↓ Skip to main content

The Multidimensionality of Welfare State Attitudes: A European Cross-National Study

Overview of attention for article published in Social Indicators Research, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
148 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
177 Mendeley
Title
The Multidimensionality of Welfare State Attitudes: A European Cross-National Study
Published in
Social Indicators Research, June 2012
DOI 10.1007/s11205-012-0099-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Femke Roosma, John Gelissen, Wim van Oorschot

Abstract

When evaluating the various aspects of the welfare state, people assess some aspects more positively than others. Following a multidimensional approach, this study systematically argues for a framework composed of seven dimensions of the welfare state, which are subject to the opinions of the public. Using confirmatory factor analyses, this conceptual framework of multidimensional welfare attitudes was tested on cross-national data from 22 countries participating in the 2008 European Social Survey. According to our empirical analysis, attitudes towards the welfare state are multidimensional; in general, people are very positive about the welfare state's goals and range, while simultaneously being critical of its efficiency, effectiveness and policy outcomes. We found that these dimensions relate to each other differently in different countries. Eastern/Southern Europeans combine a positive attitude towards the goals and role of government with a more critical attitude towards the welfare state's efficiency and policy outcomes. In contrast, Western/Northern Europeans' attitudes towards the various welfare state dimensions are based partly on a fundamentally positive or negative stance towards the welfare state.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 171 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 21%
Researcher 26 15%
Student > Master 26 15%
Student > Bachelor 25 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 7%
Other 26 15%
Unknown 24 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 117 66%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 3%
Psychology 5 3%
Engineering 4 2%
Other 11 6%
Unknown 27 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 November 2020.
All research outputs
#7,755,290
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Social Indicators Research
#715
of 1,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,204
of 168,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Indicators Research
#6
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,770 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 168,563 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.