SOCIAL VALUES IN AMERICA
This research explored the topic of social values with 2,025 United States residents. Adapting scales first developed by Steg et al. (2014) and Schwartz (1992), we used market segmentation techniques called exploratory factor analysis and k-means clustering to identify four social values in America: Altruism, Power-Seeking, Hedonism, and Environmentalism.
For this research, respondents completed a self-report questionnaire on what they felt was important in life, with each item rated on a 5-point agreement scale. Principal-axis factoring was conducted using a direct oblimin rotation (delta=0), as factors were expected to be correlated. Factors were extracted using parallel analysis, a highly accurate method for determining factors in principal-axis factoring (Velicer et al., 2000). Four social values were identified, accounting for 68.14% of the variance in the data. Internal consistency was good for all four social values: Altruism (α=.87), Power-Seeking (α=.88), Hedonism (α=.88), and Environmentalism (α=.87). Following principal-axis factoring, items from each value were categorized into high and low groups using k-means clustering.
VALUE 1: ALTRUISM
The first value we identified reflects general compassion and concern for the happiness and well-being of other people. Using k-means clustering, the majority (75 per cent) of Americans were classified as being High in Altruism, while only 25 per cent of Americans were classified as being Low in Altruism.
From a demographic perspective, Americans who are High in Altruism are more likely to be over the age of 60, live in the Northeast region, hold liberal political views, and have graduated university. Americans who are Low in Altruism are more likely to be between the ages of 16 and 29 and hold conservative political views.
VALUE 2: POWER-SEEKING
The second value we identified pertains to having control and authority over other people. Using k-means clustering, 44 per cent of Americans were classified as High in Power-Seeking, while 56 per cent of Americans were classified as being Low in Power-Seeking.
From a demographic perspective, Americans who are High in Power-Seeking are more likely to be male and between the ages of 16 to 44. Americans who are Low in Power-Seeking are more likely to be female, be over the age of 45, and live in the Midwest region.
VALUE 3: HEDONISM
The third value we identified involves seeking enjoyment, pleasure, and fun in life. Using k-means clustering, the vast majority (88 per cent) of Americans were classified as being High in Hedonism, while only 12 per cent of Americans were classified as being Low in Hedonism.
From a demographic perspective, Americans who are High in Hedonism are more likely to be over the age of 60. Americans who are Low in Hedonism are more likely to be between the ages of 16 and 29.
VALUE 4: ENVIRONMENTALISM
This final value we identified reflects a concern for the environment and nature. Using k-means clustering, we found that the majority (77 per cent) of Americans were classified as being High in Environmentalism, while only 23 per cent of Americans were classified as being Low in Environmentalism.
From a demographic perspective, Americans who are High in Environmentalism are more likely to be over the age of 60, hold liberal political views, and have graduated university. Americans who are Low in Environmentalism are more likely to be between the ages of 16 and 29 and hold conservative political views.
ABOUT THIS RESEARCH
These are findings from an Intensions Consulting study conducted between January 20, 2020, and January 28, 2020. For this study a 20-minute online survey was administered with a sample of 2,025 United States residents aged 16 years and older. The sample was stratified by gender, age, and region, to ensure that the sample’s composition reflected the underlying distribution of the population as determined by Census data. A traditional probability sample of comparable size would have produced results considered accurate to within plus or minus 2.2 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
For more information on this research, please contact: info@intensions.co
REFERENCES
- Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. (pp. 1-65). Elsevier Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6
- Steg, L., Perlaviciute, G., van der Werff, E., & Lurvink, J. (2014). The significance of hedonic values for environmentally relevant attitudes, preferences, and actions. Environment and Behavior, 46(2), 163-192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512454730
- Velicer, W. F., Eaton, C. A., & Fava, J. L. (2000). Construct explication through factor or component analysis: A review and evaluation of alternative procedures for determining the number of factors or components. In R. D. Goffin & E. Helmes (Eds.), Problems and solutions in human assessment: Honoring Douglas N. Jackson at seventy (pp. 41-71). Norwell, MS: Kluwer. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4615-4397-8_3