Reliability and Validity of the Intergroup Compromise Inventory in Two Bipartisan Samples

Abstract

Compromise is largely based on being able to come to a common perspective while sacrificing marginal values that would otherwise deny a reconciliation of disparate ideas. Due to the absence of an established intergroup compromise measure in the extant political or social psychology literature, we attempted to develop and psychometrically examine such a scale within the political psychology domain. Across two studies, we found construct and predictive validity for three scales that predict individuals’ propensity to compromise in a political context. In Study 2, we found evidence of model invariance between Democrats and Republicans, suggesting that our measures of compromise, political animus, and distrust are assessing these constructs equally for both major parties.

The Causal Effect of an Intergroup Contact Intervention on Affective Polarization around Brexit: A Randomized Controlled Trial

“…We adapted three items from the Intergroup Compromise Inventory 94 to measure willingness to compromise with the outgroup in this context (e.g., "If [outgroup members'] solution is proven to be better for the country, we should support them") on scales ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The items were combined into a reliable measure of compromise willingness (α T1 = .71; α T2 = .80; α T3 = .81).…”