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。
| Issue Framing Experiment× | 政治容忍度量表× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 政治心理学 | 政治心理学 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1997 | 1955 |
| 提出者≠ | Thomas Nelson; Dennis Chong & James Druckman | Samuel Stouffer, James Gibson, John Sullivan |
| 类型≠ | Survey/lab experiment | Self-report |
| 开创性文献≠ | Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A., & Oxley, Z. M. (1997). Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91(3), 567-583. DOI ↗ | Stouffer, S. A. (1955). Communism, conformity, and civil liberties: A cross-section of the nation speaks its mind. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. link ↗ |
| 别名 | Framing Effects Experiment, Emphasis Framing Study, Equivalence Framing Experiment | DTCL, Civil Liberties Scale, Majoritarian Constraint Scale |
| 相关≠ | 4 | 2 |
| 摘要≠ | An issue framing experiment manipulates how a political issue is described, emphasizing different considerations, to test how framing shifts opinion. Nelson, Clawson and Oxley's (1997) classic study showed that framing a Klan rally as a free-speech issue versus a public-order issue changed tolerance judgments, and Chong and Druckman (2007) systematized framing theory and the experimental methods used to estimate framing effects. | The Political Tolerance Scale measures willingness to permit unpopular groups to exercise civil liberties and political rights, including free speech, assembly, and voting rights even for groups the respondent strongly opposes. Pioneered by Stouffer (1955) measuring tolerance of communists during McCarthyism and extended by Gibson (1989) and Sullivan, Piereson, and Marcus (1982), the scale assesses fundamental democratic commitment—that pluralism and minority rights supersede majoritarian preference. It addresses the paradox: can democracy survive if majorities vote to restrict minority rights? Tolerance is essential for democratic stability, particularly as polarization increases. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|