政治自由、新闻消费和政治信任模式：来自东亚和东南亚的证据，2001-2016

IF 1.2 4区社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Political Science Pub Date : 2021-09-02 DOI:10.1080/00323187.2021.1968767

Anli Jiang, T. Zhang

{"title":"政治自由、新闻消费和政治信任模式：来自东亚和东南亚的证据，2001-2016","authors":"Anli Jiang, T. Zhang","doi":"10.1080/00323187.2021.1968767","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The gap between trust in central and local governments remains an unsolved puzzle in social sciences. Based on existing theoretical frameworks and our analyses of the Asian Barometer Survey data (2001–2016), we found three types of trust gaps in Asian societies: equal trust, paradoxical trust, and hierarchical trust. We speculated the differences could be explained by macro-level political freedom and individual-level predictors such as how people consume political news. Multilevel analyses revealed the political freedom of a society is a critical predictor of the trust gap: people from politically unfree societies tend to trust their central governments the most. Furthermore, freedom and frequency of news consumption interact in shaping political trust: in free societies, people who follow news frequently have less political trust; in unfree societies, the opposite is true, suggesting media propaganda plays a role in shaping political trust. This study helps to explain authoritarian resilience in East and Southeast Asia.","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Political freedom, news consumption, and patterns of political trust: evidence from East and Southeast Asia, 2001-2016\",\"authors\":\"Anli Jiang, T. Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00323187.2021.1968767\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The gap between trust in central and local governments remains an unsolved puzzle in social sciences. Based on existing theoretical frameworks and our analyses of the Asian Barometer Survey data (2001–2016), we found three types of trust gaps in Asian societies: equal trust, paradoxical trust, and hierarchical trust. We speculated the differences could be explained by macro-level political freedom and individual-level predictors such as how people consume political news. Multilevel analyses revealed the political freedom of a society is a critical predictor of the trust gap: people from politically unfree societies tend to trust their central governments the most. Furthermore, freedom and frequency of news consumption interact in shaping political trust: in free societies, people who follow news frequently have less political trust; in unfree societies, the opposite is true, suggesting media propaganda plays a role in shaping political trust. This study helps to explain authoritarian resilience in East and Southeast Asia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20275,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2021.1968767\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00323187.2021.1968767","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: 7

摘要

摘要对中央和地方政府的信任差距仍然是社会科学中一个悬而未决的难题。基于现有的理论框架和我们对亚洲晴雨表调查数据（2001-2006）的分析，我们发现亚洲社会存在三种类型的信任差距：平等信任、矛盾信任和等级信任。我们推测，这种差异可以用宏观层面的政治自由和个人层面的预测因素来解释，比如人们如何消费政治新闻。多层面分析表明，一个社会的政治自由是信任差距的关键预测因素：来自政治不自由社会的人往往最信任他们的中央政府。此外，新闻消费的自由度和频率在塑造政治信任方面相互作用：在自由社会中，经常关注新闻的人政治信任度较低；在不自由的社会中，情况正好相反，这表明媒体宣传在塑造政治信任方面发挥着作用。这项研究有助于解释东亚和东南亚的威权弹性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Political freedom, news consumption, and patterns of political trust: evidence from East and Southeast Asia, 2001-2016

ABSTRACT The gap between trust in central and local governments remains an unsolved puzzle in social sciences. Based on existing theoretical frameworks and our analyses of the Asian Barometer Survey data (2001–2016), we found three types of trust gaps in Asian societies: equal trust, paradoxical trust, and hierarchical trust. We speculated the differences could be explained by macro-level political freedom and individual-level predictors such as how people consume political news. Multilevel analyses revealed the political freedom of a society is a critical predictor of the trust gap: people from politically unfree societies tend to trust their central governments the most. Furthermore, freedom and frequency of news consumption interact in shaping political trust: in free societies, people who follow news frequently have less political trust; in unfree societies, the opposite is true, suggesting media propaganda plays a role in shaping political trust. This study helps to explain authoritarian resilience in East and Southeast Asia.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Political Science POLITICAL SCIENCE-

CiteScore

0.90

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Political Science publishes high quality original scholarly works in the broad field of political science. Submission of articles with a regional focus on New Zealand and the Asia-Pacific is particularly encouraged, but content is not limited to this focus. Contributions are invited from across the political science discipline, including from the fields of international relations, comparative politics, political theory and public administration. Proposals for collections of articles on a common theme or debate to be published as special issues are welcome, as well as individual submissions.