方法对比

	Democratic Norms Support Measurement	Support for Political Violence Measure
领域	政治心理学	政治心理学
方法族	Process / pipeline	Latent structure
起源年份	2020	2022
提出者	Matthew Graham & Milan Svolik; Christopher Claassen	Nathan Kalmoe & Lilliana Mason
类型	Experimental and survey measurement of democratic commitment	Attitude scale for endorsement of partisan violence
开创性文献	Graham, M. H., & Svolik, M. W. (2020). Democracy in America? Partisanship, Polarization, and the Robustness of Support for Democracy in the United States. American Political Science Review, 114(2), 392-409.	Kalmoe, N. P., & Mason, L. (2022). Radical American Partisanship: Mapping Violent Hostility, Its Causes, and the Consequences for Democracy. University of Chicago Press. ISBN: 9780226820286
别名	Support for Democracy Tradeoff Experiment, Democratic Backsliding Tolerance Measure, Graham-Svolik Democratic Norms Design, Commitment to Democratic Principles Measure	Lethal Partisanship Scale, Support for Partisan Violence Battery, Kalmoe-Mason Political Violence Items, Radical Partisanship Measure
相关	3	3
摘要	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.	This measure assesses citizens' willingness to endorse violence against political opponents, a key indicator of democratic fragility. Nathan Kalmoe and Lilliana Mason's research, synthesized in Radical American Partisanship (2022), maps a continuum of violent partisan hostility from wishing harm on the other side to endorsing lethal attacks, using representative surveys and embedded behavioral experiments. Because such attitudes are rare and the items are extreme, the measure has prompted vigorous methodological debate, exemplified by Westwood and colleagues' demonstration that inattentive responding and item design can substantially inflate apparent support, making bias correction central to credible estimates.