So sánh phương pháp
Xem các phương pháp đã chọn cạnh nhau; những hàng khác biệt được làm nổi bật.
| Political Cynicism Scale× | Thang đo Lòng tin Chính trị× | |
|---|---|---|
| Lĩnh vực | Tâm lý học chính trị | Tâm lý học chính trị |
| Họ≠ | Latent structure | Process / pipeline |
| Năm ra đời≠ | 1961 | 1974 |
| Người khởi xướng≠ | Robert Agger, Marshall Goldstein & Stanley Pearl | Arthur H. Miller |
| Loại≠ | Attitude scale for distrust of politics | Self-report |
| Công trình gốc≠ | 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 ↗ |
| Tên gọi khác≠ | Political Distrust Scale, Agger-Goldstein-Pearl Cynicism Measure, Cynicism Toward Government Scale, Political Disaffection Scale | PTS, Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) Trust Module |
| Liên quan | 3 | 3 |
| Tóm tắt≠ | 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. |
| ScholarGateBộ dữ liệu ↗ |
|
|