Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| System Justification Scale× | Democratische Steunschaal× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied | Politieke psychologie | Politieke psychologie |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 1994 | 1999 |
| Grondlegger≠ | John T. Jost & Mahzarin R. Banaji | Russell Dalton & Pippa Norris |
| Type≠ | Self-report attitude scale | Self-report |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1-27. DOI ↗ | Dalton, R. J. (2004). Democratic challenges, democratic choices: The erosion of political support in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. link ↗ |
| Aliassen | SJS, General System Justification Scale, Economic System Justification Scale | SFD, Democratic Legitimacy Scale, System Support Scale |
| Verwant≠ | 4 | 3 |
| Samenvatting≠ | The System Justification Scale operationalizes system justification theory, introduced by Jost and Banaji (1994), which holds that people are motivated to defend, bolster, and rationalize the existing social, economic, and political status quo, even when doing so runs against their personal or group interest. The general version, refined by Kay and Jost (2003), is an 8-item self-report measure on which respondents rate agreement with statements such as 'In general, the American political system operates as it should' on a 7- or 9-point Likert scale. | The Democratic Support Scale measures citizen commitment to democracy as a regime type, including beliefs that democracy is the best system of government, willingness to defend democratic institutions, and rejection of non-democratic alternatives. Pioneered by Norris (1999) and Dalton (2004) in comparative research, the measure distinguishes regime support (belief in democracy's superiority) from performance support (satisfaction with current government). It addresses the paradox of 'critical citizens'—in advanced democracies, people often express dissatisfaction with current government performance while maintaining deep commitment to democratic principles. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|