Studies about human values have gained prominence due to the important role this construct plays in the human behavior (Rokeach 1973), leading to the development of several theories on values, like those proposed by Rokeach (1973), Inglehart (1991) and Schwartz (1992). These theories are based on a dichotomous view of the nature of human values, where values are explained as having an individual nature or social nature. In turn, the societal approach to human values (Pereira et al. 2005) seeks to integrate these explanations, taking into account the need to integrate multiple levels of explanation of psychosocial phenomena in social psychology (Doise 1982). In this sense, this work aimed to test in a cross-cultural context (Brazil and Portugal) the hypotheses of content, structure and compatibility of this approach, as well as to adapt and test the construct validity of the Psychosocial Values Questionnaire (PVQ-24), the measure used in the societal approach, to study the values in adolescents.
Adolescence is a transition period usually characterized by significant changes in the development of various aspects related with life in society (Blakemore and Mills 2014). Typical changes in this period reflect patterns and behaviors that affect both the way teens experience the present and their future behavior (Santos and Fernandes 2011), which makes the analysis of human values particularly relevant in this period of life. In this context, having a measure that adequately assesses human values can make an important contribution to conducting research that takes in account the impact of social values in the various fields of adolescents’ everyday life.
Human values in social psychology
In social psychology, the explanations about the nature of human values are mostly at the intra-personal level (Torres et al. 2001). In this sense, the sources of values are individual needs (Rokeach 1973), which are distributed hierarchically and organize the beliefs of individuals in a value system (Pereira et al. 2005). The models proposed by Rokeach (1973), Schwartz (1992) and Gouveia et al. (2014) are representative of this perspective. Another perspective understands values as abstract ideas, implicitly or explicitly shared, about what is right, good and desirable in a society or culture (Williams 1979). In this perspective, we can cite models that explain values at the cultural level, such as those proposed by Schwartz (2006), Inglehart (1977, 1989) and Hofstede (1980).
Rokeach (1973) and Schwartz (1992) proposed a conception of the nature of values as having intra-personal character, which the source of values having a motivational nature based on the biological needs of group survival and coordinated social interaction. For Rokeach (1973), values are beliefs concerning desirable modes of conduct (instrumental values) or desirable end-states of existence (terminal values). With some modifications, Schwartz (1992) adopted the concept of values employed by Rokeach (1973) and used his method as a basis to measure values. Schwartz and Bilsky (1987) articulated the conception of social desirability of values, as proposed by Kluckhohn (1951), with the main characteristics of Rokeach’s (1973) theory. According to Schwartz (1992), when we think about our values, we think about what is important in our lives. Schwartz (1992) defined values as desirable and transcendent goals, hierarchically ordered by importance, that serve as principles in the life of a person or a social entity.
On the other hand, Inglehart (1989), from a sociological perspective, proposed that values represent cultural changes in the history of societies, that is, human values have a cultural nature since they are markers of cultural changes. Inglehart (1989) argued that the change from the feudal to the capitalist production system favored the emergence of materialist values, and that the economic stability of some post-industrial societies facilitated the emergence of post-materialist values. In this sense, the societies that have not solved basic social problems give more importance to materialistic goals, while societies that have reached a certain degree of resolution of these problems endorse post-materialistic goals. Studies conducted in different cultures (Bean and Papadakis 1994; Kidd and Lee 1997; Pereira and Camino 1999) have shown that materialist values are associated with concerns about economic stability and post-materialist values are associated with social and individual well-being and professional achievement.
According to Estramiana et al. (2014), these models are based on two assumptions about the nature of values, which also permeate other concepts studied in social psychology: the nature of values is individual, when they serve individual needs (Schwartz 1992), or the nature of values is social, when they emerge from cultural changes (Inglehart 1989). In an effort to overcome this opposition, a model was proposed seeking to articulate the individual and cultural conceptions of the human values through a societal approach.
Societal approach to values
Based on the previous problems, and taking into account the need for articulation between the levels of explanation of psychosocial phenomena in social psychology (Doise 1982), the societal approach to values has been proposed. This approach aims to articulate into an integrative model the psychological perspective of motivational types, proposed by Schwartz (1992), with the sociological perspective of materialist and post-materialist values, proposed by Inglehart (1989).
This model assumes that the genesis of values is in the social production of meaning. Values are understood as a phenomenon of social order linked to a psychological phenomenon, as they are seen as knowledge elements widely shared in society, enabling individuals to understand and be understood in the context of social relations (Costa 2000; Maio et. al 2001). Because values are social productions of meaning, they need a set of social conditions for their emergence (Deschamps and Devos 1993; Pereira et al. 2005). The model assumes that these conditions are the ideological struggles waged by social groups in search of power (Pereira and Camino 1999), which are part of the social construction of reality (Berger and Luckmann 1973). In this sense, the source of values lies in ideological identities that guide social groups (Costa 2000).
The emergence of values in society is not conditioned to the fact they cognitively represent individual goals, as advocated by Schwartz (1992), or collective needs, as proposed by Inglehart (1994). In fact, values emerge to represent the various ideological tendencies with which social groups are identified (Pereira et al. 2004a). In accordance with these assumptions, values are defined as knowledge structures socially produced that (a) synthesize the elements of a widely shared symbolic system, (b) express the ideological conflicts that form this system, (c) guide selection of alternative behavior and (d) reflect the socio-cultural context and individual social identities (Costa 2000; Estramiana et al. 2014; Fernandes et al. 2007).
Content and structure of values
The societal approach proposes that values represent the various ideological tendencies with which social groups are identified. These tendencies are organized into four systems with different contents: materialist, post-materialist, religious and hedonistic (Pereira et al. 2004a, b, c, 2005).
The materialist system represents the ideology of accumulation of wealth and social status (Inglehart 1994). Individuals or groups guided by such values are focused on getting material resources and accumulating power while they cherish authority. The values that represent this system are wealth, authority, status and profit.
The post-materialist system represents the ideologies that are emphasizing more abstract ideas instead of material goals, like social well-being, self-realization and knowledge (Inglehart 1977). This system contains three subsystems: social well-being, personal well-being and professional well-being (Pereira et al. 2004a, b, c, 2005). Social well-being represents the identification with the welfare of society and is associated with broader issues like human rights and citizenship. This subsystem is represented by the values of social justice, freedom, equality and fraternity. Individual well-being involves identification with more abstract personal achievements and subjective well-being, being constituted by the values of joy, love, comfort and self-fulfillment. Professional well-being entails the ideologies of self-realization in professional life, demonstrating responsibility and competence. This subsystem consists of values like professional achievement, hard work, responsibility and competence (Pereira et al. 2004a, b, c, 2005).
The religious system represents the ideology of obedience to religious rules, beliefs and norms of behavior (Schwartz 1992). In this sense, obedience to authority is important. This system covers the values of obedience to God’s laws, religion, salvation and fear of God. Finally, the hedonistic system emphasizes the pursuit of pleasure, excitement in life, and appreciation of sexuality (Schwartz 1992). The values that represent this system are pleasure, excitement, sexuality and sensuality (Pereira et al. 2004a, b, c, 2005).
According to the societal approach, these four systems are organized in two dimensions. The first dimension comprehends the materialist and post-materialist systems (Inglehart 1977; Pereira et al. 2005). The second dimension opposes the religious and hedonism system. In fact, the religious and hedonistic systems can represent opposite interests (Schwartz 1996; Pereira et al 2005). Opposition is also likely between the materialist and post-materialist systems, since the values that form these systems emerged in different socioeconomic contexts (Inglehart 1977).
However, this approach proposes positive correlations between the different value systems, indicating that values are not structured based in conflict relationships, as stated by Schwartz et al. (2012), but in their possible compatibilities (Gouveia et al. 2014; Pereira et al. 2004a, b, c; Pereira et al. 2005). This pattern of positive relations between the value systems occurs because values have little to do with needs, since they are primarily related to ideas about how society should be organized (Deschamps and Devos 1993). Furthermore, Pereira et al. (2001) argue that a conception where value structures are based on conflicting relations (Schwartz et al. 2012) contradicts the social desirability present in these values.
Therefore, the societal approach content hypothesis proposes the existence of four value systems with different contents, named hedonism, religion, materialism and post-materialism. The latter system also includes three correlated but distinct contents, represented by the subsystems of social well-being, individual well-being, and professional well-being. The structure hypothesis of the societal approach postulates the existence of two dimensions, with the first dimension including the materialist and post-materialist systems and the second the religious and hedonistic systems. Furthermore, the societal approach proposes that these systems are organized in terms of their compatibilities because value systems are positively correlated with each other (Pereira et al. 2001).
In the following section, we present empirical evidence of the validity of the societal approach to values.
Empirical evidence
Based on the societal approach to values, the Psychosocial Values Questionnaire was developed (PVQ; Pereira et al. 1997; Torres 1992) to measure the value systems of social groups. The current version of the instrument consists of 24 items equally distributed among the value systems and subsystems proposed by the theory (Pereira et al. 2004a, b, c). This instrument has been widely used in several studies and has accumulated favorable empirical evidence of construct validity and reliability, confirming the hypothesis of the societal approach to values (Fernandes et al. 2007; Lins et al. 2014; Pereira et al. 2004a, b, c; Pereira et al. 2004c).
Pereira et al. (2004a, b, c) tested the construct validity of the PVQ-24 through confirmatory factor analysis in a sample of college students. The results support the adequacy of the items used to measure the four systems, with factor loadings ranging from .31 to .75, supporting the content hypothesis. In addition, all systems showed Cronbach alphas above .70 and positive and significant correlations with each other, ranging between .09 and .76 (p < .05). These results reveal psychometric evidence of validity and accuracy of the PVQ-24. Internal consistency scores are above those frequently reported for other models in the literature. Commonly constructs, like values, that have low intersubject variability in responses tend to have low internal consistency (Rodriguez and Maeda 2006). The positive correlations observed also corroborate the claim that the systems are positively correlated with each other, indicating that the values are structured not based on relations of conflict, but on their possible compatibilities (Pereira et al. 2005).
Pereira et al. (2005) also tested the structure proposed by the societal approach using multidimensional scaling analysis. The results showed that the four systems emerge in separate areas and are organized in two dimensions: materialist-post-materialist and hedonist-religious. This study also provides evidence of convergent validity between the systems of the societal approach and the second order motivational types of Schwartz (1992). They observed correlations between materialism and self-promotion (r = .49; p < .001), hedonism and openness to change (r = .55; p < .001), religious and conservation (r = .51; p < .001), and between post-materialism and self-transcendence (r = .63, p < .001). These correlations support the approximation proposed by Pereira et al. (2001) between the societal approach to values and Schwartz’s value theory (Pereira et al. 2005).
Other studies have also shown the relevance of using the PVQ-24 to understand various social behaviors, showing evidence of predictive validity for the societal approach to values. For example, Pereira et al. (2004a, b, c) evaluated the relationship between the value systems and attitudes toward democracy and found that adherence to the materialist system predicted a negative attitude toward democracy, while adherence to the post-materialist system contributed to a positive attitude. Fernandes et al. (2007) tested the relationship between values and social dominance orientation (SDO). They observed that the SDO was directly associated with materialist values and inversely associated with post-materialist values.
Pereira et al. (2004b), in a study about the role of values in people’s involvement with human rights, found that post-materialist values were positively related with abstract involvement, whereas adherence to religious values implies more involvement in concrete efforts to promote human rights. In addition, adherence to materialist values was found to lead to a more positive evaluation of the government’s involvement in human rights, while the post-materialist values contributed to a more critical evaluation of the government’s role in promoting human rights. Barros et al. (2009), in a study testing the relationship between authoritarianism and values, observed that religious values were related to decrease in tolerance, while adherence to hedonist values was related to an increase in tolerance and reduction of authoritarianism. Furthermore, adherence to materialist values was related with higher levels of authoritarianism. Lins et al. (2014), in a study about the role of values in racial prejudice, found that adherence to hedonist and materialist values predicted the expression of prejudice against blacks. On the other hand, adherence to social justice values predicted the non-expression of prejudice.
In summary, studies conducted with the PVQ-24 show psychometric evidence of its construct validity in assessing the four proposed value systems of the societal approach to values. The internal consistency of this measure is high, especially when compared with other measures of values based on other theories. Research conducted with the PVQ-24 provides empirical evidence of the content and structure hypotheses of the societal approach to values. However, the studies of the PVQ-24 have mainly been conducted with samples of Brazilian university students, so there is a lack of studies with different samples and in different countries. In this sense, the study reported here aimed to adapt and test the construct validity and reliability of the PVQ-24 in a sample of Brazilian and Portuguese teenagers and test the cross-cultural validity of the content and structure hypotheses of the societal approach to values.