Human rights studied as social representations in a cross‐national context

TLDR

Human rights were conceptualized as social representations based on the Doise, Clemence, & Lorenzi‑Cioldi (1993) model. A questionnaire survey of 6,791 students in 35 countries used the 30 UDHR articles, and analyses anchored either on individual positionings or on maximizing between‑country differences. The analysis revealed a shared meaning system for the 30 UDHR articles across countries, highly consistent individual attitudes, systematic differences in beliefs about personal and governmental efficacy, four respondent groups, and showed that individual positionings are anchored in values and social conflict perceptions while national context shapes skepticism or advocacy. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Abstract

A questionnaire study using the 30 Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was conducted in 35 countries (N=6791 students). The basic assumption was that human rights can be studied as social representations following the model of Doise, Clemence, & Lorenzi-Cioldi (1993). The existence of a shared meaning system concerning the 30 articles in different countries was demonstrated. Individual attitudes toward the whole set of rights were proven to be highly consistent. However, individuals differed systematically in beliefs about their own and the government's efficacy in having human rights respected. An individual-level and a pancultural analysis (Kenny & La Voie, 1985; Leung & Bond, 1989) converged in the definition of four groups of respondents: advocates (most favorable responses towards human rights), sceptics (less favorable responses), personalists (high personal involvement and scepticism about governmental efficacy) and governmentalists (low personal involvement and strong belief in governmental efficacy). Analyses of anchoring started either from assessing individual positionings or from maximizing between-country differences. Individual-level analyses show that positionings are anchored in value choices as well as in perception and experience of social conflicts. Pancultural analyses confirm the importance of national context concerning the attitudes of scepticism or advocacy, personalism and governmentalism. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.