Welcome to     [ ] Search by Title       Search by Author    
Current Issue
Editors & Editorial Board
Editorial & Business Address
Note fopr Contributors
Subscription
Library Recommendation Form
Email Alerts
Copyright & Reprint Request
Registered Users

 

 

 

 

 

 

Previous Issues

 

 

Administrator Login 

 

         Abstract
 
Measuring Agency: Issues and Possibilities
Sabina Alkire
This paper adapts, and tests, a new indicator related to agency. The indicator probes the extent to which a participant judges that an action by him or her was coerced or influenced by other people, versus was valuable to, and freely endorsed by, the person him or herself. As such, it relates to agency that the person values (whether or not she has reason to value it is a separate issue). The indicator was developed by cross-cultural social psychologists Richard Ryan and E.L. Deci and has been tested in developed countries in self-reported questionnaires. An adaptation of this indicator was tested using a purposively selected sample of 220 respondents in Kerala, India, in the domains of education, health, employment, mobility, household duties, and group participation. Analysis of the survey results using a series of internal and external validity tests shows that the indicator behaves relatively well, after accounting for some weaknesses in the form of questions used. While the findings are very preliminary because of the small sample size and the exploratory nature of the research, they suggest that indeed this domain-specific indicator of autonomy may merit further empirical exploration. is a separate issue). The indicator was developed by cross-cultural social psychologists Richard Ryan and E.L. Deci and has been tested in developed countries in self-reported questionnaires. An adaptation of this indicator was tested using a purposively selected sample of 220 respondents in Kerala, India, in the domains of education, health, employment, mobility, household duties, and group participation. Analysis of the survey results using a series of internal and external validity tests shows that the indicator behaves relatively well, after accounting for some weaknesses in the form of questions used. While the findings are very preliminary because of the small sample size and the exploratory nature of the research, they suggest that indeed this domain-specific indicator of autonomy may merit further empirical exploration. This paper adapts, and tests, a new indicator related to agency. The indicator probes the extent to which a participant judges that an action by him or her was coerced or influenced by other people, versus was valuable to, and freely endorsed by, the person him or herself. As such, it relates to agency that the person values (whether or not she has reason to value it is a separate issue). The indicator was developed by cross-cultural social psychologists Richard Ryan and E.L. Deci and has been tested in developed countries in self-reported questionnaires. An adaptation of this indicator was tested using a purposively selected sample of 220 respondents in Kerala, India, in the domains of education, health, employment, mobility, household duties, and group participation. Analysis of the survey results using a series of internal and external validity tests shows that the indicator behaves relatively well, after accounting for some weaknesses in the form of questions used. While the findings are very preliminary because of the small sample size and the exploratory nature of the research, they suggest that indeed this domain-specific indicator of autonomy may merit further empirical exploration. This paper adapts, and tests, a new indicator related to agency. The indicator probes the extent to which a participant judges that an action by him or her was coerced or influenced by other people, versus was valuable to, and freely endorsed by, the person him or herself. As such, it relates to agency that the person values (whether or not she has reason to value it is a separate issue). The indicator was developed by cross-cultural social psychologists Richard Ryan and E.L. Deci and has been tested in developed countries in self-reported questionnaires. An adaptation of this indicator was tested using a purposively selected sample of 220 respondents in Kerala, India, in the domains of education, health, employment, mobility, household duties, and group participation. Analysis of the survey results using a series of internal and external validity tests shows that the indicator behaves relatively well, after accounting for some weaknesses in the form of questions used. While the findings are very preliminary because of the small sample size and the exploratory nature of the research, they suggest that indeed this domain-specific indicator of autonomy may merit further empirical exploration. This paper adapts, and tests, a new indicator related to agency. The indicator probes the extent to which a participant judges that an action by him or her was coerced or influenced by other people, versus was valuable to, and freely endorsed by, the person him or herself. As such, it relates to agency that the person values (whether or not she has reason to value it is a separate issue). The indicator was developed by cross-cultural social psychologists Richard Ryan and E.L. Deci and has been tested in developed countries in self-reported questionnaires. An adaptation of this indicator was tested using a purposively selected sample of 220 respondents in Kerala, India, in the domains of education, health, employment, mobility, household duties, and group participation. Analysis of the survey results using a series of internal and external validity tests shows that the indicator behaves relatively well, after accounting for some weaknesses in the form of questions used. While the findings are very preliminary because of the small sample size and the exploratory nature of the research, they suggest that indeed this domain-specific indicator of autonomy may merit further empirical exploration. This paper adapts, and tests, a new indicator related to agency. The indicator probes the extent to which a participant judges that an action by him or her was coerced or influenced by other people, versus was valuable to, and freely endorsed by, the person him or herself. As such, it relates to agency that the person values (whether or not she has reason to value it is a separate issue). The indicator was developed by cross-cultural social psychologists Richard Ryan and E.L. Deci and has been tested in developed countries in self-reported questionnaires. An adaptation of this indicator was tested using a purposively selected sample of 220 respondents in Kerala, India, in the domains of education, health, employment, mobility, household duties, and group participation. Analysis of the survey results using a series of internal and external validity tests shows that the indicator behaves relatively well, after accounting for some weaknesses in the form of questions used. While the findings are very preliminary because of the small sample size and the exploratory nature of the research, they suggest that indeed this domain-specific indicator of autonomy may merit further empirical exploration. This paper adapts, and tests, a new indicator related to agency. The indicator probes the extent to which a participant judges that an action by him or her was coerced or influenced by other people, versus was valuable to, and freely endorsed by, the person him or herself. As such, it relates to agency that the person values (whether or not she has reason to value it is a separate issue). The indicator was developed by cross-cultural social psychologists Richard Ryan and E.L. Deci and has been tested in developed countries in self-reported questionnaires. An adaptation of this indicator was tested using a purposively selected sample of 220 respondents in Kerala, India, in the domains of education, health, employment, mobility, household duties, and group participation. Analysis of the survey results using a series of internal and external validity tests shows that the indicator behaves relatively well, after accounting for some weaknesses in the form of questions used. While the findings are very preliminary because of the small sample size and the exploratory nature of the research, they suggest that indeed this domain-specific indicator of autonomy may merit further empirical exploration.


Download Full PDF

Home