Experience-oriented dispositions are the most consistently cosmopolitan, while tradition-seeking generally aligns with national orientation and status-seeking does not consistently drive cosmopolitanism.

Experience-oriented dispositions are the most consistently cosmopolitan, while tradition-seeking generally aligns with national orientation and status-seeking does not consistently drive cosmopolitanism.

• Migration background, economic and cultural capital, and dispositions show heterogeneous country-specific associations with global self-identification; economic and cultural capital can differ or oppose one another.
• After holding class, habitus, and other sociodemographic differences between migrants and non-migrants constant, respondents with migrant parents self-identify more globally in most countries; Chile, Pakistan, Andorra, and Rwanda show the reverse association.
  Evidence for this premise (2)

  Habitus, Globalization, and Cosmopolitanism: How Dispositions, Class, and Migration Shape Global Self-Identification Differently in 74 Countries — Comparative findings on migration, class fractions, and dispositions

  in most countries, individuals whose parents are migrants selfidentify more globally than their fellow citizens.

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6-p2

  Habitus, Globalization, and Cosmopolitanism: How Dispositions, Class, and Migration Shape Global Self-Identification Differently in 74 Countries — Comparative findings on migration, class fractions, and dispositions

  in most countries, individuals whose parents are migrants selfidentify more globally than their fellow citizens.

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6-p2
• The explanatory power of the full country regression models varies substantially across countries; it is highest in Germany and Switzerland, but no clear overall country pattern emerges.
  Evidence for this premise (2)

  Habitus, Globalization, and Cosmopolitanism: How Dispositions, Class, and Migration Shape Global Self-Identification Differently in 74 Countries — Comparative findings on migration, class fractions, and dispositions

  in some countries, global selfidenti fi cation is quite well explained, while in others, it is not at all.

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6-p1

  Habitus, Globalization, and Cosmopolitanism: How Dispositions, Class, and Migration Shape Global Self-Identification Differently in 74 Countries — Comparative findings on migration, class fractions, and dispositions

  in some countries, global selfidenti fi cation is quite well explained, while in others, it is not at all.

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6-p1
• Economic and cultural capital are positively correlated, so the analysis estimates their marginal effects separately to assess their independent and potentially different relationships with global self-identification.
• Experience-seeking is clearly associated with stronger global self-identification: people who are open to new experiences, hedonistic, risk-taking, and adventurous are more likely to identify as cosmopolitan.
  Evidence for this premise (2)

  Habitus, Globalization, and Cosmopolitanism: How Dispositions, Class, and Migration Shape Global Self-Identification Differently in 74 Countries — Comparative findings on migration, class fractions, and dispositions

  experience-seeking is clearly associated with a stronger global self-identi fi cation

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6-p6

  Habitus, Globalization, and Cosmopolitanism: How Dispositions, Class, and Migration Shape Global Self-Identification Differently in 74 Countries — Comparative findings on migration, class fractions, and dispositions

  experience-seeking is clearly associated with a stronger global self-identi fi cation

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6-p6
• Tradition-seeking is generally associated with stronger national orientation, whereas openness to new experiences and hedonism are associated with global identification; status-seeking is unassociated in most countries and, where associated, tends to be positive but is negative in Kazakhstan, Switzerland, Nigeria, and Iraq.
  Evidence for this premise (2)

  Habitus, Globalization, and Cosmopolitanism: How Dispositions, Class, and Migration Shape Global Self-Identification Differently in 74 Countries — Comparative findings on migration, class fractions, and dispositions

  status-seeking is not associated with global self-identi fi cation in most countries.

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6-p5

  Habitus, Globalization, and Cosmopolitanism: How Dispositions, Class, and Migration Shape Global Self-Identification Differently in 74 Countries — Comparative findings on migration, class fractions, and dispositions

  status-seeking is not associated with global self-identi fi cation in most countries.

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6-p5
• Class effects differ by country: in some countries they are insignificant or reversed, and positive effects of both cultural and economic capital occur only in Spain and Germany. In Switzerland and Norway cultural capital is positively and economic capital negatively correlated with global self-identification; South Africa and Armenia show the reverse pattern.
  Evidence for this premise (2)

  Habitus, Globalization, and Cosmopolitanism: How Dispositions, Class, and Migration Shape Global Self-Identification Differently in 74 Countries — Comparative findings on migration, class fractions, and dispositions

  Overall, positive effects of cultural and economic capital on global self-identi fi cation are only present in two countries: Spain and Germany.

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6-p4

  Habitus, Globalization, and Cosmopolitanism: How Dispositions, Class, and Migration Shape Global Self-Identification Differently in 74 Countries — Comparative findings on migration, class fractions, and dispositions

  Overall, positive effects of cultural and economic capital on global self-identi fi cation are only present in two countries: Spain and Germany.

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6-p4

These are challenges this argument’s reasoning pattern must still withstand. Answering them on Isonomia strengthens the argument.

• Does the conclusion stay within the population P from which S was drawn, or does it overreach (different country, different time period, different platform)?Answer under review
  Draft answer

  The paper bases its inference on separate country OLS regressions and compares conditional associations across those countries. Its language of consistency and general tendency is thus tied to the country-specific comparative results, not to a claim of an identical effect in every setting. Paper basis — This is a model-based comparative inference: unstandardized marginal coefficients from full-model country OLS regressions, with the other measured dispositions, class indicators, migration, and controls held constant, are treated as evidence of the independent associations of each factor with global self-identification. Cross-country variation in those coefficients licenses rejecting a universal c (from unit-6#w; no verbatim anchor). Reconstructed from Christian Schneickert & Sören Carlson (2026); machine-drafted from the paper, filed for review.

  https://doi.org/10.1177/14407833261430381#unit-6#w
• Does the operational measure of F in the sample actually capture F as it is meant in the population-level claim?Open
• Is the sample actually representative of the target population on the dimensions that matter for F (demographics, behavior, time period, platform mix)?Open
• Is the sample large enough to support the precision (margin m) being claimed?Open
• Was the sample drawn or recruited in a way that systematically biases the proportion of F (e.g., volunteer bias, opt-in panels, attrition)?Open

Cited by 1 · 0 contests