The Perceived Political Self-Efficacy Scale

Abstract

The present study aims to develop a short form of the Perceived Political Self-Efficacy scale (PPSE-S). The psychometric properties of the short form were first investigated in an Italian sample (n = 697), and compared with those of the extended version. The cross-cultural replicability of the short form was then investigated in Spain (n = 354), and Greece (n = 270). Finally, the relations between the PPSE-S and several indicators of political participation were assessed in each country. Results from confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) supported the unidimensionality of the PPSE-S. Reliability and criterion validity of the short- and the full-length scales were found to be substantially equivalent. Multigroup CFA provided evidence of measurement invariance across Italy, Spain, and Greece. Perceived political efficacy was positively related to political engagement in a stable and consistent way across the three countries. In light of these results, the usefulness and applicability of the PPSE-S for large-scale surveys were discussed.

Keywords

political efficacy political participation self-efficacy beliefs short form cross-cultural invariance

Introduction

Self-efficacy beliefs refer to judgments people hold about their capabilities to organize and affect courses of action to attain given goals (Bandura, 1986, 1997). A broad literature documents the pervasive influence of self-efficacy beliefs on individual’s motivation and effort across various domains of functioning, including academic achievement (Caprara, Vecchione, Alessandri, Gerbino, & Barbaranelli, 2011), job performance (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998), well-being, and physical health (Bandura, 1997). The current article focuses on the influential role of self-efficacy beliefs in the realm of politics.

In the seminal work of Campbell, Gurin, and Miller (1954), political efficacy was defined as the “feeling that individual political action does have, or can have, an impact upon the political process” (p. 187). Several authors (e.g., Balch, 1974) have distinguished between personal beliefs regarding the ability to achieve desired results in the political domain (internal political efficacy), and people’s beliefs that the political system is amenable to change through individual influence (external political efficacy). The present manuscript addresses only the first set of beliefs.

Despite being a key notion in the study of citizens’ political engagement, several problems arise in the measurement of internal political efficacy (Morrell, 2003). One of the major limitations is that most of the proposed instruments focused on knowledge, skills, and capacities, rather than on perceived control or feelings about ones’ own efficacy (Caprara, Vecchione, Capanna, & Mebane, 2009; Saris & Torcal, 2009; Zimmerman & Zahniser, 1991). As it has been argued, perceptions of efficacy are critical determinants of how people think, feel, and behave (Bandura, 1997). In this regard, it is surprising that most approaches to the assessment of political efficacy are not connected to a theoretical framework able to account for the psychological processes underlying an individual’s sense of efficacy.

In an attempt to overcome the above limitations, a recent study of Caprara et al. (2009) conceptualized political efficacy within social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986, 1997), focusing on political self-efficacy beliefs, namely, on judgments people hold about their capacities “to take an agentic role in modern representative democracies” (Caprara, et al., 2009, p. 1005). Social cognitive approaches deal with the unique properties of human agency, such as self-regulation and self-reflection, that enable people to manage effectively the demands of the socio-cultural environment in which they live, and to realize their desired accomplishments, in accordance with their own personal standards (Bandura, 2001; Cervone & Shoda, 1999). Among psychological structures attesting to individual’s agentic power, none has proved to exert a more critical influence over motivation, thought, and action than self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997).

After reviewing the literature on political efficacy and its assessment, Caprara and colleagues (2009) developed a measure of political self-efficacy, the Perceived Political Self-Efficacy scale (PPSE). The scale is composed of 10 items, framed in accordance with Bandura’s (2006) guidelines. While the political domain involves a wide array of activities that requires different capabilities, authors have focused on basic capacities that are needed to participate actively in a representative democracy, where citizens participate mostly through the control they exert on their elected representatives. In particular, the items of the scale assess the capacities to promote ones’ own opinions about people and programs, to monitor one’s own political representatives, and to mobilize resources in support of one’s own party or movement.

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) corroborated the unidimensionality of the PPSE. The instrument showed good internal consistency and construct validity. Correlations with several indicators of political interest and participation supported the criterion validity of the scale, and its incremental validity with respect to two widely used measures of political efficacy (Campbell et al., 1954; Niemi, Craig, & Mattei, 1991).

The above study was carried out in Italy, where political turnout is high and ideological affiliations still exert a moderate influence on individuals’ personal and social identities. Italy is a parliamentary democracy where parties have traditionally played a major role in setting the political agenda of the country, in training politicians, and in selecting leaders. Whereas the scale has been shown to work well in Italy, we do not know to what extent these findings are generalizable to different countries. Furthermore, we argue that a shorter form is more suited for large research applications or population surveys, where assessment time is severely restricted. Although the scale is not excessively long, it contains about twice as many items than existing scales of political efficacy (e.g., Campbell et al., 1954; Niemi et al., 1991) included in large-scale surveys, such as the European Social Survey or the National Election Studies. Based on these premises, the present study aims to develop a shortened four-item version of the scale, the Perceived Political Self-Efficacy scale–Short Form (PPSE-S), comparable in length with other instruments devised to assess political efficacy. This should increase the appeal of the scale for large-scale surveys.

In selecting the items of the short scale, we preserved the content validity of the original measure by ensuring that the target content domain of the PPSE was adequately represented (Haynes, Richard, & Kubany, 1995; Smith, McCarthy, & Anderson, 2000). At the same time, we favored items that refer to basic activities accessible to the average citizen and that do not necessarily require high levels of political involvement. After having established the psychometric properties of the short scale in an Italian sample, we examined its functioning in two independent samples from Spain and Greece. Finally, we investigated the measurement invariance of the scale across countries, and examined its relationship with several forms of political participation. To this aim, we chose Italy, Spain, and Greece, three Mediterranean countries that are members of the European Union, cultivate a sense of common identity, and are similar on basic aspects of human development (i.e., life expectancy at birth, expected years of schooling, and income distribution). In addition, all the three countries have experienced a period of authoritarian regime over the course of the last century, although with different characteristics and duration. At the same time, they are widely different in terms of language, culture, tradition, and political system.

Material and Method

Participants and Procedures

The full-length form of the scale (PPSE) was administered to members of the adult Italian population (n = 697) on two different occasions, separated by 2 weeks. The short form (PPSE-S) was also administered to members of the adult population in Spain (n = 354), and Greece (n = 270) in their native language. In each country, data were collected by university students who were briefed on the general aims of the research and instructed on how to administer the questionnaires. All students earned course credits for their participation, which consisted in filling out the questionnaires and collecting data from two to four people, balancing age and gender. Data from the three countries were gathered in the years 2008 to 2009, after the beginning of the world’s worst financial crisis since the great depression, but before the crisis intensified in the three examined countries.

Italy

The mean age of participants was 37.6 years (SD = 14.7), and 57% were female. Of the participants, 3% had an elementary school education, 8% completed junior high school, 41% had earned a high school diploma, and 48% a college degree. The annual income mode was “from 10,000 to 15,000 Euro” (29.9%). Participants returned after 2 weeks to complete a retest (response rate was 85%).

Spain

The mean age of participants was 31.0 years (SD=13.3), and 63% were female. Of the participants, 15% had an elementary school education, 43% completed junior high school, 34% had earned a high school diploma, and 8% a college degree. The annual income mode was “<5000 Euro” (38.1%).

Greece

The mean age of participants was 38.1 years (SD = 15.1), and 54% were female. Of the participants, 9% had an elementary school education, 10% completed junior high school, 44% had earned a high school diploma, and 37% a college degree. The annual income mode was “5000-10,000 Euro” (25.9%).

Measures

Perceived political self-efficacy

The PPSE (Caprara et al., 2009) is composed of 10 items aimed to assess individuals’ beliefs in their capabilities to engage actively in politics. For each item, participants were asked to evaluate how capable they felt in carrying out the specific action or behavior described, on a 5-point Likert-type scale, from 1 (not at all) to 5 (completely).

The items are phrased following the instructions given by Bandura (2006) in his “Guide to the Construction of Self-Efficacy Scales.”. In Italy, we administered the 10 items of the original version (the PPSE) that has been previously validated in the native language (Caprara et al., 2009). In Spain and Greece, we administered the four items of the short form (the PPSE-S). In these countries, the original items were translated into Spanish and Greek and later back-translated into the original language by native bilingual researchers living in Spain and Greece.

Political participation

Seven items with a yes (1) or no (0) response format were used to measure political participation: “contacted a politician or government official,” “worked in political party or action group,” “worked in another organization or association,” “worn or displayed campaign badge/sticker,” “signed petition,” “taken part in lawful public demonstration,” “boycotted certain products for political/ethical/environment reason.” For each item, respondents indicated whether they performed the described behavior during the past 12 months. A composite index of political participation was created by taking a sum of the seven indicators. High scores indicate a high level of participation.

Results

The Development of a Short Form of the PPSE (PPSE-S): A Validation Study in Italy

The purpose of this initial phase was to develop a short form of the PPSE (i.e., the PPSE-S). The item selection procedure was intended to be based on a combination of both empirical (i.e., factor loadings) and theoretical (i.e., content validity) considerations (Smith et al., 2000). Yet, since standardized factor loadings were all largely adequate (i.e., all >.40), the items of the short form were selected mostly on conceptual grounds, with the aim to preserve the domains of the full-length scale (i.e., voice ones’ own opinions, monitor one’s own political representatives, and support one’s own party or movement). The four items are: “promote public initiatives to support political programs that you believe are just”; “maintain personal relationships with representatives of national government authorities”; “promote effective activities of information and mobilization in your own community (of work, friends, and family), to sustain political programs in which you believe”; and “use the means you have as a citizen to critically monitor the actions of your political representatives.”

In this phase, we present the psychometric properties of the PPSE-S in an Italian sample, comparing this short version with the original version in terms of factor structure, reliability, and criterion validity.

The factor structure of the scale was examined through CFA. The posited model consists of a single latent factor explaining the covariation among the four items of the PPSE-S. To identify a scale for the latent factor, we fixed to 1 the loading of the first item (Steenkamp & Baumgartner, 1998). Parameters were estimated by means of robust Maximum Likelihood, using the EQS program (Bentler, 2001). The model yielded an adequate fit (Table 1). Factor loadings of the items were all significant and greater than the .4 criterion suggested by Brown (2006). They ranged from .71 to .80 (M = .75, SD = .04), providing support for the convergent validity of the scale.

Table 1.

Standardized Factor Loadings and Goodness-of-Fit Indices of the CFA Conducted on the PPSE-S in Italy (n = 697), Spain (n = 354), and Greece (n = 270).

	Italy	Spain	Greece
1. Promote public initiatives to support political programs that you believe are just	.80	.81	.71
2. Maintain personal relationships with representatives of national government authorities	.71	.59	.64
3. Promote effective activities of information and mobilization in your own community (of work, friends, and family), to sustain political programs in which you believe	.77	.68	.76
4. Use the means you have as a citizen to critically monitor the actions of your political representatives	.73	.71	.59

Goodness-of-fit indices

Italy: χ²(2) = 8.58, p < .05, CFI = .993, TLI = .990, RMSEA = .070 (.027, .121), SRMR = .015

Spain: χ²(2) = 4.81, p = .09, CFI = .991, TLI = .985, RMSEA = .064 (.000, .139), SRMR = .023

Greece: χ²(2) = 7.13, p < .05, CFI = .983, TLI = .976, RMSEA = .098 (.027, .180), SRMR = .028

Note. CFA = confirmatory factor analysis; PPSE-S = Perceived Political Self-Efficacy scale–Short Form; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; TLI = Tucker–Lewis Index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean residual.

The reliability of the short form was assessed both in terms of internal consistency and temporal stability, using Cronbach’s alpha and test–retest correlation, respectively. The alpha reliability coefficient was .83 both at Time 1 and Time 2. The coefficients of the full-length scale were .90 at Time 1 and .91 at Time 2. Thus, we can conclude that the short form has a good degree of internal consistency, which drops marginally with respect to the original scale. This decrease is an expected consequence of the reduced test length. More importantly, test–retest reliability of the two forms was nearly identical (stability coefficients were .68 for the full scale and .67 for the short version).

We further assessed the degree to which the two forms share similar psychometric properties by examining the correlation between them, as well as their correlations with relevant criteria. The correlation between the short- and the full-length scales measured at Time 1 was .95. This correlation, however, is likely to be overestimated since scores on four items are included in both forms. Following the guidelines provided by Smith et al. (2000), a more conservative estimation has been obtained by calculating the correlation between the full-length scale measured at Time 1 and the short form measured at Time 2. This correlation was .65, that is only slightly lower than the test–retest correlation of the full scale (.68). One can therefore conclude that there is adequate overlapping variance between the PPSE-S and its full-length version.

The criterion validity was investigated by examining the degree to which individual’s scores on the PPSE-S are related to several indicators of political participation, above and beyond the contribution of basic demographic characteristics, such as gender (coded as 0 for males and 1 for females), age, education, and household income. While we expected that the short form would be related to high levels of political engagement (see Caprara et al., 2009), we compared its criterion validity with that of the extended form.

We found the criterion validity to be substantially equivalent for the short and the full scales. Correlations were, respectively, .33 and .33 (p < .01) with “contacted a politician,” .32 and .32 (p < .01) with “worked in political party,” .46 and .46 (p < .01) with “worked in other political organizations,” .35 and .36 (p < .01) with “worn or displayed badge/sticker,” .28 and .26 (p < .01) with “signed petition,” .42 and .43 (p < .01) with “taken part in public demonstration,” and .21 and .19 (p < .01) with “boycotted products.” Taken together, correlations tend to be higher with conventional (e.g., working in parties, taking part in demonstration) than unconventional (e.g., boycotting products, signing petition) forms of participation.

Measurement Invariance Across Countries

As a second step, we extended the analysis of the short form to Spain and Greece, two further Southern European countries. As shown in Table 1, the one-factor model fits adequately both in Spain and Greece. Factor loadings were all significant and higher than .40 (M = .69, SD = .08). The alpha reliability coefficients were .79 in Spain and .77 in Greece.

After the fit of the one-factor model was established within each country, the cross-cultural equivalence of the PPSE-S was tested by using a Multigroup CFA (MGCFA). To this aim, a sequence of nested models was tested. In Model 1 (configural invariance), parameters were estimated simultaneously in Italy, Spain, and Greece and allowed to differ across groups. In Model 2 (metric invariance), the factor loadings have been constrained to be equal across countries. In Model 3 (scalar invariance), additional equality constraints on item intercepts have been imposed (for identification purposes, we fixed the loading of the first item to 1 and the intercept to 0). To test differences between models, we used the chi-square difference test (Δχ²) using Satorra and Bentler’s (2010) scaled chi-square, with an α level of .05, along with the ΔCFI (Comparative Fit Index) and ΔRMSEA (root mean square error of approximation), with a critical level of −.01 and .015, respectively (Chen, 2007). Results are presented in Table 2.

Table 2.

Tests of Measurement Invariance of the PPSE-S Across Countries.

	χ²	df	p	CFI	SRMR	RMSEA (CI)	Model comparison	Δχ²	Δdf	p	ΔCFI	ΔRMSEA
Model 1. Configural invariance	25.29	6	<.001	.987	.025	.050 [.031, .071]
Model 2. Metric invariance	31.59	12	<.01	.987	.041	.036 [.021, .051]	2 vs. 1	6.30^a	6	.38	.000	−.014
Model 3. Scalar invariance	67.90	18	<.001	.976	.041	.046 [.035, .058]	3 vs. 2	36.31^a	6	<.001	−.011	.010
Model 4. Partial scalar invariance	33.96	15	<.01	.978	.041	.031 [.017, .045]	4 vs. 2	2.37^a	3	.50	−.009	.005

Note. PPSE-S = Perceived Political Self-Efficacy scale–Short Form; χ² = chi-square Goodness of Fit; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; SRMR = standardized root mean residual; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; CI = 95% confidence interval.

The chi-square difference test was calculated using Satorra and Bentler’s (2010) scaled chi-square.

The configural model (Model 1) fits the data, suggesting that the same factor structure holds in each country. The cross-cultural equivalence of factor loadings (Model 2) can also be retained, as the chi-square difference test was not significant. Constraining the intercepts across groups (Model 3) produced a high and significant increase of the chi-square and a decrease in the CFI that is slightly higher than the criteria set by Chen (2007). This seems to suggest that scalar equivalence is not completely tenable. The lack of invariance was mostly due to Item 3 (whose intercept was significantly different between Italy and Greece), and Item 4 (whose intercept was significantly different across the three countries).

We thus tested partial scalar invariance (Byrne, Shavelson, & Muthén, 1989) by comparing Model 2 with a model that constraints the intercept of Item 2 across the three countries and the intercept of Item 4 across Italy and Spain (Model 4). As a result, we obtained a significant increase of the chi-square but a small decrease in the CFI and the RMSEA. This suggests that the observed decrease in fit is attributable to sampling error rather than to a lack of equivalence (Chen, 2007). We therefore concluded that partial scalar invariance was established across the three examined countries. As the model met the minimum requirement for scalar invariance of at least one equal intercept, valid cross-cultural comparisons of latent means can be conducted (Meredith & Horn, 2001). The mean of the PPSE-S was 2.38 in Italy, 2.31 in Spain, and 2.35 in Greece. These means were not significantly different, as revealed by the chi-square difference test: Δχ²(2) = 1.76, p = .42.

Criterion Validity Across Countries

The criterion validity was examined by positing a multigroup structural model that links political self-efficacy to the composite index of political participation. This model included gender, age, education, and income as covariates, given their expected impact on political participation (e.g., Milbrath & Goel, 1977; Verba, Schlozman, & Brady, 1995).

The model fits the data: χ²(75) = 126.04, p < .001, CFI = .985, TLI (Tucker–Lewis Index) = .965, SRMR (standardized root mean residual) =.032, RMSEA = .024 (.016, .031). Standardized model parameters are reported in Figure 1. Education was positively correlated with political participation in each country. Age was positively related in Spain but not in Italy and Greece. Males reported higher levels of political activity than females in Italy and Spain. The contribution of income was not significant in all countries.

Figure 1.

A structural model linking political self-efficacy and demographic variables to political participation.

Most importantly, for our purposes, political self-efficacy beliefs predicted political participation in all countries. We examined whether the strength of this association differed across nations, by imposing equality constraints on the path coefficient linking efficacy beliefs to political activity and examining the change in the chi-square of the model. The chi-square differences test was not significant, Δχ²(2) = 1.42, p = .49, revealing that political self-efficacy was positively related to political engagement in a stable and consistent way across the examined countries. Efficacy beliefs and demographic variables accounted for 26% of the variance in Italy, 28% in Spain, and 25% in Greece.

A further model was estimated to obtain a more fine-grained analysis of the effect of self-efficacy beliefs on specific forms of participation. In this model, the seven indicators of political participation were included in the measurement model and allowed to covariate with each other and with the latent factor of perceived political self-efficacy. The socio-demographic variables were included as controls.

Table 3 provides the standardized point–biserial correlation coefficients linking individual’s score on the PPSE-S with each indicator of political participation. As can be observed, perceived political self-efficacy was positively related to political engagement in each country. To compare the strength of the relation across countries, we constrained the correlation coefficients to be invariant across groups. Type I error was controlled for by using the Lagrange Multiplier test, that provides a multivariate test for the tenability of constraints. Parameters were non-significantly different across groups for all but two indicators of political participation. The effect of political self-efficacy on signing petitions was higher in Greece than in Spain and Italy (p < .05). The effect on working for political parties was lower in Spain than in the other countries (p < .01).

Table 3.

Criterion Validity of the PPSE-S in Three Countries.

	Italy	Spain	Greece
Contacted a politician	.35^a	.39^a	.34^a
Worked in a party	.34^a	.19^b	.42^a
Worked in political organizations	.44^a	.43^a	.29^a
Displayed a badge	.31^a	.35^a	.42^a
Signed a petition	.23^a	.24^a	.37^b
Taken part in public demonstrations	.33^a	.30^a	.26^a
Boycotted products	.20^a	.25^a	.19^a

Note. All coefficients are significantly different from zero (p < .05). Correlations with different letters (a, b) differ significantly (p < .05) across countries. PPSE-S = Perceived Political Self-Efficacy scale–Short Form.

Discussion

Political participation is a key issue in theories of democracy and citizenship. As has been argued (e.g., Bandura, 2001; Zimmerman, 1989), the judgments citizens hold about their capability to accomplish the desired results in the political domain are among the most critical determinants of political and civic engagement. Previous findings (e.g., Fernández-Ballesteros, Díez-Nicolás, Caprara, Barbaranelli, & Bandura, 2002; Vecchione & Caprara, 2009) showed that people’s sense of political efficacy can be better understood within social cognitive theory, a broad theory of human agency that assigns to self-efficacy beliefs a decisive role in enabling people to act purposefully in accordance with their own standard and to shape their course of life (Bandura, 2001; Caprara & Cervone, 2000). In accordance with Bandura’s (2006) recommendations, Caprara and colleagues (2009) developed a measure of perceived political self-efficacy. This scale assessed people’s beliefs to be able to take an agentic role in the realm of politics.

In the current study, we developed a shortened version of the scale, and assessed its psychometric properties using data from three countries. In choosing the items of the short form, we preferred to include statements tapping basic tasks and activities that do not require holding position of responsibility (e.g., “Use the means you have as a citizen to critically monitor the actions of your political representatives”). We are aware that political efficacy expresses across a variety of activities that are differently demanding in terms of effort and responsibility, such as voting, petitioning, campaigning for one’s own political party, mobilizing voters, fundraising, holding important political offices, and many others. All these activities, however, require that individuals believe they have a few basic capacities that are crucial at all levels of political involvement. These are the abilities to voice one’s own political opinions and preferences, to monitor one’s own political representatives, and to support one’s own party or movement. People who lack a sense of mastery over such capacities are likely to nurture feelings of distance and alienation that lead them to withdraw from any kind of political engagement.

After having ascertained the psychometric properties of the short form in an Italian sample, we examined its validity in a cross-cultural perspective. Findings provided evidence of configural and metric invariance across Italy, Spain, and Greece, corroborating the robustness of the instrument and the generalizability of the construct. Scalar invariance across countries, by contrast, was not fully supported. In particular, the intercepts of Items 3 and 4 were not equivalent across groups (i.e., scores have different measurement origins across countries).¹ This result is not particularly surprising. As Horn (1991) pointed out, full measurement invariance can be considered an ideal condition that is not expected to be fully realized. From a practical point of view, it is important to note that at least one intercept was equivalent across groups, so that latent means of the PPSE-S can be compared cross-culturally (Byrne et al., 1989; Meredith & Horn, 2001). This comparison revealed that average levels of perceived political self-efficacy are remarkably similar across citizens of Italy, Spain, and Greece.

We also examined the extent to which beliefs people hold about their capacities to engage in politics are conducive to political participation in each country. Results showed that perceived political self-efficacy was positively related with several indicators of political participation, supporting the role of self-efficacy beliefs in sustaining citizens’ engagement in politics, as well as the criterion validity of the PPSE-S. A cross-cultural comparison revealed that the effect of self-efficacy beliefs was similar across countries. Significant differences emerged only for signing petitions and working for political parties. These results might be due to cultural differences in the way the two forms of participation are perceived. Survey data from representative samples (Standard Eurobarometer, 2010) revealed that respondents in Greece were more likely (21%) than respondents in Italy (12%) and Spain (10%) to mention signing petition as one of the best ways to ensure that one’s voice is heard. This might explain why political self-efficacy beliefs, which include the perceived ability to voice one’s opinions, are more predictive in Greece than in other countries. A similar explanation might apply, at least in part, to the low predictive validity observed in Spain with respect to “working for parties.” This form of participation has been mentioned by 18% of respondents in Italy, and only 10% in Spain and Greece. Correlations in Spain might be further reduced by a statistical artifact, as point–biserial correlations tend to be lower when the proportion of cases in the grouping variable are skewed. In our data, only the 6.5% of Spanish participants has worked for a political party (vs. 17.5% in Italy, and 13.6% in Greece), which is the lowest proportion of cases observed across countries and types of participation.

There are some limitations to this research. First, results are based on convenience samples that did not represent the general population, and differ both in size and in demographic composition. Moreover, the study focuses on three Southern European countries. We do not know to which extent the same findings apply to other countries from different geo-political regions that differ more widely in socio-economic and cultural characteristics. Whereas future research should broaden the generalizability of findings across samples and populations, the present study attests to the stability of the psychometric properties of the PPSE-S across three European countries. The availability of a short, reliable scale that maintains similar metric properties across different populations may be particularly suited to be included in cross-national studies aimed to investigate the personal determinants of citizens’ engagement in politics. Our results, indeed, suggest that the proposed reduction from 10 to 4 items does not alter the psychometric qualities of the scale. The short form seems therefore preferable to the full version in that it avoids unnecessary complexity and is more efficient in terms of time and costs. Finally, the PPSE-S has the advantage of being embedded in a general theory of personality that provides the foundation for human motivation and suggests appropriate interventions aimed to foster citizens’ sense of mastery in their abilities to contribute to the functioning of participatory democracy.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biographies

Michele Vecchione is a researcher in psychology at Sapienza University of Rome, Italy. He received his PhD in Personality and Social Psychology from University of Padua. His research interests focus on psychological assessment and multivariate statistics in the field of personality and social psychology.

Gian Vittorio Caprara is a full professor of personality psychology at the Sapienza University of Rome, Italy. His primary research interests focus on personality development and assessment and psychosocial adjustment.

Maria Giovanna Caprara is a professor of psychology at the Open University of Madrid (UDIMA). She received her PhD in psychology from Autonoma University of Madrid. Her research interests focus on psychogerontology and social gerontology, promoting active aging, determinants of well-being in older people.

Guido Alessandri, is an assistant professor at Sapienza University of Rome, Italy, where he received his PhD in personality and social psychology. His primary research interests focus on personality development and assessment, psychological measurement, and multivariate statistics.

Carmen Tabernero, PhD, is a professor in social psychology at the University of Cordoba, Spain. Her main research interest focuses on the analysis of motivational processes at individual and collective levels (e.g., self- and collective-efficacy, goals, and emotional states) related to behavior (e.g., complex decision-making processes, or prosocial behaviors).

José Luis González-Castro is currently an associate professor of social psychology at the University of Burgos (Spain). His research interests are in the areas of social identities, collective memory, political psychology, and disadvantaged groups. He has authored various articles, book chapters, and reports on the effects of identity formation and maintenance on social and political relationships.

References

Balch

(1974). Multiple indicators in survey research: The concept “sense of political efficacy.” Political Methodology, 1, 1-43.

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura

(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.

Bandura

(2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Reviews of Psychology, 52, 1-26.

Bandura

(2006). Guide to the construction of self-efficacy scales. In Pajares

Urdan

(Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (Vol. 5, pp. 307-337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Bentler

P. M.

(2001). EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.

Brown

T. A.

(2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Byrne

B. M.

Shavelson

R. J.

Muthén

(1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456-466.

Campbell

Gurin

Miller

(1954). The voter decides. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.

10.

Caprara

G. V.

Cervone

(2000). Personality: Determinants, dynamics and potentials. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

11.

Caprara

G. V.

Vecchione

Alessandri

Gerbino

Barbaranelli

(2011). The contribution of personality traits and self-efficacy beliefs to academic achievement: A longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 78-96.

12.

Caprara

G. V.

Vecchione

Capanna

Mebane

(2009). Perceived political self-efficacy: Theory, assessment, and applications. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 1002-1020.

13.

Cervone

Shoda

(1999). The coherence of personality: Social-cognitive bases of consistency, variability, and organization. New York, NY: Guilford Press

14.

Chen

F. F.

(2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464-504.

15.

Fernández-Ballesteros

Díez-Nicolás

Caprara

G. V.

Barbaranelli

Bandura

(2002). Determinants and structural relation of personal efficacy to collective efficacy. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 107-125.

16.

Haynes

S. N.

Richard

D. C. S.

Kubany

E. S.

(1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7, 238-247.

17.

Horn

J. L.

(1991). Comments on “issues in factorial invariance.” In Collins

L. M.

Horn

J. L.

(Eds.), Best methods for the analysis of change (pp. 115–125). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

18.

Jöreskog

K. G.

(2004). Structural equation modeling with ordinal variables using LISREL. Available from http://www.ssicentral.com

19.

Meredith

Horn

(2001). The role of factorial invariance in modeling growth and change. In Collins

L. M.

Sayer

A. G.

(Eds.), New methods for the analysis of change (pp. 203-240). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

20.

Milbrath

Goel

M. L.

(1977). Political participation (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

21.

Morrell

M. E.

(2003). Survey and experimental evidence for a reliable and valid measure of political efficacy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 589-602.

22.

Niemi

R. G.

Craig

S. C.

Mattei

(1991). Measuring Internal political efficacy in the 1988 national election study. American Political Science Review, 85, 1407-1413.

23.

Saris

W. E.

Torcal

(2009). Alternative measurement procedures and models for political efficacy (Working Paper 3). Research and Expertise Centre for Survey Methodology, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.

24.

Satorra

Bentler

P. M.

(2010). Ensuring positiveness of the scaled difference chi-square test statistic. Psychometrika, 75, 243-248.

25.

Smith

G. T.

McCarthy

D. M.

Anderson

K. G.

(2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychological Assessment, 12, 102-111.

26.

Stajkovic

A. D.

Luthans

(1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240-261.

27.

Standard Eurobarometer. (2010, May). Public opinion in the European Union (Report, Vol. 2). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm

28.

Steenkamp

J.-B. E. M.

Baumgartner

(1998). Assessing measurement invariance in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 78-90.

29.

Vecchione

Caprara

G. V.

(2009). Personality determinants of political participation: The contribution of traits and self-efficacy beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 487-492.

30.

Verba

Schlozman

K. L.

Brady

(1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

31.

Zimmerman

M. A.

(1989). The relationship between political efficacy and citizen participation: Construct validation studies. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53, 554-566.

32.

Zimmerman

M. A.

Zahniser

J. H.

(1991). Refinements of sphere-specific measures of perceived control: Development of a sociopolitical control scale. Journal of Community Psychology, 19, 189-204.

The Perceived Political Self-Efficacy Scale–Short Form (PPSE-S)

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Material and Method

Participants and Procedures

Italy

Spain

Greece

Measures

Perceived political self-efficacy

Political participation

Results

The Development of a Short Form of the PPSE (PPSE-S): A Validation Study in Italy

Measurement Invariance Across Countries

Criterion Validity Across Countries

Discussion

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

Notes

Author Biographies

References