ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

民主支持量表×政治效能感量表×选民犬儒主义量表×
领域政治心理学政治心理学政治心理学
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份199919691960
提出者Russell Dalton & Pippa NorrisRichard Niemi, Steven Craig, Albert BanduraAngus Campbell et al.
类型Self-reportSelf-reportSelf-report
开创性文献Dalton, R. J. (2004). Democratic challenges, democratic choices: The erosion of political support in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. link ↗Niemi, R. G., Craig, S. C., & Mattei, F. (1991). Measuring internal political efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study. American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1407-1413. DOI ↗Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York: John Wiley & Sons. link ↗
别名SFD, Democratic Legitimacy Scale, System Support ScalePolitical Efficacy, Internal Efficacy, External EfficacyPCS, Political Efficacy Cynicism, Electoral System Cynicism
相关333
摘要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.Political efficacy measures sense of personal agency and power in the political system, encompassing both internal efficacy (belief in own political competence and understanding) and external efficacy (belief that the political system is responsive to citizen input). Rooted in Bandura's self-efficacy theory (1977) and developed for political contexts by Niemi, Craig, and colleagues (1969 onwards), the measure explains why some citizens feel empowered to engage in politics while others feel powerless. High-efficacy citizens are substantially more likely to participate, contact representatives, and vote; low-efficacy citizens withdraw from politics and are susceptible to anti-democratic appeals.The Voter Cynicism Scale measures citizen skepticism and disillusionment regarding the political process, including beliefs that the electoral system is rigged, politicians are self-serving, and voting does not matter. The measure captures a pessimistic orientation toward electoral democracy distinct from distrust in institutions (which can coexist with belief in democratic potential) or political alienation. Rooted in Campbell et al.'s American Voter (1960) tradition of measuring political efficacy and cynicism, the scale remains central to understanding voter turnout decline, support for populist alternatives, and democratic legitimacy crises.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Democratic Support Scale · Political Efficacy Scale · Voter Cynicism Scale. 于 2026-06-20 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare