Engaged and duty-based citizenship in a comparative perspective: Good citizens, bad researchers, dubious scales?
Date:
Abstract: When studying the normative foundations of citizenship, researchers relying on survey data commonly investigate individuals’ support for so called ‘norms of citizenship’, i.e. they ask individuals how important they consider certain characteristics and behaviors of a ‘good citizen’ in a democratic polity. In this connection, several studies make use of a two-dimensional distinction between engaged vs. duty-based citizenship. While this distinction has been regularly applied in empirical studies, its usage appears to be questionable for at least three reasons: the distinction is (1) theoretically hard to maintain, (2) empirically hard to demonstrate, and (3) not applicable in the same way across different countries and contexts. Based on these shortcomings, the paper proposes an alternative way of conceptualizing and measuring support for norms of citizenship by means of a one-dimensional, cumulative scale. Applying Mokken Scale Analysis and relying on different comparative data sources (ESS, ISSP, CID), the paper shows the empirical (and cross-national) adequacy of the one-dimensional, cumulative scale and thus provides valuable insights for future research on the connection between norms of citizenship and the viability of modern democracies.