Record di evidenza del metodo

Democratic Norms Support Measurement

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.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Record di origine

Citazioni copiate testualmente dal record di origine del metodo. Non si inferisce alcuna verifica a livello di affermazione da esse.

Measuring Mass Support for Democratic Norms (Candidate-Choice Tradeoff Design)

Record tassonomico del metodo · process-pipeline / political-psychology

Apri metodo completo

Affermazioni curate

Affermazioni persistite nel registro delle evidenze, ciascuna con la propria valutazione.

Nessuna affermazione curata ancora

Questa vista non inventa una valutazione dell'affermazione quando il registro non ne ha.

Metodi correlati

Generato dal grafo dei metodi e mostrato come relazioni suggerite dalla macchina — nessuna affermazione di evidenza viene inferita.

Same method familyElite Cue Experimentmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyPolitical Trust Scalemachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Used in the same domainSupport for Political Violence Measuremachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.