We do not measure what we aim to measure: Testing Three Measurement Models for Nationalism and Patriotism

Abstract

The measurement models for both nationalism and patriotism originally developed by Blank and Schmidt are broadly established. Despite their widespread usage in Germany and beyond, concerns have been voiced about the operationalisation of these nation-related concepts. However, in previous scholarship little attention has been devoted to systematically reviewing the models’ validity. This paper’s major goal is to contribute substantially to research on operationalising national attitudes by thoroughly examining how both nationalism and patriotism are measured and how valid the predominant measurement models really are. By running a confirmatory factor analysis, three measurement models based on the ISSP data of 2003 are replicated and empirically reviewed. By conducting a single-country analysis, the models are tested for the German case, including the evaluation of measurement invariance for both Eastern and Western Germany. Although the selected measurement models yield satisfying results, the paper identifies considerable shortcomings with regard to the way both nationalism and patriotism are empirically approached. It calls for a reconceptualising of the prevailing concept of pride and thus challenges the predominant operationalisation.

A Move Forward: Exploring National Identity Through Non-linear Principal Component Analysis in Germany

“…On the first dimension, we find items related to nationalistic attitudes, such as the belief in the intrinsic superiority of one's nation accompanied by the unconditional allegiance to it (e.g. Kosterman and Feshbach 1989;Blank and Schmidt 2003;Davidov 2009;Mußotter 2021), 2 on the second we find items referring to various aspects of "positive" national pride as well as the attachment that one feels towards their country; on the third dimension we find items relating to "negative" national pride and a broad range of cosmopolitan attitudes; on the fourth dimension we find items that cover both ascriptive and elective traits one ought to have to be seen by others as…”

The relationship between patriotism and regional identification: a cross-country analysis

“…A confirmatory factor analysis tests the independence of the items evaluation of patriotism, patriotism itself, chauvinistic nationalism and regional identification from each other following Mußotter ( 2021 ). The test results are acceptable ( Χ 2 = 1968.016; df = 29; p < 0.001; CFI = 0.985; TLI = 0.977; SRMR = 0.036; RMSEA = 0.049) with factor loadings between 0.63 and 0.91.…”

“…The test results are acceptable ( Χ 2 = 1968.016; df = 29; p < 0.001; CFI = 0.985; TLI = 0.977; SRMR = 0.036; RMSEA = 0.049) with factor loadings between 0.63 and 0.91. As the scales are sums of ordinal items, the WLS estimator is used to achieve the best possible estimates (Mußotter 2021 ). The confirmatory factor analysis confirms that the four territory-based attitude scales are independent of each other.…”

“…The confirmatory factor analysis confirms that the four territory-based attitude scales are independent of each other. The measurement scales can therefore be considered as valid (Mußotter 2021 ).…”

Personality and national identity: How the Big Five relate to civic and ethnic conceptions of nationhood

“…2 2 However, the boundaries between these two approaches are often blurred, so that (conceptual) accounts of patriotism and nationalism frequently also refer to different membership criteria, and different conceptions of nationhood are also discussed in affective terms (Ariely, 2020; Mussotter, 2021). Moreover, other related concepts and terms such as national pride, belonging, or identification are discussed in the literature.…”