Two-way nostalgia and attitudes toward history among residents of six Polish cities
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s) Maria Lewicka, Nicolaus Copernicus University
Version: View help for Version V1
| Name | File Type | Size | Last Modified |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
0 |
Project Citation:
Lewicka, Maria. Two-way nostalgia and attitudes toward history among residents of six Polish cities . Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2023-08-09. https://doi.org/10.3886/E193209V1
Project Description
Summary:
View help for Summary
The
included database is part of a larger research program entitled
"Retrieving the Lost History: Role of Social Memory of Place in Identity
Formation," led by Lewicka (grant from the National Science Centre OPUS
NCN Nr 2011/03/B/HS6/03320).
The study was conducted in 2015 in six Polish cities (Bialystok – n = 410, Krakow – n = 414, Lodz – n = 400, Olsztyn - n = 402, Poznan - n = 401, Wroclaw - n = 401) using the CAPI method. The participants in the study were randomly selected. The total overall sample size was N = 2428.
The database consists of multiple variables that can be grouped as follows:
- Sociodemographic variables (e.g., age, gender, education, voivodeship, standard of living, place of interview, length of residency in the city)
- Place Attachment Scale. A five-item place attachment scale (e.g., “I miss this place when I am not there for a long time”; “This place is part of me”; Lewicka, 2010). Participants expressed their agreement with Likert’s scale items from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). The scale had satisfactory reliability (α = .76) (variables: PAS1 to PAS5)
- Lay Theories of History. A 9-item scale designed to identify three different lay theories of history (Wójcik & Lewicka, 2022): historical realism (three items; e.g., “In history, the most important thing is to know the truth about the past”; “We should even remember those historical events that today may give rise to conflicts and disputes”, α = .71), historical instrumentalism (three items; e.g., “Sometimes, it is better to remain silent about certain historical events in order not to weaken the image of our nation”; “Knowledge of the past should be communicated in such a way that it serves the interests of our nation today”; α = .65 ), and historical relativism (three items; e.g., “The past can never be fully understood”; “We will never know the real course of many historical events”; α = .50). Participants expressed their agreement on a 7-point Likert’s scale. (variables: LTH1 to LTH9)
- Perceived National Group and City Continuity. Sani’s shortened 8-item Perceived Collective Continuity Scale adapted to the Polish context. The scale was applied twice, to the perceived continuity of the country (Poland) and in a shorter, 6-item, version – to the perceived continuity of one’s city. The reliability of the two scales was α = .72 and α = .76. Participants expressed their agreement with the scale items from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). (variables: PCC1 to PCC8 for national group continuity and PC1 to PC9 for place/city continuity)
-Interest in Local History. A 10-item Interest in Local History Scale (Lewicka, 2012) that consisted of two subscales: interest in history (e.g., “I am interested in the history of my city”; “I like to read about the past of my city”) and focus on the present (e.g., “Sometimes it is better to pull down an old building than to invest enormous money in its renovation”; “If I were the city president, I would destroy some old buildings and make space for modern and future-oriented architecture”). Participants expressed their agreement with the scale items from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). The respective reliabilities were α = .79 and .69 (variables: ILH1 to ILH10)
-National Identity: Attachment Versus Glorification. A shortened 9-item National Identity Scale (Roccas et al., 2006), with two subscales: attachment to country and glorification of country. Reliabilities of the two subscales were α = .86 and α = .78. Participants expressed their agreement with the scale items from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree) (variables: N1 to N9)
-Need for Cognition. An abbreviated version of the 7-item Need for Cognition Scale (Caccioppo & Petty, 1982) that was translated into Polish and adapted to the Polish context (Matusz et al., 2011). Participants expressed their agreement with items on a 5-point scale (e.g., “I like to solve puzzles”; “I can spend many hours reflecting on an intellectual problem”). The reliability of this scale was satisfactory (α = .70) (variables: NFC1 to NFC7)
-Nostalgia: Restorative Versus Reflective. Nostalgia was measured with the abbreviated 13-item version (Prusik & Lewicka, 2010) of 31-item nostalgia scale by Havlena & Holak (2000). Restorative nostalgia was covered by five items (e.g., “I miss the good old days”; “The society to which I belong was better in the past than it is now”), while reflective nostalgia was covered by eight items (e.g., “I like to look at photos I have taken”, “I like to read books or watch movies about other times and places”). Participants expressed their agreement with the items on a 5-point scale. The reliability of each scale was satisfactory (restorative nostalgia, α = .76; reflective nostalgia, α = .80). (variables: INP1 to INP13)
The study was conducted in 2015 in six Polish cities (Bialystok – n = 410, Krakow – n = 414, Lodz – n = 400, Olsztyn - n = 402, Poznan - n = 401, Wroclaw - n = 401) using the CAPI method. The participants in the study were randomly selected. The total overall sample size was N = 2428.
The database consists of multiple variables that can be grouped as follows:
- Sociodemographic variables (e.g., age, gender, education, voivodeship, standard of living, place of interview, length of residency in the city)
- Place Attachment Scale. A five-item place attachment scale (e.g., “I miss this place when I am not there for a long time”; “This place is part of me”; Lewicka, 2010). Participants expressed their agreement with Likert’s scale items from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). The scale had satisfactory reliability (α = .76) (variables: PAS1 to PAS5)
- Lay Theories of History. A 9-item scale designed to identify three different lay theories of history (Wójcik & Lewicka, 2022): historical realism (three items; e.g., “In history, the most important thing is to know the truth about the past”; “We should even remember those historical events that today may give rise to conflicts and disputes”, α = .71), historical instrumentalism (three items; e.g., “Sometimes, it is better to remain silent about certain historical events in order not to weaken the image of our nation”; “Knowledge of the past should be communicated in such a way that it serves the interests of our nation today”; α = .65 ), and historical relativism (three items; e.g., “The past can never be fully understood”; “We will never know the real course of many historical events”; α = .50). Participants expressed their agreement on a 7-point Likert’s scale. (variables: LTH1 to LTH9)
- Perceived National Group and City Continuity. Sani’s shortened 8-item Perceived Collective Continuity Scale adapted to the Polish context. The scale was applied twice, to the perceived continuity of the country (Poland) and in a shorter, 6-item, version – to the perceived continuity of one’s city. The reliability of the two scales was α = .72 and α = .76. Participants expressed their agreement with the scale items from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). (variables: PCC1 to PCC8 for national group continuity and PC1 to PC9 for place/city continuity)
-Interest in Local History. A 10-item Interest in Local History Scale (Lewicka, 2012) that consisted of two subscales: interest in history (e.g., “I am interested in the history of my city”; “I like to read about the past of my city”) and focus on the present (e.g., “Sometimes it is better to pull down an old building than to invest enormous money in its renovation”; “If I were the city president, I would destroy some old buildings and make space for modern and future-oriented architecture”). Participants expressed their agreement with the scale items from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree). The respective reliabilities were α = .79 and .69 (variables: ILH1 to ILH10)
-National Identity: Attachment Versus Glorification. A shortened 9-item National Identity Scale (Roccas et al., 2006), with two subscales: attachment to country and glorification of country. Reliabilities of the two subscales were α = .86 and α = .78. Participants expressed their agreement with the scale items from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree) (variables: N1 to N9)
-Need for Cognition. An abbreviated version of the 7-item Need for Cognition Scale (Caccioppo & Petty, 1982) that was translated into Polish and adapted to the Polish context (Matusz et al., 2011). Participants expressed their agreement with items on a 5-point scale (e.g., “I like to solve puzzles”; “I can spend many hours reflecting on an intellectual problem”). The reliability of this scale was satisfactory (α = .70) (variables: NFC1 to NFC7)
-Nostalgia: Restorative Versus Reflective. Nostalgia was measured with the abbreviated 13-item version (Prusik & Lewicka, 2010) of 31-item nostalgia scale by Havlena & Holak (2000). Restorative nostalgia was covered by five items (e.g., “I miss the good old days”; “The society to which I belong was better in the past than it is now”), while reflective nostalgia was covered by eight items (e.g., “I like to look at photos I have taken”, “I like to read books or watch movies about other times and places”). Participants expressed their agreement with the items on a 5-point scale. The reliability of each scale was satisfactory (restorative nostalgia, α = .76; reflective nostalgia, α = .80). (variables: INP1 to INP13)
Scope of Project
Subject Terms:
View help for Subject Terms
nostalgia;
two-way nostalgia;
restorative nostalgia;
reflective nostalgia;
people-place relations;
attitudes toward history;
interest in the past;
perceived continuity of places;
Polish cities with disrupted history
Geographic Coverage:
View help for Geographic Coverage
Wroclaw, Poland,
Lodz, Poland,
Krakow, Poland,
Olsztyn, Poland,
Poznan, Poland,
Bialystok, Poland
Data Type(s):
View help for Data Type(s)
survey data
Methodology
Sampling:
View help for Sampling
random, among cities of six Polish cities, representative samples
Collection Mode(s):
View help for Collection Mode(s)
computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI)
Unit(s) of Observation:
View help for Unit(s) of Observation
2428
Geographic Unit:
View help for Geographic Unit
six cities in Poland
Related Publications
Published Versions
Report a Problem
Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.
This material is distributed exactly as it arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is desired.