方法对比

	选民犬儒主义量表	民主支持量表	政治效能感量表	政治信任量表
领域	政治心理学	政治心理学	政治心理学	政治心理学
方法族	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
起源年份	1960	1999	1969	1974
提出者	Angus Campbell et al.	Russell Dalton & Pippa Norris	Richard Niemi, Steven Craig, Albert Bandura	Arthur H. Miller
类型	Self-report	Self-report	Self-report	Self-report
开创性文献	Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York: John Wiley & Sons.	Dalton, R. J. (2004). Democratic challenges, democratic choices: The erosion of political support in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.	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.	Miller, A. H. (1974). Political issues and trust in government: 1964-1970. American Political Science Review, 68(3), 951-972.
别名	PCS, Political Efficacy Cynicism, Electoral System Cynicism	SFD, Democratic Legitimacy Scale, System Support Scale	Political Efficacy, Internal Efficacy, External Efficacy	PTS, Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) Trust Module
相关	3	3	3	3
摘要	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.	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 Political Trust Scale measures citizen confidence in government institutions, elected officials, and the political system's responsiveness and fairness. Pioneered by Miller (1974) and operationalized across comparative electoral studies (CSES Module 5), the scale captures both diffuse trust (in the political system generally) and specific trust (in particular institutions such as parliament or the executive). It is central to understanding democratic legitimacy, political engagement, and support for democratic institutions.