ESRA 2025 Preliminary Program

Monday 14 July    Tuesday 15 July    Wednesday 16 July    Thursday 17 July    Friday 18 July   

All time references are in CEST

Surveying Social Norms: Challenges for Survey Research 3
Session Organisers	Dr Ivar Krumpal (University of Leipzig) Mrs Anna Lena Fehlhaber (Leibniz University Hannover) Dr Anatol-Fiete Näher (Hasso-Plattner-Institut Potsdam)
Time	Wednesday 16 July, 09:00 - 10:30
Room	Ruppert C - 0.23

Monitoring collective action as well as individual behavior and attitudes via surveys and big data has posed new challenges to the survey discipline. This session aims at presenting and discussing current survey research on social norms. We aim to discuss best practices, new challenges and innovative designs that address both methodological and substantive problems related to the emergence, enforcement, change and decay of social norms. The explanation and measurement of norm compliance / deviance are also of central interest in our session.
We invite submissions that address these issues and/or present potential solutions. We also invite applications of norm research from any discipline. In particular, we are interested in studies that (1) deal with substantive problems and applications of survey research, such as norm compliance, deviant behavior, ethical preferences in regards to allocation or trolley problems; (2) present current survey research focusing on public opinion in regards to the emergence of new social norms, values and the production of collective goods; (3) deal with methodological problems such as nonresponse, social desirability bias or sampling issues presenting innovative designs and solutions addressing these problems; (4) discuss the use of artificial intelligence in the collection and analysis of data on social norms; (5) present experimental survey research (e.g. factorial surveys, conjoint experiments, field experiments) and statistical procedures to analyze such data (e.g. conjoint analysis); (6) integrate innovative experimental designs in well-established, large-scale population surveys of the general population; (7) discuss best practices in surveying social norms.

Keywords: Social norms, social desirability bias, nonresponse bias, factorial surveys, conjoint experiments

Papers

How to Measure Gender Norms: Examining the Need for Social Norm Items and the Impact of Item Sequence

Ms Annelie Brüning (Utrecht University) - Presenting Author
Professor Wojtek Przepiorka (Utrecht University)
Professor Tali Spiegel (Utrecht University)
Professor Tanja van der Lippe (Utrecht University)

Most survey-based studies on the normative underpinnings of gendered practices rely on measures of personal attitudes (i.e. gender roles) only. This involves the attitudes people have towards statements such as “Men should participate in housework to the same extent as women”. However, recent advancements in the measurement of norms suggest that (1) measuring social norms also requires the elicitation of people’s beliefs about what other people think and do, and that (2) these beliefs exert a greater influence on respondents’ behavior than their attitudes. Yet, there is little evidence on how the elicitations of these attitudes and beliefs in surveys affect each other. We conduct a survey experiment on a diverse sample of 1484 Dutch respondents that are employed and 24 to 65 years old. First, we explore to what extent discrepancies exist between respondents’ attitudes towards traditional gender roles and these respondents’ expectations regarding the prevalence of these attitudes and practices in their social environment. Large discrepancies would indicate that current gender role measures insufficiently capture the normative underpinnings of gendered practices. Second, we examine sequence effects – whether eliciting attitudes and beliefs after each other prompts respondents to align or distinguish their attitudes and beliefs. Third, we assess if sequence effects vary based on the closeness of the reference group used in social norm inquiries. We find respondents hold, on average, significantly less traditional gender role attitudes than they believe to be held or practiced in their social environment. Moreover, our results indicate a small sequence effect in one of the three gender spheres we studied. We find no evidence for a moderating role of the reference group on sequence effects. Our results demonstrate the need for measuring attitudes and beliefs in gender norm inquiries and point to potential caveats when measuring them in surveys.

A Survey-Experimental Approach to Parenting Norms in Europe: Findings from a Population-Representative Study in Switzerland

Mr Matthias Klingler (University of Zurich) - Presenting Author
Mrs Benita Combet (University of Zurich)
Mrs Larissa Fritsch (University of Zurich)
Mrs Sandra Gilgen (University of Zurich )

In nearly all Western countries, parents’ time investment has increased over the last fifty years, with higher SES parents investing more (Altintas, 2016). Based on extensive qualitative research in the US, Annette Lareau (2011) showed that not only time investment varies by SES but that parenting practices and norms also show status differentials. More precisely, parents with lower SES emphasize providing for their children’s material needs and granting them autonomy (termed ‘accomplishment of natural growth’), while parents with higher SES focus on structuring their children’s lives, fostering their talents, and empowering them to advocate for their interests (termed ‘concerted cultivation’).
This finding has not been widely challenged, although it is based largely on qualitative research conducted in one country - the USA. The lack of further research is even more surprising given that norms are known to vary widely across countries (Begall et al., 2023).
Goal of our research is to examine the universality of the content of parenting norms. To address these research gaps, we investigate this question in a country with great cultural and institutional heterogeneity – Switzerland. In a survey experiment, we have participants rate a fictional parenting situation representing a ‘natural growth’ versus a ‘concerted cultivation’ style, following an approach similar to Ishizuka (2019, based on the US population). The survey experiment is part of a population-representative sample of individuals included in the 2nd wave of the Swiss Assisted Reproduction Longitudinal Study (CHARLS, Büchler, 2023). The aims are to examine whether parenting norms differ by individual characteristics (e.g., SES, gender), whether different norms are attributed to groups (e.g., mothers vs. fathers), and whether they vary by macro-level factors (e.g., cultural regions within Switzerland). In addition, we aim to refine the measurement of parenting norms by disentangling different components of the

Navigating social norms: reducing Social Desirability Bias with face-saving strategies

Ms Emma Zaal (University of Groningen) - Presenting Author
Dr Yfke Ongena (University of Groningen)
Professor John Hoeks (University of Groningen)

Social Desirability Bias (SDB), the tendency to provide a socially favorable image in self-reports, is a challenge when investigating sensitive topics in surveys. SDB results in underreporting norm-violating behavior (e.g., substance use) and overreporting norm-conforming behavior (e.g., exercising). To address this issue, we conducted an experimental study in which we employed so-called face-saving strategies to reduce SDB. A face-saving approach aims to ease traditional norms by reassuring respondents that deviating from typical or expected behaviors is sometimes unavoidable, thereby reducing the discomfort associated with acknowledging such actions. We conducted a survey in two neighborhoods in Groningen, the Netherlands, which featured questions prone to SDB, such as on willingness to volunteer and assist neighbors, as well as on perceived social cohesion, disturbances, safety, and financial difficulties.
We included a face-saving preamble aimed at normalizing the potential unpopular opinion of having difficulties living alongside individuals from different ethnic backgrounds. This preamble employed downtowning, phrasing that aims to weaken the strength of a statement or social norm (e.g., “It can sometimes be challenging to [...] It’s also very normal to find this difficult.”). Additionally, we offered face-saving answer options, for instance by incorporating degrees of truth (answer options reflecting partial agreement, like “occasionally”) and credentialing (offering justifications for norm-noncompliance, like “no, but I don’t have time”). Our findings revealed that participants were more likely to provide socially undesirable responses when presented with face-saving options compared to a traditional yes/no format, while a preamble did not affect SDB. Our results replicate results of other recent studies demonstrating the effectiveness of face-saving in reducing SDB. We explored face-saving in other question formats and operationalizations as well, offering deeper insights into the conditions under which face-saving is effective.

Measuring religiosity in the European Social Survey: Cross-temporal and cross-country measurement invariance

Dr Alisa Remizova (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) - Presenting Author
Dr Maksim Rudnev (University of Waterloo)

Measuring religiosity in the European Social Survey: Cross-temporal and cross-country measurement invariance
Secularization theory suggests that religiosity declines over time, yet the study of religious change across countries faces a critical challenge: the potential noninvariance of religiosity measurement. Previous research has indicated that measures of religiosity are culturally specific, raising doubts about the universality of religiosity and its measurement across diverse countries. Nevertheless, it was demonstrated that religiosity measures can achieve approximate invariance across some European countries. However, whether these measures are invariant not only across countries but also over time has yet to be investigated. Without temporal invariance, observed changes in religiosity may reflect shifts in the understanding of religiosity and its measurement, rather than true societal trends, thereby undermining the validity of comparisons over time.
This study examines the measurement invariance of religious involvement (RI)—captured by the frequency of an individual's religious attendance, frequency of praying, and self-assessed religiosity indicators—across 11 rounds of the European Social Survey (2002–2024). Using a one-factor model of RI and the alignment method, we find that while exact invariance across rounds is largely absent, approximate invariance holds in all countries, providing reliable, aligned factor means for assessing trends in RI in European countries over time. Further analysis reveals patterns of religious decline across Europe, while some countries exhibit stable or even increasing levels of RI, diverging from the overall trend. Additionally, we discuss the polarization of countries based on the varying dynamics of their RI.

Tossing a Coin: Preferences for Random Allocation in Triage Decisions

Mr Peer Keßler (University of Greifswald, Institute of Psychology, Department Health and Prevention) - Presenting Author
Mr Anatol-Fiete Näher (University of Potsdam, Hasso Plattner Institute for Digital Engineering)
Mr Ivar Krumpal (Leipzig University, Institute of Sociology)

The COVID-19 pandemic has intensified the debate about fairness in medical allocation decisions. Emergencies require careful balancing of highly conflicting normative principles. Triage decisions involve criteria such as maximizing treatment benefits, treating people equally, prioritizing those worst off, and promoting societal value.
Emanuel et al. (2020) argue for maximizing treatment benefits as the leading criterion. More specifically, they argue to choose the persons with the highest chance of survival and the most life-years ahead, using a random lottery only when patients are equal in these dimensions. This approach aligns with a rank-ordering solution to triage (Veatch 1995), ranking treatment benefits over equal treatment.
In democratic societies, criteria on ethical decisions must at least coincide with the convictions of the general population to ensure public trust in institutions and social cohesion. Measuring preferences in ethical dilemma situations can give insights into the perceived fairness of ethical decisions and guidelines.
Despite extensive research on ethical preferences in triage, no study, to our knowledge, has directly examined preferences aligned with the rank-ordering approach recommended by Emanuel et al. (2020). To this end, we conducted a conjoint experiment with a sample of a broad international public (N=1,998). Participants were asked to fictionally allocate a respiratory ventilator to one of two patients in need that would otherwise not survive. The patients were represented by randomly generated profiles. Additionally, participants could decide to allocate the respiratory ventilator by random chance.
We find that participants choose an allocation by random chance more likely when the patients in question have equal chances of survival and are equal in age. Even though we find similar but less pronounced effects for other attributes, our results speak in favor of preferences for a rank-ordering approach to triage.