{"id":1903,"date":"2018-01-02T00:16:20","date_gmt":"2018-01-02T00:16:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/?p=1903"},"modified":"2018-01-02T00:21:58","modified_gmt":"2018-01-02T00:21:58","slug":"identity-factors-and-values-in-britain-a-survey","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/?p=1903","title":{"rendered":"Identity Factors and Values in Britain: A Survey"},"content":{"rendered":"

What defines us?\u00a0 What makes up our \u2018identity\u2019?<\/h3>\n

As part of its large (3594 person) 2014 British Values Survey, CDSM (Cultural Dynamics Strategy and Marketing) asked two \u2018my identity\u2019 questions, with 31 \u2018facts\u2019 offered as options important in forming identity. \u00a0The results are published for the first time in this post.<\/h3>\n

In one question Cultural Dynamics asked people to pick as many of the 31 \u2018facts\u2019 as they liked, and in the other, to select the three they found \u2018most important\u2019 (including a \u2018none of these\u2019 option).\u00a0 Some charts of the results are presented below, and images of the full data sets can be downloaded here<\/a>.<\/h3>\n

The 31 \u2018fact\u2019 options were:<\/h3>\n

My nationality (English, Welsh, etc); Being British; My county or city (Yorkshire, London, etc); My local area; Being a parent; Being European; My social class; Being the sex I am; My skin colour; My religion; My tastes; My occupation; My standard of living, possessions; My family history; My age, stage of life; My intelligence; My creative abilities; My emotions and feelings; My imagination and fantasy; My practical abilities; My political convictions; My educational achievements; My interests; My principles and values; My circle of friends; My income; My body, face, hair; The way I dress; The way I speak; My ethnic origins; None of these.<\/h3>\n

The survey also collected information to segment the results by Motivational Values (the three Maslow Groups of Settler, Prospector and Pioneer, and the 12 Values Modes within them), and by sex, age and class (Socio Economic Group).<\/h3>\n

Chris Rose, chris@campaignstrategy.co.uk\u00a0\u00a0 download this post as a pdf here<\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Above: 31 \u2018identity\u2019 factors used in its values-segmented 2014 survey by CDSM (<\/em>www.cultdyn.co.uk<\/em><\/a>).\u00a0 [This graphic was not part of the survey!]<\/em><\/p>\n

It hardly needs saying but the more important \u2018identity factors\u2019 play a big role in intuitive responses to attempts to communicate with audiences, providing reflexive \u2018Track One\u2019<\/a> answers to questions such as \u201cis this about me?\u201d or \u201cdoes this person understand me and my life?\u201d<\/p>\n

Some Findings Which Might Interest Campaigners and the \u2018Political Classes\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

Taking the samples as a whole, the five most frequently chosen \u2018facts\u2019 when invited to \u2018Choose all the facts you feel are important in your identity \u2013 who you feel you are\u2019 were \u2018my interests\u2019 (1), \u2018my principles and values\u2019 (2), \u2018my intelligence\u2019 (3), \u2018my nationality\u2019 (meaning English, Welsh, Scottish) (4), and \u2018My emotions and feelings (5).<\/p>\n

The five most frequent when asked to \u2018Choose the THREE facts that are MOST important to you\u2019, were: \u2018my principles and values\u2019 (1), \u2018being a parent\u2019 (2), \u2018my intelligence\u2019 (3), \u2018Being British (4), and \u2018my emotions and feelings\u2019 (5).<\/p>\n

In some cases there are quite marked differences in the choices in relation to values, age, sex, or class (later), which may be relevant to audience targeting.\u00a0 In other cases there are no such differences, meaning that these are potential options to reach \u2018across divides\u2019.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Overall, the two ways of asking people to chose between the options gave similar results (above).\u00a0 The 13 most frequent choices are the same in both cases, although the order is slightly different.\u00a0 (In most of this blog I focus on the \u2018top three\u2019 results as that question forces people to think about their response a bit more and so gives greater discrimination eg across values.\u00a0 But in some cases users don\u2019t need or want maximum discrimination but to see even weak effects. \u00a0Readers can find the full data here<\/a>).<\/p>\n

A number of options touched on factors frequently debated in the news and social media on identity grounds but many of these do not<\/u> appear in the more frequent choices.<\/p>\n

For example, despite the huge amount of media discussion about sexual identity, politics, and feminism, \u2018being the sex I am\u2019 came in (top three question format) at rank 21 (in 3.6% of the choices), \u2018my political convictions\u2019 ranked 25th<\/sup> (2.7%), and \u2018my ethnic origins\u2019 and \u2018my skin colour\u2019 were both included in less than 2% of the \u2018top three\u2019 selections. \u00a0(See table below).<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t know if this is encouraging or discouraging to campaigners and policy wonks who spend an awful lot of their professional or activist time (much on \u2018Track Two<\/a>\u2019) on issues of gender or diversity but at least in terms of self-identity, this suggests that as a whole, the British do not often define themselves in these ways.\u00a0 Nor do they often define themselves by \u2018social class\u2019, ranked 30th<\/sup> at 1.4%: one for Jeremy Corbyn to ponder on perhaps?<\/p>\n

Bottom of the list came \u2018being European\u2019.\u00a0 This survey was conducted in October\/November 2014, after January 2013 when David Cameron announced there would be a referendum on EU membership but before the European Union Referendum Act 2015<\/a> was passed and before he announced the June 2016 referendum date, in February 2016.\u00a0 It is possible that the massive subsequent pre-occupation with \u2018Brexit\u2019 may have raised the priority for \u2018being European\u2019 but it is very unlikely that it has changed the low rating for the importance of \u2018political convictions\u2019, which was also seen in previous versions of this survey. \u00a0People who spend a lot of time \u2018in politics\u2019 or watching politics and \u2018issues\u2019 (like me), tend to massively over-estimate the public interest in what they are doing or consider important.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

In Britain quite a lot of people vote but very few put \u2018my political convictions\u2019 in the top three of their identity factors.\u00a0 \u2018Very political\u2019 people are very different from most of the British population. <\/em><\/p>\n

Values and Identity<\/strong><\/p>\n

Readers familiar with the Values Modes model will know that because it creates groups from how people think, by measuring hundreds of attitudes and beliefs, values groups are in effect already <\/em>an identity mapping exercise, in that they show sets of correlated convictions about how the world \u2018really is\u2019.\u00a0 So for example, people in a particular Maslow Group (Settler, Prospector or Pioneer), or within in a Values Mode, will soon detect whether or not other people are \u2018like them\u2019, and in situations where they can exercise free choice, often end up socialising with people in similar groups.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s the 2014\/5 British Values Map. \u00a0Settler is top right, Prospector left, Pioneer lower right.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This shows the 100 \u2018Attributes\u2019 which statistically most separate the different values groups.\u00a0 Each can be plotted as a single \u2018map\u2019 but here they are shown (the dots) at their points of maximum \u2018espousal\u2019, \u00a0the point on the map where they are \u2018strongest\u2019.\u00a0 Behind this map is a 1000×1000 grid of survey responses, in effect like combining the results of a thousand separate surveys.<\/p>\n

Links to explanations of the Values Modes system and more of my posts on values can be found here<\/a>, and at CDSM\u2019s website<\/a> (including an alphabetical description of the Attributes).\u00a0\u00a0 See also my book What Makes People Tick, The Three Hidden Worlds of Settlers, Prospectors and Pioneers<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Understanding motivational values, which along with framing and heuristics are major drivers of everyday behaviour on \u2018Track One<\/a>\u2019, gives a much greater insight into social dynamics in which identity plays a part, including politics and events like \u2018Brexit\u2019.\u00a0 (See analysis of how that came about here<\/a> and the insights of before and after referendum values and voting surveys here<\/a>).<\/p>\n

This \u2018identity\u2019 survey overtly asks people to think about their identity and offered 31 options, some of which are also used in other identity surveys, allowing for some comparison.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s the overall response table with values skews shown to the right.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The coloured boxes indicate significant positive or negative associations at 95%, 97.5% or 99% levels. Warm colours indicate positive association, in other words that Maslow Group (Pioneer, Prospector or Settler) \u2018over indexed\u2019 on selecting that option, compared to the population average response.\u00a0 So for instance Pioneers indexed 127 on \u2018my principles\u2019 and values (option ranked 1), 27% more than the population average, and although a lot of Settlers and Prospectors also \u2018ticked that box\u2019, Prospectors were 16% less likely to do this than as if \u2018by chance\u2019 (index 84), and Settlers (88) were 12% less likely.\u00a0 In contrast, there is no significant difference in values terms in the case of \u2018my emotions and feelings\u2019 (ranked 5).\u00a0 The \u2018index\u2019 takes into account the different sizes of the three Maslow Groups in the population (this survey found 34.5% Pioneers nationally, 36.9% Prospectors and 28.6% Settlers), as well as the response to the option.<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Eight options (below) showed no values difference in responses at the Maslow Group level.\u00a0 Of these \u2018my emotions and feelings\u2019 and \u2018my circle of friends\u2019 are popular responses, so if you started a conversation or created a proposition assuming these were important to identity on either of these bases, in Britain it would be very unlikely to trigger any values-inspired rejection.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Most of the responses are differentiated by values, and the coloured \u2018skews\u2019 are a\u00a0 quick way of identifying these.\u00a0 However looking at the skews alone can mislead us into overlooking the fact that substantial numbers of people from \u2018under indexed\u2019 or \u2018average\u2019 Groups also chose that option.\u00a0 Here are the raw numbers of respondents from the 10 options most selected as in my \u2018top three\u2019.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This shows that the highest frequency of \u2018my principles and values\u2019 is down to support from all three Groups but with disproportionate support from the Pioneers.\u00a0 What is meant<\/em> by \u2018my principles and values\u2019 will be very different for each group, although with some things in common between pairs of groups.\u00a0 Any conversation about \u2018principles and values\u2019 across Groups could start to diverge almost immediately.<\/p>\n

The second most popular choice was \u2018being a parent\u2019 and this is also the most evenly matched between the Groups, although it shows as \u2018skewed\u2019 to Settler as it is chosen by a disproportionately large number of Settlers. \u00a0\u2018Being a parent\u2019 is more founded in common experiences than \u2018principles and values\u2019, and so offering a lot more potential \u2018common ground\u2019 and scope for agreement. \u00a0(Eventually it also would start to diverge, for example on the nature and objectives of \u2018good parenting\u2019 and the \u2018right\u2019 structure of \u2018families\u2019).\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0This is why I often advise communicators in Britain, that good starting point for communications deliberately or by default aimed at a mixture<\/em> of values groups (eg \u201cthe public\u201d), stands a better chance of \u2018getting a hearing\u2019 if it framed as about children or parents\/families (cf for instance just \u2018nature\u2019 \u2013 see this example of the effect<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Testing by CDSM has not shown any difference in intelligence based for instance on IQ, between values groups.\u00a0 There are differences in educational level, and although this is a hotly contested topic, it is very likely that this is in part due to social advantages (eg the influence of richer parents), and the effect of the educational process<\/a> in enabling values-transitions, especially from Prospector to Pioneer (achieving esteem and self esteem).<\/p>\n

So when Pioneers over-index on \u2018my intelligence\u2019 as an identity factor it is probably not because they are more intelligent but because they value ideas (for instance more than things) and have an unmet need to explore new ideas and connections.\u00a0 From this, they may conclude that \u2018intelligence\u2019 is important. \u00a0It has to be said that one of the more annoying tendencies of Pioneers is to attribute their convictions to having made \u2018the right\u2019 (meaning clever) choices, and to have a lot of \u2018facts\u2019 and arguments available (as they spend time collecting them) to back these up.\u00a0 This is why the other Maslow Groups often refer to them as \u2018smug\u2019.<\/p>\n

By the same token, although \u2018my interests\u2019 was chosen by a lot of people from all three Groups, the Pioneers over-indexed, and they do tend to have more different \u2018interests\u2019 and greater active curiosity. \u00a0Similar reasons lead Pioneers to score \u2018my creative abilities\u2019 highly (whether or not other people think them very creative, it\u2019s often important to them).<\/p>\n

Two stand-out Settler over-indexes are on \u2018my nationality and \u2018being British\u2019.\u00a0 This topic became hugely discussed as a result of the \u2018Brexit vote\u2019, and at its simplest, the Settler emphasis on national identity is driven by an unmet need for safety, security and belonging.\u00a0 See for example the discussion on perceived threats to cultural identity from immigration, in The Values Story of the Brexit Split (Part 1)<\/a> [see slides 44-60 including on the authoritarian response to cultural change].<\/p>\n

Brexit split the values map across the middle along a pre-exiting fault-line over \u2018Europe\u2019:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

(above: attitude to EU, 2015; below, the Leave vote)<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Identity was not the only factor but it was an important one.\u00a0 It is interesting that nationality rather than geography and \u2018place\u2019 produces the higher results, across all values groups.\u00a0 The option \u201cmy county or city, eg Yorkshire \u2026 London etc\u201d \u00a0came in 17th<\/sup> when people were asked to pick the three most important factors (included by 4.2%), and ranked 19th<\/sup> when participants could select a many of the \u2018facts\u2019 as they wished (19.1%).\u00a0\u00a0 Likewise \u2018my local area\u2019 ranked 20th<\/sup> (at 3.6%) when people picked their \u2018top three\u2019 identity factors, and 16th<\/sup> (22%) in the unrestricted choice.<\/p>\n

Writer and editor David Goodhart attracted a lot of \u2018Brexit\u2019 comment in 2017 when he proposed in his book The Road to Somewhere<\/a> <\/em>that the British now divide into \u2018tribes\u2019 of people based on affinity (or lack of it) to place or local cultural continuity: the \u2018Anywhere\u2019s\u2019 (liberal, about 25%), \u2018Somewheres\u2019 (the reverse and \u2018about half\u2019 the population) with a strong connection to place, and \u2018Inbetweeners\u2019 (those \u2018in between\u2019 \u2013 about 25%). \u00a0This CDSM survey specifically asks about \u2018my local county or city\u2019 and \u2018my local area\u2019 and neither produce any sort of result suggesting this is a defining identity factor for 50% of the population.<\/p>\n

Geographic determinism is a popular option for political pundits in Britain and the US, perhaps because they are two of the few countries with a first-past-the-post electoral system based on geographic constituencies.\u00a0 There was much reference to \u2018Northern Towns\u2019, \u2018forgotten\u2019 seaside towns and \u2018Metropolitian Elites\u2019 and \u2018Rustbelts\u2019 in media explanations of the EU Referendum result but the \u2018locational\u2019 explanations may owe more to half-remembered school geography books fished from journalistic Pensieves, than any analysis which stands up to scrutiny.<\/p>\n

Values analysis produces a better explanation but the social geography of values is far too fine-grained to produce such convenient handles as Anywheres v. Somewheres.\u00a0 It is likely for example, that Settler (and Golden Dreamer and Happy Follower Prospector) attachment to people-and-places-I-know,\u00a0 is real but subsumed in some of the identity response captured in \u2018my circle of friends\u2019 and \u2018my emotions and feelings\u2019 but that\u2019s not just about geography and where you are \u2018from\u2019. \u00a0Nor, in our mobile and online-connected world, are any of the values groups now confined to making social connections through face to face contact within \u2018their local area\u2019.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The different choices of three most important identity factors made within the main values groups may be of use to anyone thinking about how to engage these groups (above).\u00a0 \u00a0\u2018My principles and values\u2019 is a great place to start but requires a lot more insight than \u2018being a parent\u2019, while \u2018Being British\u2019 is a stronger factor for Settlers and Prospectors than Pioneers.<\/p>\n

\u2018My body, face, hair\u2019 creeps in at 10 for Prospectors: about appearance and looking good.\u00a0 \u2018My age, stage of life\u2019 appears at 10 for Settlers, largely due to the cohort effect (it is a more frequent choice for older people and Britain\u2019s current Settler population skew older).<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"\"\"<\/p>\n

Differences by Values Mode<\/strong><\/p>\n

The full table of twelve Values Modes against 31 options is too big to reproduce here (you can download it here<\/a>) but below is a table of the ten most popular choices, extracted from the \u2018pick three\u2019 responses (showing only the indexes or skews).<\/p>\n

In this table I have transposed the Values Modes into their \u2018transition order\u2019, from RT (Roots) to TX (Transcender). \u00a0\u00a0CDSM research suggests that individuals \u2018transition\u2019 from one Values Mode to the next, if they do, along this sequence:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The names given to each Values Mode by CDSM are shown below, together with a schematic version of the \u2018Values Map\u2019, also showing the priority need of each of the \u2018outside edge\u2019 Values Modes:<\/p>\n

\"values<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This table shows that three of the four Settler Values Modes (VMs) over index on \u2018being a parent\u2019, and three of the four Pioneer VMs on \u2018my principles and values\u2019.\u00a0 The \u2018outside edge\u2019 VMs (see schematic map) are typically those with strongest values identities, and these VMs tend to define and dominate values dynamics (eg change or resistance to it).\u00a0 The TX Transcender VM is frequently wildly over-represented amongst leaders of organisations, particularly those concerned with \u2018issues\u2019.\u00a0 (You can take the values questionnaire and find your own Maslow Group and Values Mode from the CDSM website survey tool here<\/a>).<\/p>\n

TXs over-index on \u2018my principles and values\u2019, \u2018my intelligence\u2019, \u2018my interests\u2019 and \u2018my creative abilities\u2019 as identity factors, and strongly under index on \u2018being British\u2019 and \u2018my nationality\u2019, and slightly less so on \u2018being a parent\u2019.\u00a0 On the other side of the Values Map, the \u2018Brave New World\u2019 and \u2018Certainty First\u2019 Settlers show almost the exact opposite skews.\u00a0 This is the \u2018Power v Universalism\u2019 axis discussed in several previous blogs including on \u2018Brexit\u2019.<\/p>\n

A key \u2018swing\u2019 group is the NP Now People Prospectors, who can act as a bridge for the spread of new attitudes and behaviours from Pioneers (taking them from the TX) and popularising them with other Prospectors.\u00a0 It is notable that the identity factor \u2018being British\u2019 shows over indexes in all Settler and the first two (GD and HF) Prospector VMs but is then under strongly indexed in NP and TP (the similar Tomorrow People). This is the values inflexion across the middle of the values map, which was present in the EU\/Brexit divide.\u00a0 But it\u2019s not the case for \u2018my nationality\u2019, being English, Welsh or Scottish, on which only the Settler VMs are over indexed.\u00a0 I don\u2019t have a good explanation for why this is.<\/p>\n

It may be that the clarity of national identity \u2013 a binary in\/out, presence or absence quality \u2013 acts as a simplifier, giving symbolic certainty which is satisfying to Settlers, whereas \u2018my local area\u2019 or \u2018my county\u2019 or town\/city is harder to see in this way because everyday experience shows it to be more complex and less definitive.\u00a0 I also wonder if \u2018British-ness\u2019 exists in juxtaposition to an outside influence (eg supposedly, as in the Boris Johnson caricatures, the EU).\u00a0 But to investigate this would require qualitative research.<\/p>\n

Like the Pioneers, the NPs also over index on \u2018my intelligence\u2019.<\/p>\n

For more on the differences between individual VMs, follow the links on the home page at www.campaignstrategy.org<\/a><\/p>\n

Sex Differences<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Above: the overall results in rank order with indexes showing the significant male\/female differences.\u00a0 About two thirds show sex differences.<\/p>\n

Identity factors chosen by significantly more males:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The strongest over-index is on \u2018my political convictions\u2019.\u00a0 Although this is a tiny group, it is a very male-dominated choice.\u00a0 The next strongest skew is on \u2018my county or city\u2019.\u00a0 I can\u2019t help wondering if this might have something to do with affinity to sports clubs.<\/p>\n

Identity factors chosen by significantly more females:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The biggest difference is on \u2018my body, face hair\u2019 (89 points), followed by \u2018being a parent\u2019.\u00a0 \u00a0The latter is most relevant in \u2018targeting\u2019 terms as this is a much more popular choice.\u00a0 Together the top three probably illustrate the political or campaign significance of female dominated blogs, websites and media channels covering \u2018classic\u2019 \u201cwomen\u2019s issues\u201d.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\u2018My principles and values\u2019 is close to gender neutral, and probably is so amongst Pioneers.<\/p>\n

Identity factors chosen equally by females and males:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Age and Identity Choices<\/strong><\/p>\n

In this case I have used the \u2018chose as many as you like\u2019 question and shown only those with clear age effects.<\/p>\n

Those identity factors more important to older<\/em> people:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The clearest age effect is \u2018being a parent\u2019, which also looks like an experience-related effect.\u00a0 In other words\u2019 it\u2019s caused by the real-life experience of having children and being a parent.\u00a0 It is also cited more frequently as people age.<\/p>\n

Nationality, being British and \u2018my local area\u2019 all show similar age-related increases in frequency, only part of which can be down to the Settler-older correlation.<\/p>\n

\u2018My political convictions\u2019 and \u2018My principles and values\u2019 would be interesting to explore with qualitative research.\u00a0 CDSM has made many studies of political affinity<\/a> and voting in the UK, and shown strong values effects which tend to be quite consistent or slowly changing with respect to Labour and the Conservatives and Settlers and Pioneers but much more labile in relation to Prospectors (typically swing voters). \u00a0The values profile of UKIP, the Greens and the LibDems is much narrower and more static.\u00a0 It seems this is not the same as \u2018political convictions\u2019 as an identity factor.<\/p>\n

Those identity factors more important to younger<\/em> people:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Fewer identity factors are skewed to the young. \u00a0\u00a0As with \u2018being a parent\u2019 it is tempting to see some of these as lifestyle pre-occupations. \u00a0For example the salience of \u2018my occupation\u2019 falls of a bit of a cliff at 34 just as \u2018being a parent\u2019 takes off.<\/p>\n

Finally, \u2018age and lifestage\u2019 as an identity factor, in relation to age:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This shows a different pattern over-indexing at each end of the spectrum, perhaps because the effects of age when very young and when increasingly old, become things that \u2018middle aged\u2019 people rarely have to think about.<\/p>\n

For other posts with analysis on age and values in Britain see here<\/a> and here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Class and Identity<\/strong><\/p>\n

Lastly, we can look at the relationship between \u2018identity\u2019 factor choices and \u2018class\u2019, which in Britain is conventionally measured by Socio-Economic Group, itself defined by occupation.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The table above shows results from the \u2018pick your top three\u2019 question along with skews of significance by Social Class.\u00a0 (AB is \u2018professional\u2019, C1 \u2018clerical\/ supervisory\u2019, C2 \u2018skilled manual\u2019, DE \u2018unskilled\u2019, \u2018unemployed\u2019 and \u2018retired\u2019; student here is coded as C1).<\/p>\n

There are differences in the British population across values groups and SEG, although they are not strong or consistent enough to treat one as a substitute for the other:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

(more recent survey data)<\/p>\n

As discussed in Brexit Values Story Part 1<\/a> and Brexit Values Story Part 2.1<\/a>, the broad correlation between approving or not of Europe and voting for Brexit or not, with class and values, is consistent between CDSM values surveys and others such as Lord Ashcroft\u2019s survey.\u00a0 This is obvious in the case of identity factors such as \u2018Britishness\u2019 and \u2018nationality\u2019 and probably hidden within the responses to \u2018my principles and values\u2019.<\/p>\n

The over indexes on \u2018my intelligence\u2019 and \u2018my interests\u2019 amongst ABs are at least partly due to the auto-correlation with Pioneers and ABs. \u00a0The over indexes amongst ABs on \u2018my standard of living, possessions\u2019 and \u2018my occupation\u2019 are at least partly due to these also over-indexing with Prospectors (ie \u2018successful\u2019 people), who also over index on \u2018my educational achievements\u2019.<\/p>\n

\n

Acknowledgement: thanks to Les Higgins and Pat Dade of CDSM (pat@cultdyn.co.uk<\/a>) for permission to use these data <\/em><\/p>\n

ends<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

What defines us?\u00a0 What makes up our \u2018identity\u2019? As part of its large (3594 person) 2014 British Values Survey, CDSM (Cultural Dynamics Strategy and Marketing) asked two \u2018my identity\u2019 questions, with 31 \u2018facts\u2019 offered as options important in forming identity. … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1903","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1903","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1903"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1903\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1938,"href":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1903\/revisions\/1938"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1903"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1903"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/threeworlds.campaignstrategy.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1903"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}