方法对比

	Motivated Reasoning Experiment	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	2006	2012
提出者	Charles Taber & Milton Lodge	Shanto Iyengar, Gaurav Sood & Yphtach Lelkes
类型	Survey/lab experiment	Composite survey index
开创性文献	Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755-769.	Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405-431.
别名	Directional Motivated Reasoning Study, Biased Assimilation Experiment, Disconfirmation Bias Paradigm	Affective Polarization Index, Partisan Affect Gap, Thermometer Difference Measure
相关	4	4
摘要	A motivated reasoning experiment tests whether people process political information to reach conclusions they are directionally motivated to hold rather than the most accurate ones. Building on Kunda's (1990) theory and crystallized by Taber and Lodge (2006), these designs expose partisans to attitude-congruent and incongruent arguments and measure biased assimilation, disconfirmation bias, attitude polarization, and selective exposure.	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.