The theory of human values discriminated 10 basic values arrayed in a quasicircular structure. Analyses with several instruments in numerous samples supported this structure. The refined theory of human values discriminates 19 values in the same circle. Its support depends on one instrument, the revised Portrait Values Questionnaire. We introduce a forced choice method, the Best–Worst Refined Values scale (BWVr), to assess the robustness of the refined theory to method of measurement and also assess the distinctiveness and validity of a new animal welfare value. Three studies (N = 784, 439, and 383) support the theory and the new value. Study 3 also demonstrates the convergent and discriminant validity of the 19 values by comparing the BWVr, the revised Portrait Values Questionnaire, and value-expressive behaviors and confirms the test–retest reliability of BWVr responses. These studies provide further information about the order of values in the value circle.
AllportG. W.VernonP. E.LindzeyG. (1960). Study of values. Oxford, England: Houghton Mifflin.
2.
BardiA.LeeJ. A.Hofmann-TowfighN.SoutarG. (2009). The structure of intraindividual value change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 913-929.
3.
BekkersR.WiepkingP. (2006). To give or not to give, that’s the question: How methodology is destiny in Dutch giving data. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35, 533-540.
4.
BilskyW.GollanT.RoccasS.GradH.TeixeiraM. L. M.RodriguezM.. . . Segal-CaspiL. (2015). On the relative importance of personal values: Validating Schwartz’s theory of value structures by computerized paired comparisons. Journal of Individual Differences, 36, 119-129.
5.
BilskyW.JanikM.SchwartzS. H. (2011). The structural organization of human values: Evidence from three rounds of the European Social Survey (ESS). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42, 759-776.
6.
BorgI.GroenenP. J. (2005). Modern multidimensional scaling: Theory and applications. Springer Science & Business Media.
7.
BuhrmesterM.KwangT.GoslingS. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3-5.
8.
CallicottJ. B. (1980). Animal liberation: A triangular affair. Environmental Ethics, 2, 311-338.
9.
CampbellD. T.FiskeD. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
10.
DavidH. A. (1988). The method of paired comparisons (2nd ed.). London, England: Hodder Arnold.
11.
DöringA. K.BlauensteinerA.AryusK.DrögekampL.BilskyW. (2010). Assessing values at an early age: The Picture-Based Value Survey for Children (PBVS–C). Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 439-448.
12.
DunlapR. E.Van LiereK. D.MertigA. G.JonesR. E. (2000). New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: Measuring endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-442.
FennellD. (2012). Tourism and animals ethics. Oxon, England: Routledge.
15.
FinnA.LouviereJ. J. (1992). Determining the appropriate response to evidence of public concern: The case of food safety. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 11, 12-25.
16.
FischerR. (2004). Standardization to account for cross-cultural response bias a classification of score adjustment procedures and review of research in JCCP. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 263-282.
17.
GoslingS. D.SandyC. J.PotterJ. (2010). Personalities of self-identified “dog people” and “cat people.”Anthrozoös, 23, 213-222.
HerzogH. A.GoldenL. L. (2009). Moral emotions and social activism: The case of animal rights. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 485-498.
20.
HerzogH. A.Jr.BetchartN. S.PittmanR. B. (1991). Gender, sex role orientation, and attitudes toward animals. Anthrozoös, 4, 184-191.
21.
JöreskogK. G. (1974). Analyzing psychological data by structural analysis of covariance matrices. In AtkinsonR.KrantzD.LuceR.SuppesP. (Eds.), Contemporary developments in mathematical psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1-56). San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.
22.
LeeJ. A.SoutarG.LouviereJ. (2008). The best–worst scaling approach: An alternative to Schwartz’s values survey. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 335-347.
23.
LouviereJ. J.CarsonR. T.BurgessL.StreetD.MarleyA. A. J. (2013). Sequential preference questions factors influencing completion rates and response times using an online panel. Journal of Choice Modelling, 8, 19-31.
24.
LouviereJ. J.FlynnT. N.MarleyA. A. J. (2015). Best-worst scaling: Theory, methods and applications. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
25.
LouviereJ. J.LingsI.IslamT.GuderganS.FlynnT. (2013). An introduction to the application of (case 1) best–worst scaling in marketing research. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 30, 292-303.
26.
LouviereJ. J.WoodworthG. (1983). Design and analysis of simulated consumer choice or allocation experiments: An approach based on aggregate data. Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 350-367.
27.
LuskJ. L. (2011). The market for animal welfare. Agriculture and Human Values, 28, 561-575.
28.
MaioG. R. (2010). Mental representations of social values. Advances in experimental social psychology, 42, 1-43.
29.
MalamudR. (2011). Famous animals in modern culture. In MalamudR. (Ed.), A cultural history of animals in the modern age (pp. 1-26). Oxford, England: Berg.
30.
McDonaldB. (2000). “Once you know something, you can’t not know it.” An empirical look at becoming vegan. Society & Animals, 8, 1-23.
31.
McFaddenD. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. In ZarembkaP. (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics (pp. 105-142). New York, NY: Academic Press.
32.
Merz-PerezL.HeideK. M. (2003). Animal cruelty: Pathway to violence against people. Oxford, England: Rowman AltaMira.
33.
NeumannS. L. (2010). Animal welfare volunteers: Who are they and why do they do what they do?Anthrozoös, 23, 351-364.
34.
OishiS.SchimmackU.DienerE.SuhE. M. (1998). The measurement of values and individualism-collectivism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1177-1189.
35.
PaulE. S.PodberscekA. L. (2000). Veterinary education and students’ attitudes towards animal welfare. Veterinary Record, 146, 269-272.
36.
PhillipsC. J. C. (2008). The welfare of animals: The silent majority (Vol. 8). Netherlands: Springer Science & Business Media.
37.
PhillipsC. J. C.IzmirliS.AldavoodS. J.AlonsoM.ChoeB. I.HanlonA.. . . RehnT. (2012). Students’ attitudes to animal welfare and rights in Europe and Asia. Animal Welfare, 21, 87-100.
38.
ReganT. (1987). The case for animal rights. Berkley: University of California Press.
39.
RindskopfD. (1984). Using phantom and imaginary latent variables to parameterize constraints in linear structural models, Psychometrika, 49, 37-47.
40.
RoccasS.SagivL. (2010). Personal values and behavior: Taking the cultural context into account. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 30-41.
41.
RokeachM. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes, and values: A theory of organization and change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
42.
RokeachM. (1973). The nature of human values. Detroit, MI: Free Press.
43.
RollinB. E. (2010). Why is agricultural animal welfare important? The social and ethical context. In GrandinT. (Ed.), Improving animal welfare: A practical approach (pp. 21-31). Cambridge, MA: CAB International.
44.
SagivL.SverdlikN.SchwarzN. (2011). To compete or to cooperate? Values’ impact on perception and action in social dilemma games. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 64-77.
45.
SagoffM. (1984). Animal liberation and environmental ethics: Bad marriage, quick divorce. Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 22, 297-307.
46.
SarkarS. (2005). Biodiversity and environmental philosophy: An introduction. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
47.
SchwartzS. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65.
48.
SchwartzS. H. (2006). Les valeurs de base de la personne: Théorie, mesures et applications [Basic human values: Theory, measurement, and applications]. Revue Française de Sociologie, 47, 249-288.
49.
SchwartzS. H. (2015). Basic individual values: Sources and consequences. In SanderD.BroschT. (Eds.), Handbook of value (pp.63-84). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
SchwartzS. H.ButenkoT. (2014). Values and behavior: Validating the refined value theory in Russia. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 799-813.
52.
SchwartzS. H.CieciuchJ.VecchioneM.DavidovE.FischerR.BeierleinC.. . . KontyM. (2012). Refining the theory of basic individual values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 663-688.
53.
SchwartzS. H.CieciuchJ.VecchioneM.TorresC.Dirilem-GumusO.ButenkoT. (2017). Value tradeoffs and behavior in four countries: Validating 19 refined values. European Journal of Social Psychology.
54.
SchwartzS. H.MelechG.LehmannA.BurgessS.HarrisM.OwensV. (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.
55.
SchwartzS. H.SagivL. (1995). Identifying culture specifics in the content and structure of values. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 92-116.
56.
SingerP. (1990). Animal liberation (New rev. ed.). New York, NY: Avon Books.
57.
SouléM. E. (1985). What is conservation biology?BioScience, 35, 727-734.
58.
SneddonJ.LeeJ.BallantyneR.PackerJ. (2016). Animal welfare values and tourist behaviour. Annals of Tourism Research, 57, 234-236. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2016.01.006
59.
ThurstoneL. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 34, 273-286.
60.
VarnerG. E. (1998). In nature’s interests? Interests, animal rights, and environmental ethics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
61.
VerbekeW. (2009). Stakeholder, citizen and consumer interests in farm animal welfare. Animal Welfare, 18, 325-333.
62.
VernonP. E.AllportG. W. (1931). A test for personal values. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 26, 231-248.
63.
WidamanK. F. (1985). Hierarchically nested covariance structure models for multitrait-multimethod data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 1-26.
64.
ZamirT. (2004). Veganism. Journal of Social Philosophy, 35, 367-379.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
