降低科学好奇心量表管理需求的实证研究

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q2 COMMUNICATION International Journal of Public Opinion Research Pub Date : 2021-08-17 DOI:10.1093/ijpor/edz049
Matthew P. Motta, D. Chapman, Kathryn Haglin, D. Kahan
{"title":"降低科学好奇心量表管理需求的实证研究","authors":"Matthew P. Motta, D. Chapman, Kathryn Haglin, D. Kahan","doi":"10.1093/ijpor/edz049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Science curious people—those who enjoy consuming science-related information—are less likely to hold politically polarized views about contentious science. Consequently, science curiosity is of great interest to scholars across the social sciences. However, measuring science curiosity via the science curiosity scale (SCS) is time intensive; potentially impeding its widespread usage. We present two new methods for reducing SCS administration time. One method presents respondents with a randomly selected subset of items (“Random Subset [RS] Method”). The other asks all respondents a core set of just four items (“Reduced-Form Method;” RF). In three nationally representative surveys, we assess the construct, convergent, and predictive validity of these alternatives. We find both versions to be well validated.","PeriodicalId":51480,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Opinion Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/ijpor/edz049","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reducing the Administrative Demands of the Science Curiosity Scale: A Validation Study\",\"authors\":\"Matthew P. Motta, D. Chapman, Kathryn Haglin, D. Kahan\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ijpor/edz049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Science curious people—those who enjoy consuming science-related information—are less likely to hold politically polarized views about contentious science. Consequently, science curiosity is of great interest to scholars across the social sciences. However, measuring science curiosity via the science curiosity scale (SCS) is time intensive; potentially impeding its widespread usage. We present two new methods for reducing SCS administration time. One method presents respondents with a randomly selected subset of items (“Random Subset [RS] Method”). The other asks all respondents a core set of just four items (“Reduced-Form Method;” RF). In three nationally representative surveys, we assess the construct, convergent, and predictive validity of these alternatives. We find both versions to be well validated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51480,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Public Opinion Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/ijpor/edz049\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Public Opinion Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edz049\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Opinion Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edz049","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

对科学好奇的人——那些喜欢消费科学相关信息的人——不太可能对有争议的科学持有政治上两极化的观点。因此,科学好奇心引起了社会科学学者的极大兴趣。然而,通过科学好奇心量表(SCS)测量科学好奇心是费时的;可能阻碍其广泛使用。我们提出了两种减少SCS给药时间的新方法。一种方法是向受访者提供随机选择的项目子集(“随机子集[RS]方法”)。另一种方法只要求所有受访者回答四个核心问题(“简化表单方法”;RF)。在三个具有全国代表性的调查中,我们评估了这些替代方案的结构、收敛性和预测有效性。我们发现这两个版本都得到了很好的验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reducing the Administrative Demands of the Science Curiosity Scale: A Validation Study
Science curious people—those who enjoy consuming science-related information—are less likely to hold politically polarized views about contentious science. Consequently, science curiosity is of great interest to scholars across the social sciences. However, measuring science curiosity via the science curiosity scale (SCS) is time intensive; potentially impeding its widespread usage. We present two new methods for reducing SCS administration time. One method presents respondents with a randomly selected subset of items (“Random Subset [RS] Method”). The other asks all respondents a core set of just four items (“Reduced-Form Method;” RF). In three nationally representative surveys, we assess the construct, convergent, and predictive validity of these alternatives. We find both versions to be well validated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Public Opinion Research welcomes manuscripts that describe: - studies of public opinion that contribute to theory development and testing about political, social and current issues, particularly those that involve comparative analysis; - the role of public opinion polls in political decision making, the development of public policies, electoral behavior, and mass communications; - evaluations of and improvements in the methodology of public opinion surveys.
期刊最新文献
Political Turmoil and Attitude Change Among the Diaspora. The Impact of the 2016 Attempted Military Coup on Homeland Orientation Among Recent Turkish Immigrants in the Netherlands Hasty Generalization as a Source of Misleading Survey Responses The More Sophisticated, the More Biased? Testing a New Measure of Political Sophistication on Biased Information Processing Calling on the Third-party Privacy Control into Algorithmic Governance Framework: Linking Users’ Presumed Influence with Control Agency Theory Misperceptions, Intergroup Prejudice, and the Varied Encounters Between European Citizens and Non-EU Foreigners
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1