방법 비교

	Partisan Social Identity Scale	Social Identity Political Measurement
분야	정치심리학	정치심리학
계열	Latent structure	Process / pipeline
기원 연도	2015	2015
창시자	Leonie Huddy, Lilliana Mason & Lene Aaroe; Steven Greene	Leonie Huddy, Lilliana Mason & Lene Aaroe
유형	Identity-strength scale for partisanship	Self-report identity scale
원전	Huddy, L., Mason, L., & Aaroe, L. (2015). Expressive Partisanship: Campaign Involvement, Political Emotion, and Partisan Identity. American Political Science Review, 109(1), 1-17.	Huddy, L., Mason, L., & Aaroe, L. (2015). Expressive partisanship: Campaign involvement, political emotion, and partisan identity. American Political Science Review, 109(1), 1-17.
별칭	Partisan Identity Strength Scale, Expressive Partisanship Scale, Huddy-Mason-Aaroe Partisan Identity Measure, Partisan In-Group Identification Scale	Political Social Identity Scale, Partisan Social Identity Measure, Expressive Partisanship Scale
관련	3	4
요약	The Partisan Social Identity Scale treats party identification as a social identity in the sense of Henri Tajfel rather than as a running tally of policy agreement. Building on Steven Greene's social-identity approach and crystallized in Huddy, Mason, and Aaroe's 2015 study of expressive partisanship, the scale adapts standard group-identification items to ask how central, important, and emotionally engaging a person's party is to their sense of self. Strongly identified partisans are shown to feel action-oriented emotions, anger when their side is threatened and enthusiasm when reassured, and to participate in campaigns more than issue-based measures of partisanship predict.	Social identity measurement in political behavior applies social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) to political groups, treating partisanship, ideology, or movement membership as a social identity rather than a mere instrumental affiliation. Huddy, Mason and Aaroe (2015) adapted Mael and Tetlock-style identity items into a partisan social-identity scale that measures expressive, emotionally charged group attachment and predicts campaign activity and political emotion better than issue agreement.