-national and nation-specific indicators can reliable and valid assessments be made.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548598128&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548598128&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1086/267455

DO - 10.1086/267455

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:34548598128

SN - 0033-362X

VL - 30

SP - 551

EP - 568

JO - Public Opinion Quarterly

JF - Public Opinion Quarterly

IS - 4

ER -

Equivalence in cross-national research

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this