Cargando…

An Empirical Comparison of Human Value Models

Over the past century, various value models have been proposed. To determine which value model best predicts prosocial behavior, mental health, and pro-environmental behavior, we subjected seven value models to a hierarchical regression analysis. A sample of University students (N = 271) completed t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hanel, Paul H. P., Litzellachner, Lukas F., Maio, Gregory R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6167453/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30319476
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01643
_version_ 1783360201222520832
author Hanel, Paul H. P.
Litzellachner, Lukas F.
Maio, Gregory R.
author_facet Hanel, Paul H. P.
Litzellachner, Lukas F.
Maio, Gregory R.
author_sort Hanel, Paul H. P.
collection PubMed
description Over the past century, various value models have been proposed. To determine which value model best predicts prosocial behavior, mental health, and pro-environmental behavior, we subjected seven value models to a hierarchical regression analysis. A sample of University students (N = 271) completed the Portrait Value Questionnaire (Schwartz et al., 2012), the Basic Value Survey (Gouveia et al., 2008), and the Social Value Orientation scale (Van Lange et al., 1997). Additionally, they completed the Values Survey Module (Hofstede and Minkov, 2013), Inglehart’s (1977) materialism–postmaterialism items, the Study of Values, fourth edition (Allport et al., 1960; Kopelman et al., 2003), and the Rokeach (1973) Value Survey. However, because the reliability of the latter measures was low, only the PVQ-RR, the BVS, and the SVO where entered into our analysis. Our results provide empirical evidence that the PVQ-RR is the strongest predictor of all three outcome variables, explaining variance above and beyond the other two instruments in almost all cases. The BVS significantly predicted prosocial and pro-environmental behavior, while the SVO only explained variance in pro-environmental behavior.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6167453
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61674532018-10-12 An Empirical Comparison of Human Value Models Hanel, Paul H. P. Litzellachner, Lukas F. Maio, Gregory R. Front Psychol Psychology Over the past century, various value models have been proposed. To determine which value model best predicts prosocial behavior, mental health, and pro-environmental behavior, we subjected seven value models to a hierarchical regression analysis. A sample of University students (N = 271) completed the Portrait Value Questionnaire (Schwartz et al., 2012), the Basic Value Survey (Gouveia et al., 2008), and the Social Value Orientation scale (Van Lange et al., 1997). Additionally, they completed the Values Survey Module (Hofstede and Minkov, 2013), Inglehart’s (1977) materialism–postmaterialism items, the Study of Values, fourth edition (Allport et al., 1960; Kopelman et al., 2003), and the Rokeach (1973) Value Survey. However, because the reliability of the latter measures was low, only the PVQ-RR, the BVS, and the SVO where entered into our analysis. Our results provide empirical evidence that the PVQ-RR is the strongest predictor of all three outcome variables, explaining variance above and beyond the other two instruments in almost all cases. The BVS significantly predicted prosocial and pro-environmental behavior, while the SVO only explained variance in pro-environmental behavior. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6167453/ /pubmed/30319476 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01643 Text en Copyright © 2018 Hanel, Litzellachner and Maio. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Hanel, Paul H. P.
Litzellachner, Lukas F.
Maio, Gregory R.
An Empirical Comparison of Human Value Models
title An Empirical Comparison of Human Value Models
title_full An Empirical Comparison of Human Value Models
title_fullStr An Empirical Comparison of Human Value Models
title_full_unstemmed An Empirical Comparison of Human Value Models
title_short An Empirical Comparison of Human Value Models
title_sort empirical comparison of human value models
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6167453/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30319476
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01643
work_keys_str_mv AT hanelpaulhp anempiricalcomparisonofhumanvaluemodels
AT litzellachnerlukasf anempiricalcomparisonofhumanvaluemodels
AT maiogregoryr anempiricalcomparisonofhumanvaluemodels
AT hanelpaulhp empiricalcomparisonofhumanvaluemodels
AT litzellachnerlukasf empiricalcomparisonofhumanvaluemodels
AT maiogregoryr empiricalcomparisonofhumanvaluemodels