How Political Systems Manage Their Policy Controversies

Markus Hinterleitner
{"title":"How Political Systems Manage Their Policy Controversies","authors":"Markus Hinterleitner","doi":"10.1017/9781108860116.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"1. I did not conduct interviews with blame game actors because I am primarily interested in what blame game participants say and do during the actual blame game. To knowwhat they think would certainly be interesting, but it is not a necessary requirement for the analysis of blame game interactions and their consequences. Moreover, I suspect that interview data would be useless for the most part as interviewees are driven by a very strong urge for social desirability when it comes to explaining their roles and actions during a blame game. Another reason against noncontemporaneous interviews is that memories on tactical issues are likely to fade quickly and that these memories are more likely to be influenced by outcomes than by what calculations interviewees were making at the time (Berry, 2002). 2. This is why I opted against counting the number of newspaper articles during a blame game. The second reason for a qualitative assessment is its flexibility, meaning that salience and proximity can be determined and compared across very different policy controversies. 3. UK newspapers: The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, The Sun; German newspapers: Die Welt, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Bild; Swiss newspapers: Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Tages-Anzeiger, Blick; US newspapers: The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, USA Today. I retrieved relevant articles from these newspapers mainly via the Factiva database. I used several controversy-specific keywords in each case to identify all relevant articles in the newspapers selected (see Table A2 in the Appendix). The time span during which I searched for articles starts significantly before the start of the blame game and extends beyond the end of blame game interactions until articles related to the blame game could no longer be found (the concrete time span varies considerably from case to case). Moreover, I occasionally consulted newspaper articles from other outlets in case they could provide further insights into a case. 4. Considering these different newspapers also controls for political parallelism, that is, for a situation in which only one political camp shows strong interest in a controversy while other camps largely ignore","PeriodicalId":183524,"journal":{"name":"Policy Controversies and Political Blame Games","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Controversies and Political Blame Games","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108860116.001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

1. I did not conduct interviews with blame game actors because I am primarily interested in what blame game participants say and do during the actual blame game. To knowwhat they think would certainly be interesting, but it is not a necessary requirement for the analysis of blame game interactions and their consequences. Moreover, I suspect that interview data would be useless for the most part as interviewees are driven by a very strong urge for social desirability when it comes to explaining their roles and actions during a blame game. Another reason against noncontemporaneous interviews is that memories on tactical issues are likely to fade quickly and that these memories are more likely to be influenced by outcomes than by what calculations interviewees were making at the time (Berry, 2002). 2. This is why I opted against counting the number of newspaper articles during a blame game. The second reason for a qualitative assessment is its flexibility, meaning that salience and proximity can be determined and compared across very different policy controversies. 3. UK newspapers: The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, The Sun; German newspapers: Die Welt, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Bild; Swiss newspapers: Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Tages-Anzeiger, Blick; US newspapers: The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, USA Today. I retrieved relevant articles from these newspapers mainly via the Factiva database. I used several controversy-specific keywords in each case to identify all relevant articles in the newspapers selected (see Table A2 in the Appendix). The time span during which I searched for articles starts significantly before the start of the blame game and extends beyond the end of blame game interactions until articles related to the blame game could no longer be found (the concrete time span varies considerably from case to case). Moreover, I occasionally consulted newspaper articles from other outlets in case they could provide further insights into a case. 4. Considering these different newspapers also controls for political parallelism, that is, for a situation in which only one political camp shows strong interest in a controversy while other camps largely ignore
政治制度如何管理其政策争议
1. 我没有对指责游戏参与者进行采访,因为我主要对指责游戏参与者在实际的指责游戏中所说和所做的事情感兴趣。了解他们的想法当然很有趣,但这并不是分析指责游戏互动及其后果的必要条件。此外,我怀疑面试数据在很大程度上是无用的,因为受访者在解释他们在指责游戏中的角色和行为时,受到一种非常强烈的社会渴望的驱使。反对非同期访谈的另一个原因是,关于战术问题的记忆可能会迅速消退,而且这些记忆更有可能受到结果的影响,而不是受受访者当时所做的计算的影响(Berry, 2002)。2. 这就是为什么我选择在指责游戏中不计算报纸文章的数量。进行定性评估的第二个原因是它的灵活性,这意味着可以在非常不同的政策争议中确定和比较显著性和接近性。3.。英国报纸:每日电讯报、卫报、太阳报;德国报纸:《世界报》、《德意志日报》、《图片报》;瑞士报纸:Neue zrcher Zeitung, Tages-Anzeiger, Blick;美国报纸:《华尔街日报》、《纽约时报》、《今日美国》我主要通过Factiva数据库从这些报纸上检索相关文章。我在每个案例中都使用了几个有争议的关键词来识别所选报纸上的所有相关文章(见附录中的表A2)。我搜索文章的时间跨度明显开始于指责游戏开始之前,并延伸到指责游戏互动结束之后,直到再也找不到与指责游戏相关的文章(具体的时间跨度因情况而异)。此外,我偶尔也会查阅其他媒体的报纸文章,希望它们能对某个案例提供更深入的见解。4. 考虑到这些不同的报纸,还可以控制政治上的平行性,即只有一个政治阵营对争议表现出强烈的兴趣,而其他阵营基本上忽略的情况
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信