Elmar Schlüter

Using a Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling Approach to Explain Cross-Cultural Measurement Noninvariance

Testing for invariance of measurements across groups (such as countries or time points) is essential before meaningful comparisons may be conducted. However, when tested, invariance is often absent. As a result, comparisons across groups are potentially problematic and may be biased. In the current study, we propose utilizing a multilevel structural equation modeling (SEM) approach to provide a framework to explain item bias. We show how variation in a contextual variable may explain noninvariance. For the illustration of the method, we use data from the second round of the European Social Survey (ESS).

Public, expert and patients' opinions on preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in Germany.

The regulation of reproductive medicine technologies differs significantly among Western industrialized countries. In Germany, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is prohibited due to the Embryo Protection Act, which came into force in 1991. In the last 5 years, this prohibition has been vigorously debated. In the present studies, which are part of the German research programme on ethical implications of the Human Genome Project, representative surveys were undertaken to assess the attitudes on PGD in the general population (n = 1017), five relevant expert groups (n = 879), high genetic risk couples (n = 324) and couples undergoing IVF (n = 108). All groups surveyed clearly favoured allowing PGD in Germany. Compared with the results of recently conducted population surveys in the UK and the USA, where PGD is already carried out, public approval of PGD does not differ significantly. The influence of restrictive biopolitics on the apparently liberal public opinion towards new reproductive technology seems to be marginal according to the present data, which should carefully be considered in the ongoing legislation process on human reproduction.

Individual- and group-level effects of social identification on workplace bullying

A study of 494 employees nested in workgroups from 19 different organizations revealed group identification to be an important factor influencing work-related bullying at both the individual and the group level. Results show that the more employees identified with their group, the less likely they were victims of bullying, which is in line with previous social identity-based analyses of work stress. More importantly, the higher the average level of group identification in the organization, the lower the odds of being a victim versus not being a victim. The latter effect constituted a genuine context effect. These findings redress a neglect of the social bases of workplace bullying and suggest that bullying needs to be understood within a broader perspective of workgroup identities.

Analyse von Prozessen und Veränderungen

Zusammenfassung: Komplexe Veranderungen von sozialpsychologischen Merkmalen uber langere Zeitraume konnen nur mittels aufwandiger Panel-Studien untersucht werden. Zur Analyse solcher Zusammenhange werden angemessene Analysemodelle benotigt. Im vorliegenden Beitrag soll das von Bollen und Curran (2004) entwickelte autoregressive Wachstumskurvenmodell vorgestellt werden. Das Modell stellt eine Kombination von zwei etablierten Analysemethoden fur Langsschnittdaten dar. Diese sind das autoregressive Modell und das latente Wachstumskurvenmodell. Es werden die Vorteile des autoregressiven Wachstumskurvenmodells gegenuber diesen beiden bewahrten Analysemethoden diskutiert. Abschliesend wird an einem aktuellen deutschen Panel-Datensatz die Anwendung des autoregressiven Wachstumskurvenmodells demonstriert. Dabei wird der Zusammenhang zwischen ethnischen Vorurteilen und diskriminierenden Verhaltensintentionen analysiert.

Detecting Nasty Data With Simple Plots of Complex Models: Comment on Brandt (2011)

A recent research report (Brandt, 2011) suggests that sexist ideologies predict increases in gender inequality at the country level. Using advanced multilevel modeling methods, the author combined aggregated individual-level data on sexism (N > 80,000) from the World Values Survey (World Values Survey Association, 2009) with country-level data on gender inequality (N < 60) from United Nations Human Development Reports. We were curious and plotted the sexism effect based on the data printed in the article. Figure 1 reveals that the effect was driven by only a few influential cases. When we replicated Brandt’s (2011) analysis in Mplus 6.1 (Muthén & Muthén, 2010), the effect dropped to nonsignificance after we excluded Switzerland, and was reduced to virtually zero after we excluded three further outliers. Our reanalysis casts serious doubts on Brandt’s (2011) conclusion. We are not suggesting that it would have been better for these influential cases to have been deleted. However, they should have been discussed so that readers could assess the robustness of the effect. Furthermore, unusual cases often tell their own important stories, which may critically inform future research (McClelland, 2002). The problem may become more general as psychologists become increasingly interested in applying their theories to states or countries as units of analysis (e.g., Rindermann & Thompson, 2011). With such natural limits to sample size in place, it is especially important to carefully check the data using simple plots. Unfortunately, in complex models with multiple predictor variables, “nasty” data may not be apparent in bivariate plots of the original data. In his study, Brandt (2011) regressed the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) at Time 2 on two control variables (GEM and the Human Development Index, or HDI, at Time 1) in addition to sexism at Time 1. Thus, to produce Figure 1, we removed the variance shared with these control variables from the dependent variable and the independent variable (see Lane & Sándor, 2009, p. 248, for a similar approach). That is, we regressed sexism at Time 1 and GEM at Time 2 on GEM and HDI at Time 1 and saved the residuals in both cases to obtain the independent and dependent variables shown in Figure 1. Positive values on the dependent variable indicate increases in gender equality relative to what would be predicted on the basis of Time 1 GEM and HDI. Similarly, positive values on the independent variable indicate greater sexism than would be predicted on the basis of Time 1 GEM and HDI. As McClelland (2002) explained, “the really nasty observations . . . are those that have both predictor and criterion values that are at least a little bit weird” (p. 403). Trinidad and Tobago is an outlier on the criterion variable but average on the predictor variable. However, Switzerland, Italy, and the United States are nasty data in the sense that they have a disproportionate influence on the regression results. In other words, had the United States not been too sexist for a developed country at Time 1, and had Switzerland and Italy not scored so low on sexism, Brandt (2011) would not have obtained evidence for an effect of sexism on gender inequality.

Welche Erklärung für Fremdenfeindlichkeit: relative Deprivation oder Autoritarismus?

Nach der Vereinigung beider deutscher Staaten im Jahr 1990 hat sich neben dem Verhaltnis zwischen Ost- und Westdeutschen die Beziehung zwischen Deutschen und Auslandern als besonders zentral fur die weitere Entwicklung Deutschlands erwiesen. Sowohl im Verhaltnis zwischen Ost- und Westdeutschen als auch in den Beziehungen zwischen Deutschen und den in Deutschland lebenden Auslandern stellt sich die Frage nach gerechter Verteilung (Kluegel/Mason/Wegener 1995). Diese bezieht sich aber nicht nur auf objektive Faktoren, wie das Erreichen bestimmter Bildungsabschlusse, beruflicher Positionen und das Einkommen. Vielmehr wirken die objektiven sozialstukturellen Merkmale auf das Mas der wahrgenommenen Benachteiligung auf individueller und gruppenbezogener Ebene. In der Debatte um die Erklarung des Ausmases der Abwertung von Auslandern werden zwei Erklarungsansatze besonders haufig genannt:

How national identification enhances anti-immigrant prejudice: Development and empirical test of individual-, contextual-, and cross-level explanations

Social scientists have long recognized that national identification can enhance anti-immigrant prejudice. Most studies in this field, however, have tended to focus on individual-level relations only. Although this line of research has much to offer (e.g., Blank and Schmidt, 2003), we suggest that an even more comprehensive understanding of how national identification links to anti-immigrant prejudice becomes attainable when characteristics of the proximate social contexts individuals live in are taken into account. In this chapter, we address this task in the following manner: First, as a theoretical contribution, we specify and integrate individual-, contextual- and rosslevel explanations on how national identification relates to anti-immigrant prejudice. Second, as a methodological contribution, we examine our theoretical expectations using latent variable contextual models – a powerful and flexible combination of structural equation and multilevel modeling. Third, for our empirical tests, we utilize unique large-scale survey data collected among students within German secondary schools. Doing so is critical, for it offers potentially important knowledge for policy interventions aiming to alter the prevalence of anti-immigrant attitudes in educational settings.

Brain Drain in der Stammzellforschung?@@@Brain drain in stem cell research? The views and attitudes of stem cell researchers in Germany: Erste Ergebnisse einer Befragung von Wissenschaftlern zur Lage der Stammzellforschung in Deutschland

The legal status of stem cell research in Germany has most recently been debated at the highest political level. Stakeholders have argued referring to the situation of stem cell researchers in past debates; however, a survey of the views and attitudes of German stem cell researchers is currently being performed by the University of Marburg also involving a team at Exeter University. Here, we present some of the first findings from this study on the basis of 14 qualitative interviews and 117 responses to the quantitative survey. The data suggest that the motives for engaging in particular areas of research are multilayered. Respondents take a critical view towards the way in which research on human embryonic stem cells has been regulated. The majority of interviewees rejected a change in legislation involving the amendment of the cut-off date for the import of human embryonic stem cells lines. Also, the recent changes in the German regulation of stem cell research that, among other changes, include a change of the cut off date for the production of lines which could become used in the country from January 2002 to May 2007 appear not to be received as a satisfactory solution of the constraints experienced by science through the law in Germany.ZusammenfassungDie Debatte um die Situation der Stammzellforschung in Deutschland wird auf höchster politischer Ebene geführt. Es liegen hierzu verschiedene offizielle Stellungnahmen vor, unter anderem von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft. Bisher gibt es jedoch keine fundierten repräsentativen Daten über die Ansichten und Erfahrungen der betroffenen Wissenschaftler zur bzw. mit der Situation. In einem Kooperationsprojekt werden gegenwärtig deutschland- und weltweit deutschstämmige Stammzellforscher im In- und Ausland sowie aus dem Ausland stammende Stammzellforscher, die in Deutschland arbeiten, zur Lage der Stammzellforschung befragt. Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden erste Zwischenergebnisse aus 14 qualitativen Interviews mit in Deutschland und England tätigen Stammzellforschern und Nachwuchswissenschaftler sowie aus 117 Online-Befragungen in Deutschland arbeitender Wissenschaftler vorgestellt. Die Motive der Befragten, bestimmte Forschungsrichtungen zu betreiben, sind vielfältig. Die aktuelle Gesetzgebung zur Stammzellforschung wird sehr kritisch bewertet. Die Ergebnisse weisen darauf hin, dass die gerade vom Parlament verabschiedete Stichtagsverschiebung von Forschern in Deutschland als nicht befriedigend betrachtet wird.AbstractThe legal status of stem cell research in Germany has most recently been debated at the highest political level. Stakeholders have argued referring to the situation of stem cell researchers in past debates; however, a survey of the views and attitudes of German stem cell researchers is currently being performed by the University of Marburg also involving a team at Exeter University. Here, we present some of the first findings from this study on the basis of 14 qualitative interviews and 117 responses to the quantitative survey. The data suggest that the motives for engaging in particular areas of research are multilayered. Respondents take a critical view towards the way in which research on human embryonic stem cells has been regulated. The majority of interviewees rejected a change in legislation involving the amendment of the cut-off date for the import of human embryonic stem cells lines. Also, the recent changes in the German regulation of stem cell research that, among other changes, include a change of the cut off date for the production of lines which could become used in the country from January 2002 to May 2007 appear not to be received as a satisfactory solution of the constraints experienced by science through the law in Germany.

[Brain drain in stem cell research? The views and attitudes of stem cell researchers in Germany].

The legal status of stem cell research in Germany has most recently been debated at the highest political level. Stakeholders have argued referring to the situation of stem cell researchers in past debates; however, a survey of the views and attitudes of German stem cell researchers is currently being performed by the University of Marburg also involving a team at Exeter University. Here, we present some of the first findings from this study on the basis of 14 qualitative interviews and 117 responses to the quantitative survey. The data suggest that the motives for engaging in particular areas of research are multilayered. Respondents take a critical view towards the way in which research on human embryonic stem cells has been regulated. The majority of interviewees rejected a change in legislation involving the amendment of the cut-off date for the import of human embryonic stem cells lines. Also, the recent changes in the German regulation of stem cell research that, among other changes, include a change of the cut off date for the production of lines which could become used in the country from January 2002 to May 2007 appear not to be received as a satisfactory solution of the constraints experienced by science through the law in Germany.ZusammenfassungDie Debatte um die Situation der Stammzellforschung in Deutschland wird auf höchster politischer Ebene geführt. Es liegen hierzu verschiedene offizielle Stellungnahmen vor, unter anderem von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft. Bisher gibt es jedoch keine fundierten repräsentativen Daten über die Ansichten und Erfahrungen der betroffenen Wissenschaftler zur bzw. mit der Situation. In einem Kooperationsprojekt werden gegenwärtig deutschland- und weltweit deutschstämmige Stammzellforscher im In- und Ausland sowie aus dem Ausland stammende Stammzellforscher, die in Deutschland arbeiten, zur Lage der Stammzellforschung befragt. Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden erste Zwischenergebnisse aus 14 qualitativen Interviews mit in Deutschland und England tätigen Stammzellforschern und Nachwuchswissenschaftler sowie aus 117 Online-Befragungen in Deutschland arbeitender Wissenschaftler vorgestellt. Die Motive der Befragten, bestimmte Forschungsrichtungen zu betreiben, sind vielfältig. Die aktuelle Gesetzgebung zur Stammzellforschung wird sehr kritisch bewertet. Die Ergebnisse weisen darauf hin, dass die gerade vom Parlament verabschiedete Stichtagsverschiebung von Forschern in Deutschland als nicht befriedigend betrachtet wird.AbstractThe legal status of stem cell research in Germany has most recently been debated at the highest political level. Stakeholders have argued referring to the situation of stem cell researchers in past debates; however, a survey of the views and attitudes of German stem cell researchers is currently being performed by the University of Marburg also involving a team at Exeter University. Here, we present some of the first findings from this study on the basis of 14 qualitative interviews and 117 responses to the quantitative survey. The data suggest that the motives for engaging in particular areas of research are multilayered. Respondents take a critical view towards the way in which research on human embryonic stem cells has been regulated. The majority of interviewees rejected a change in legislation involving the amendment of the cut-off date for the import of human embryonic stem cells lines. Also, the recent changes in the German regulation of stem cell research that, among other changes, include a change of the cut off date for the production of lines which could become used in the country from January 2002 to May 2007 appear not to be received as a satisfactory solution of the constraints experienced by science through the law in Germany.

Brain Drain in der Stammzellforschung

The legal status of stem cell research in Germany has most recently been debated at the highest political level. Stakeholders have argued referring to the situation of stem cell researchers in past debates; however, a survey of the views and attitudes of German stem cell researchers is currently being performed by the University of Marburg also involving a team at Exeter University. Here, we present some of the first findings from this study on the basis of 14 qualitative interviews and 117 responses to the quantitative survey. The data suggest that the motives for engaging in particular areas of research are multilayered. Respondents take a critical view towards the way in which research on human embryonic stem cells has been regulated. The majority of interviewees rejected a change in legislation involving the amendment of the cut-off date for the import of human embryonic stem cells lines. Also, the recent changes in the German regulation of stem cell research that, among other changes, include a change of the cut off date for the production of lines which could become used in the country from January 2002 to May 2007 appear not to be received as a satisfactory solution of the constraints experienced by science through the law in Germany.ZusammenfassungDie Debatte um die Situation der Stammzellforschung in Deutschland wird auf höchster politischer Ebene geführt. Es liegen hierzu verschiedene offizielle Stellungnahmen vor, unter anderem von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft. Bisher gibt es jedoch keine fundierten repräsentativen Daten über die Ansichten und Erfahrungen der betroffenen Wissenschaftler zur bzw. mit der Situation. In einem Kooperationsprojekt werden gegenwärtig deutschland- und weltweit deutschstämmige Stammzellforscher im In- und Ausland sowie aus dem Ausland stammende Stammzellforscher, die in Deutschland arbeiten, zur Lage der Stammzellforschung befragt. Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden erste Zwischenergebnisse aus 14 qualitativen Interviews mit in Deutschland und England tätigen Stammzellforschern und Nachwuchswissenschaftler sowie aus 117 Online-Befragungen in Deutschland arbeitender Wissenschaftler vorgestellt. Die Motive der Befragten, bestimmte Forschungsrichtungen zu betreiben, sind vielfältig. Die aktuelle Gesetzgebung zur Stammzellforschung wird sehr kritisch bewertet. Die Ergebnisse weisen darauf hin, dass die gerade vom Parlament verabschiedete Stichtagsverschiebung von Forschern in Deutschland als nicht befriedigend betrachtet wird.AbstractThe legal status of stem cell research in Germany has most recently been debated at the highest political level. Stakeholders have argued referring to the situation of stem cell researchers in past debates; however, a survey of the views and attitudes of German stem cell researchers is currently being performed by the University of Marburg also involving a team at Exeter University. Here, we present some of the first findings from this study on the basis of 14 qualitative interviews and 117 responses to the quantitative survey. The data suggest that the motives for engaging in particular areas of research are multilayered. Respondents take a critical view towards the way in which research on human embryonic stem cells has been regulated. The majority of interviewees rejected a change in legislation involving the amendment of the cut-off date for the import of human embryonic stem cells lines. Also, the recent changes in the German regulation of stem cell research that, among other changes, include a change of the cut off date for the production of lines which could become used in the country from January 2002 to May 2007 appear not to be received as a satisfactory solution of the constraints experienced by science through the law in Germany.