Methoden vergleichen

	Skala zur Nationalen Identität	Political Ideology Scale
Fachgebiet	Politische Psychologie	Politische Psychologie
Familie	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Entstehungsjahr	1989	1990
Urheber	Richard Kosterman & Seymour Feshbach	Hans-Dieter Klingemann & Norberto Bobbio
Typ	Self-report	Self-report
Wegweisende Quelle	Kosterman, R., & Feshbach, S. (1989). Toward a measure of patriotic and nationalistic attitudes. Political Psychology, 10(2), 257-274.	Fuchs, D., & Klingemann, H. D. (1990). The left-right schema. In M. Kent Jennings & Jan W. Van Deth (Eds.), Continuities in political action. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Aliasnamen	NIS, National Attachment Scale, Patriotism Scale	Left-Right Scale, Ideology Continuum, Political Spectrum Scale
Verwandt	3	3
Zusammenfassung	The National Identity Scale measures the strength and character of individuals' identification with their nation, including attachment to national symbols, pride in national achievements, and sense of belonging to the national community. Developed by Kosterman and Feshbach (1989), it distinguishes patriotism (pride in national accomplishments, willingness to serve) from nationalism (belief in national superiority, willingness to act against outsiders). The measure has become essential in comparative politics, examining how national identity shapes political behavior, attitudes toward immigration, support for international cooperation, and electoral choices.	The Political Ideology Scale measures individual self-placement on a left-right political spectrum, capturing fundamental preferences for government role, economic organization, and social values. The single-item self-placement measure (most common) asks respondents to rate themselves on a 0-10 or 0-100 continuum; multi-item versions assess distinct ideological dimensions (economic policy, social policy, nationalism). The left-right axis remains the dominant organizing principle of political competition globally, predicting party choice, policy preferences, and electoral behavior despite critiques that it oversimplifies multidimensional political space.