Pilarov Barometar Hrvatskog Društva

Samples and Implementation

Following approval from the Ethics Committee at the Ivo Pilar Institute, a field surveys were conducted between 24th March and 8th May 2014, 19th March and 16th May 2015, 15th April and 15th May 2016, on a representative samples of adults (18 years and over) that included 1,000 (2014 and 2015) and 750 persons (2016)

A multistaged, proportionally stratified samples (with randomly selected units within each strata) included all counties within which settlements were classified according to the formal criteria of urban and other types. The selection of settlements and number of sample points depended on their share in the mentioned strata. Households in each sample point were selected by a systematic random procedure from a list of addresses, while the selection of respondents within households was made using the first birthday method. According to the described procedure, 102 settlements (143 sample points) were chosen in which the survey was conducted. In cases where the survey was not possible to conduct at the given addresses (due to refusal, longer absence of a suitable respondent), other households at the same micro-locations were chosen.

To reduce the proportion of non responses on specific issues and to ensure the most possible honest answers, the people surveyed, except for a description of the way they were chosen and the ways the results would be used (random selection of households and individuals; statistical analysis solely on a group basis), anonymity was guaranteed to respondents in a number of ways: questionnaires were not signed, the names of respondents were not recorded and after the interview they could mix up their questionnaire among the other questionnaires, to prevent a subsequent connection of their responses to them.

During the survey 2014, 33.5% contacted persons refused to participate; during the survey 2015 26.1%, and during the survey 2016 36.5%. Refusals caused a slight difference in the socio-demographic structure of the realised samples from the population parameters only by level of education. Weighting the results according to this criterion (0.83 to 1.30 2014; 0.86 to 1.17 2015; 0.85 to 1.21 2016) did not undermine the proportional ratios of other relevant socio-demographic characteristics. The realised sample size allows for estimation of population parameters in the range of reliability which does not exceed 3.1% (at a 95% confidence level)

As part of Pilar’s barometer, various methodological analyses will be periodically carried out. The analysis results will be published in scientific periodicals and the main findings (with links to the full text) will be presented on this website.

Questionnaire

In addition to ad hoc constructed questions and measures, several questions from previous research conducted by the Institute as well as two international studies: the World Values Survey and the European Social Research were used in the survey questionnaires. Additionally, the following psychological scales were included:

2014

Adapted International Well-Being Index) / Cummins, R. A., Eckersley, R., Pallant, J., van Vugt, J., & Misajon, R. (2003). Developing a national index of subjective wellbeing: The Australian Unity Wellbeing Index. Social Indicators Research, 64, 159-190.

Adapted APGAR: Adaptation, Partnership, Growth, Affection, Resolve) / Smilkstein, G. (1978). The family APGAR: A proposal for a family function test and its use by physicians. The Journal of Family Practice, 6, 1231-1240.

Neighborhood Relations Scale / Prezza, M., Amici, M., Roberti, T., & Tedeschi, G. (2001). Sense of community referred to the whole town: Its relations with neighboring, loneliness, life satisfaction, and area of residence. Journal of Community Psychology, 29(1), 29–52.

Short version of the Personal Values Questionnaire (PVQ) used in the World Values Survey (10 items) Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehrnami, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 519-542.

Short version of the Material Values Scale / Richins, M. L. (2004). The Material Values Scale: Measurement Properties and Development of a Short Form. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 209-219.

2015

Adapted International Well-Being Index / Cummins, R. A., Eckersley, R., Pallant, J., van Vugt, J. & Misajon, R. (2003). Developing a national index of subjective wellbeing: The Australian Unity Wellbeing Index. Social Indicators Research, 64, 159-190.

LOT-R revised Life Orientation Test) / Scheier, M., Carver, C, Bridges, M. (1994). Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): A reevaluation of the life orientation test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1063-1078.

MARS – Measure of affect regulation styles) / Larsen, R. J., Prizmic, Z. (2004). Affect regulation. U: R. Baumeister i K. Vohs (ur.), Handbook of self-regulation research (str. 40-60). New York: Guilford.

Social network index) / Cohen, S., Doyle,W. J., Skoner, D. P., Rabin, B. S., and Gwaltney, J. M., Jr. (1997). Social ties and susceptibility to the common cold. Journal of the American Medical Association, 277, 1940-1944.

2016

Method