Do Perceptions of Ingroup Discrimination Fuel White Mistrust in Government? Insights from the 2012–2020 ANES and a Framing Experiment

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Polity Pub Date : 2022-11-23 DOI:10.1086/722763
Alexandra Filindra, Beyza E. Buyuker, Noah J. Kaplan
{"title":"Do Perceptions of Ingroup Discrimination Fuel White Mistrust in Government? Insights from the 2012–2020 ANES and a Framing Experiment","authors":"Alexandra Filindra, Beyza E. Buyuker, Noah J. Kaplan","doi":"10.1086/722763","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the 1960s, political elites have used implicit and overt claims that the government discriminates against whites to mobilize white voters. As a result, many white Americans perceive government policies that address racial inequalities as a form of anti-white bias and politicians who criticize racial inequities as hostile to white interests. We hypothesize that white Americans who believe their group faces discrimination are more likely to mistrust the federal government. We test our hypothesis using three American National Election Study (ANES) cross-sectional studies (2012–2020), the 2016–2020 ANES panel, and a survey experiment. Our results show a negative and significant relationship between perceived ingroup discrimination and trust in government in 2012 and 2016 but not in 2020. A lagged dependent variable (LDV) analysis shows that the negative effect of ingroup discrimination remains significant even after an LDV is included in the model, but the reverse is not the case. Finally, a framing experiment suggests that those high on ingroup discrimination beliefs are more likely to think that politicians have an anti-white agenda, while those low on such beliefs are more likely to think that politicians have an anti-Black agenda.","PeriodicalId":46912,"journal":{"name":"Polity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polity","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722763","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Since the 1960s, political elites have used implicit and overt claims that the government discriminates against whites to mobilize white voters. As a result, many white Americans perceive government policies that address racial inequalities as a form of anti-white bias and politicians who criticize racial inequities as hostile to white interests. We hypothesize that white Americans who believe their group faces discrimination are more likely to mistrust the federal government. We test our hypothesis using three American National Election Study (ANES) cross-sectional studies (2012–2020), the 2016–2020 ANES panel, and a survey experiment. Our results show a negative and significant relationship between perceived ingroup discrimination and trust in government in 2012 and 2016 but not in 2020. A lagged dependent variable (LDV) analysis shows that the negative effect of ingroup discrimination remains significant even after an LDV is included in the model, but the reverse is not the case. Finally, a framing experiment suggests that those high on ingroup discrimination beliefs are more likely to think that politicians have an anti-white agenda, while those low on such beliefs are more likely to think that politicians have an anti-Black agenda.
对群体歧视的认知是否助长了政府的白人不信任?2012-2012年ANES的见解和框架实验
自20世纪60年代以来,政治精英们就开始或明或暗地宣称政府歧视白人,以此来动员白人选民。因此,许多美国白人认为,解决种族不平等问题的政府政策是一种反白人偏见,批评种族不平等的政客是对白人利益的敌视。我们假设,认为自己所在群体面临歧视的美国白人更有可能不信任联邦政府。我们使用三个美国全国选举研究(ANES)横断面研究(2012-2020),2016-2020 ANES面板和调查实验来检验我们的假设。我们的研究结果显示,在2012年和2016年,感知到的群体内歧视与政府信任之间存在显著的负相关关系,而在2020年则不存在。滞后因变量(LDV)分析表明,即使在模型中包含了LDV,群体内歧视的负面影响仍然显著,但反之则不然。最后,一项框架实验表明,那些相信内部歧视的人更有可能认为政治家有反白人的议程,而那些相信内部歧视的人更有可能认为政治家有反黑人的议程。
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
Polity
Polity POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1968, Polity has been committed to the publication of scholarship reflecting the full variety of approaches to the study of politics. As journals have become more specialized and less accessible to many within the discipline of political science, Polity has remained ecumenical. The editor and editorial board welcome articles intended to be of interest to an entire field (e.g., political theory or international politics) within political science, to the discipline as a whole, and to scholars in related disciplines in the social sciences and the humanities. Scholarship of this type promises to be highly "productive" - that is, to stimulate other scholars to ask fresh questions and reconsider conventional assumptions.
×
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