This study (N = 770) explores in depth the construct of deprovincialization by both uniting and comparing two scales that assess its two facets: the Group Deprovincialization Scale (GDS; Martinovic & Verkuyten, 2013) and the Cultural Deprovincialization Scale (CDS, Boin et al., 2020). First, we tested the factorial structure of the construct through confirmatory factor analyses. Second, we compared the mean scores of the GDS and the CDS and a list of variables related to individual dispositions and intergroup outcomes for participants who had (vs. had not) lived abroad. Then, we explored the nomological net of correlates of deprovincialization to examine whether the GDS and the CDS differed in their relationship with the correlates. Finally, we tested the simultaneous relationships of both scales with a subset of variables via network analysis. Results offer insights on the important construct of deprovincialization, its assessment, and the relevance of its facets, showing that the GDS and te CDS tap into related yet different nuances of the broad deprovincialization construct. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.

The nature of deprovincialism: Assessment, nomological network, and comparison of cultural and group deprovincialization

Lucarini, Alice;Boin, Jessica;Fuochi, Giulia;Voci, Alberto
;
2023

Abstract

This study (N = 770) explores in depth the construct of deprovincialization by both uniting and comparing two scales that assess its two facets: the Group Deprovincialization Scale (GDS; Martinovic & Verkuyten, 2013) and the Cultural Deprovincialization Scale (CDS, Boin et al., 2020). First, we tested the factorial structure of the construct through confirmatory factor analyses. Second, we compared the mean scores of the GDS and the CDS and a list of variables related to individual dispositions and intergroup outcomes for participants who had (vs. had not) lived abroad. Then, we explored the nomological net of correlates of deprovincialization to examine whether the GDS and the CDS differed in their relationship with the correlates. Finally, we tested the simultaneous relationships of both scales with a subset of variables via network analysis. Results offer insights on the important construct of deprovincialization, its assessment, and the relevance of its facets, showing that the GDS and te CDS tap into related yet different nuances of the broad deprovincialization construct. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11577/3506753
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact