Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40794671›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Constructing Schwartz values framework using the Rokeach values survey: Human value measurement in the longitudinal internet survey for social sciences.

Oscar Smallenbroek, Ingmar Leijen, A Stanciu, Hester van Herk, A Bardi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Oscar SmallenbroekJoint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4280-8406
Ingmar LeijenSchool of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0375-2959
A StanciuFaculty of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences (FHSE), University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8149-7829
Hester van HerkSchool of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3503-5698
A BardiDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham, England.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper assesses and validates indexes of human values as conceptualized in the Schwartz framework using the Rokeach Value Survey in the publicly available LISS panel data (www.lisspanel.nl), thereby opening an avenue for researchers to relate values to a wide range of attitudes, traits, and behaviors with the most widely used and tested values theory. We start with a theoretical screening of the value items, after which we use multi-dimensional scaling to assess the item's correlation structure. We developed reliable and valid indexes for 8 of the 10 Schwartz values, of which universalism, achievement, benevolence, and conformity contain 3 or more items, and self-direction, stimulation, hedonism, and security contain 1 or 2 items. We assess the RVS-based indexes by comparing them with other Schwartz indexes in the World Value Survey and the European Social Survey data. Using regressions, all 8 values also show the expected relationships with demographics, political orientation, and personality traits. By tailoring the RVS to align with the Schwartz value structure, researchers can use a well-established framework for assessing human values longitudinally and cross-sectionally, enabling better comparisons and insights across studies and time periods.

Indexed as

InternetSocial SciencesSocial ValuesAdultFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID40794671
PMCPMC12342246

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.