Suchergebnisse

The ESS survey (European Social Survey, http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org) emerged from the need to obtain comparative data in Europe on a number of issues of political science, sociology, social psychology, mass communication or economics. The ESS is a study introduced in 2002 and replicated every two years. This is the seventh edition of the study in Switzerland. The ESS provides indicators on the practices and representations of the Swiss population, making it possible to compare them with European countries and to observe the evolution over time. The 2016 edition focuses on 'Climate change' and 'Welfare'.

The ESS survey (European Social Survey, http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org) emerged from the need to obtain comparative data in Europe on a number of issues of political science, sociology, social psychology, mass communication or economics. The ESS is a study introduced in 2002 and replicated every two years. This is the ninth edition of the study in Switzerland. The ESS provides indicators on the practices and representations of the Swiss population, making it possible to compare them with European countries and to observe the evolution over time. The ESS 2018 R9 edition focuses on 'Justice and Fairness' and 'Timing of Life'.

The fielded modules of Round 9 are:
A) Media and social trust
B) Politics
C) Subjective well-being, social exclusion, religion, national identity
F) Socio demographics
D) Timing of Life
G) Fairness and Justice
H) Human values
I) Test questions
J) Interviewer self-completion questions

The present article represents the first attempt to collect all health-related ESS articles for a systematic review. Although the European Social Survey (ESS) is not primarily a health survey, we have seen an increasing use of data from the ESS in comparative health research in the last few years, and the number is increasing year by year. The present article mainly aims at describing the findings from these studies and to highlight the main methodological differences between these studies. Although a synchronisation of methodological approaches would increase the comparability between ESS studies, the varying approaches are one of the main features that increase the interest in the ESS: both because it improves the robustness of the results, but also because it reflects the flexibility that the ESS offers as a data source. Twenty-one studies using the ESS for health-comparative analyses could be found and the number of studies is increasing year by year. A key result from these studies is that fundamental inequalities continue to exist according to many socio-economic indicators in the Nordic countries despite high living standards and egalitarian policies.

Individuals hold normative ideas about the just distribution of goods and burdens within a social aggregate. These normative ideas guide the evaluation of existing inequalities and refer to four basic principles: (1) Equality stands for an equal distribution of rewards and burdens. While the principle of (2) need takes individual contributions into account, (3) equity suggests a distribution based on merit. The (4) entitlement principle suggests that ascribed (e.g., gender) and achieved status characteristics (e.g., occupational prestige) should determine the distribution of goods and burdens. Past research has argued that preferences for these principles vary with social position as well as the social structure of a society. The Basic Social Justice Orientations (BSJO) scale was developed to assess agreement with the four justice principles but so far has only been fielded in Germany. Round 9 of the European Social Survey (ESS R9 with data collected in 2018/2019) is the first time; four items of the BSJO scale (1 item per justice principle) were included in a cross-national survey program, offering the unique opportunity to study both within and between country variation. To facilitate substantive research on preference for equality, equity, need, and entitlement, this report provides evidence on measurement quality in 29 European countries from ESS R9. Analyzing response distributions, non-response, reliability, and associations with related variables, we find supportive evidence that the four items of the BSJO scale included in ESS R9 produce low non-response rates, estimate agreement with the four distributive principles reliably, and follow expected correlations with related concepts. Researchers should, however, remember that the BSJO scale, as implemented in the ESS R9, only provides manifest indicators, which therefore may not cover the full spectrum of the underlying distributive principles but focus on specific elements of it.

Age is an important dimension that is used by people to categorize others. Age-based discrimination is directed toward specific age groups (young and old). In spite of their importance, attitudes toward the elderly have hardly been studied from a cross-country perspective. The fourth round of the European Social Survey (ESS) from 2008-2009 offers, for the first time, the opportunity to study ageism and attitudes toward age groups from a cross-country perspective (European Social Survey Round 4 Data, 2008). However, this opportunity also bears the risk of drawing wrong conclusions, if the scales measuring ageism are not comparable across the countries under study. Such comparisons require measurement equivalence across countries. In the current study, utilizing ESS fourth round data from 29 European countries we examine the cross-country measurement equivalence properties of two concepts that are measured by multiple indicators in the module: (1) competence and warmth and (2) experience of age discrimination. We test for measurement equivalence using two analytical methods: multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) and the alignment optimization. Our findings suggest that cross-country comparisons of these measures are trustworthy. We briefly discuss cross-country differences in competence and warmth and experience of age discrimination. Finally, we underline the importance of testing the cross-group equivalence of measurement instruments before using them in different groups (such as countries) so that meaningful substantive conclusions can be drawn.