Fig 1.
Examples of item characteristic curves from Study 1.
(A) A well-defined Item Characteristic Curve; item 10. (b) A poorly-defined Item Characteristic Curve; item 13.
Fig 2.
Total information curve for the final five-item scale in Study 1.
The SEIS demonstrates high reliability for individuals between -2 and 1 on latent support for economic inequality, θ.
Table 1.
Original 18 items, with their descriptive statistics from Study 1.
(R) denotes item is reverse coded. Descriptive statistics were calculated after each relevant item was reverse scored.
Table 2.
Goodness-of-fit Chi-Square tests for the five-item scale in Study 1.
Fig 3.
Study 1 information function for the three candidate compositing rules.
The solid line is the Maximum Likelihood estimated theoretical maximum information, the dashed line is the aj weighted composite information, and the dotted line is the unit-weighted composite information.
Table 3.
Correlations between all scales assessing convergent validity in Study 2.
Table 4.
Linear regressions of agreement with the content of the petition onto the SEIS scale, controlling for relevant covariates.
Table 5.
Logistic regressions of whether or not the petition was signed onto the SEIS scale, controlling for relevant covariates.
Table 6.
Correlations between all predictor variables in Study 5.
Table 7.
Single regression model containing all predictors in Study 5 on raffle ticket donations.
Fig 4.
Analysis of separability of constructs in Study 5.
A structural equation model demonstrating that the SEIS was the only significant predictor of donation amount across six conceptually similar measures.