Jämför metoder
Granska de valda metoderna sida vid sida; rader som skiljer sig är markerade.
| Political Cynicism Scale× | Skalan för politiskt förtroende× | |
|---|---|---|
| Ämnesområde | Politisk psykologi | Politisk psykologi |
| Familj≠ | Latent structure | Process / pipeline |
| Ursprungsår≠ | 1961 | 1974 |
| Upphovsperson≠ | Robert Agger, Marshall Goldstein & Stanley Pearl | Arthur H. Miller |
| Typ≠ | Attitude scale for distrust of politics | Self-report |
| Ursprungskälla≠ | Agger, R. E., Goldstein, M. N., & Pearl, S. A. (1961). Political Cynicism: Measurement and Meaning. The Journal of Politics, 23(3), 477-506. DOI ↗ | Miller, A. H. (1974). Political issues and trust in government: 1964-1970. American Political Science Review, 68(3), 951-972. DOI ↗ |
| Alias≠ | Political Distrust Scale, Agger-Goldstein-Pearl Cynicism Measure, Cynicism Toward Government Scale, Political Disaffection Scale | PTS, Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) Trust Module |
| Närliggande | 3 | 3 |
| Sammanfattning≠ | The Political Cynicism Scale measures the disposition to hold politicians and politics in disrepute, viewing officeholders as dishonest, self-serving, and unresponsive. First operationalized by Agger, Goldstein, and Pearl in 1961, the construct captures a generalized distrust distinct from disagreement with particular leaders or policies. Cynicism scales sit alongside political trust and efficacy as core measures of citizens' orientation toward the political system, and they figure prominently in debates, sharpened by Jack Citrin, over whether low trust reflects deep alienation from the regime or merely dissatisfaction with current incumbents. | 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. |
| ScholarGateDatamängd ↗ |
|
|