Comparer des méthodes
Examinez les méthodes sélectionnées côte à côte ; les lignes qui diffèrent sont mises en évidence.
| Democratic Norms Support Measurement× | Échelle de confiance politique× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domaine | Psychologie politique | Psychologie politique |
| Famille | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Année d'origine≠ | 2020 | 1974 |
| Auteur d'origine≠ | Matthew Graham & Milan Svolik; Christopher Claassen | Arthur H. Miller |
| Type≠ | Experimental and survey measurement of democratic commitment | Self-report |
| Source fondatrice≠ | Graham, M. H., & Svolik, M. W. (2020). Democracy in America? Partisanship, Polarization, and the Robustness of Support for Democracy in the United States. American Political Science Review, 114(2), 392-409. DOI ↗ | Miller, A. H. (1974). Political issues and trust in government: 1964-1970. American Political Science Review, 68(3), 951-972. DOI ↗ |
| Alias≠ | Support for Democracy Tradeoff Experiment, Democratic Backsliding Tolerance Measure, Graham-Svolik Democratic Norms Design, Commitment to Democratic Principles Measure | PTS, Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) Trust Module |
| Apparentées | 3 | 3 |
| Résumé≠ | This approach measures how committed ordinary citizens are to democratic norms by observing the price they are willing to pay to uphold them. Rather than asking abstractly whether people value democracy, Matthew Graham and Milan Svolik's 2020 candidate-choice design confronts voters with a co-partisan candidate who violates a democratic principle and estimates how much electoral support that violation costs. Their finding that most Americans will tolerate undemocratic behavior by their own side when partisanship and policy stakes are high reframed the study of democratic backsliding around revealed, not professed, commitment. Christopher Claassen's parallel work links aggregate diffuse support for democracy to whether democracies survive. | The Political Trust Scale measures citizen confidence in government institutions, elected officials, and the political system's responsiveness and fairness. Pioneered by Miller (1974) and operationalized across comparative electoral studies (CSES Module 5), the scale captures both diffuse trust (in the political system generally) and specific trust (in particular institutions such as parliament or the executive). It is central to understanding democratic legitimacy, political engagement, and support for democratic institutions. |
| ScholarGateJeu de données ↗ |
|
|