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。
| Emotion Appraisal in Politics× | Affective Polarization Measurement× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 政治心理学 | 政治心理学 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 2000 | 2012 |
| 提出者≠ | George Marcus, Russell Neuman & Michael MacKuen; Ted Brader | Shanto Iyengar, Gaurav Sood & Yphtach Lelkes |
| 类型≠ | Survey/lab experiment | Composite survey index |
| 开创性文献≠ | Marcus, G. E., Neuman, W. R., & MacKuen, M. (2000). Affective intelligence and political judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN: 9780226504698 | Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405-431. DOI ↗ |
| 别名 | Affective Intelligence Experiment, Political Emotion Appraisal Study, Discrete Emotions Politics Measure | Affective Polarization Index, Partisan Affect Gap, Thermometer Difference Measure |
| 相关 | 4 | 4 |
| 摘要≠ | Emotion appraisal in politics studies how distinct emotions, anxiety, anger, enthusiasm, and others, arise from cognitive appraisals of political events and in turn shape attention, information seeking, persuasion, and participation. It combines appraisal theory with affective intelligence theory (Marcus, Neuman and MacKuen, 2000) and Brader's (2006) work on emotional campaign appeals, typically measured through experiments and surveys that elicit and analyze discrete emotional responses. | Affective polarization measurement quantifies the gap between how positively people feel toward their own political party (the in-party) and how negatively they feel toward the opposing party (the out-party). Iyengar, Sood and Lelkes (2012) showed that this affective divide has grown sharply even where issue positions have not, reframing polarization as a social-identity phenomenon of partisan like and dislike rather than ideological distance. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|