比较与纵向视角下的情感极化。

IF 2.9 1区 社会学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Diego Garzia, Frederico Ferreira da Silva, Simon Maye
{"title":"比较与纵向视角下的情感极化。","authors":"Diego Garzia,&nbsp;Frederico Ferreira da Silva,&nbsp;Simon Maye","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfad004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Existent research shows that affective polarization has been intensifying in some publics, diminishing in others, and remaining stable in most. We contribute to this debate by providing the most encompassing comparative and longitudinal account of affective polarization so far. We resort to a newly assembled dataset able to track partisan affect, with varying time series, in eighteen democracies over the last six decades. We present results based on two different operational measures of affective polarization: Reiljan's Affective Polarization Index, based on reported partisans only, and Wagner's weighted distance from the most liked party, based on the whole electorate. Our reassessment of affective polarization among partisans confirms that an intensifying trend is observable in a number of countries but it is, by no means, generalizable to all established democracies. Regarding the longitudinal assessment of affective polarization among the electorate, we confirm that US citizens have become more affectively polarized over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":"87 1","pages":"219-231"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10127533/pdf/","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Affective Polarization in Comparative and Longitudinal Perspective.\",\"authors\":\"Diego Garzia,&nbsp;Frederico Ferreira da Silva,&nbsp;Simon Maye\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/poq/nfad004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Existent research shows that affective polarization has been intensifying in some publics, diminishing in others, and remaining stable in most. We contribute to this debate by providing the most encompassing comparative and longitudinal account of affective polarization so far. We resort to a newly assembled dataset able to track partisan affect, with varying time series, in eighteen democracies over the last six decades. We present results based on two different operational measures of affective polarization: Reiljan's Affective Polarization Index, based on reported partisans only, and Wagner's weighted distance from the most liked party, based on the whole electorate. Our reassessment of affective polarization among partisans confirms that an intensifying trend is observable in a number of countries but it is, by no means, generalizable to all established democracies. Regarding the longitudinal assessment of affective polarization among the electorate, we confirm that US citizens have become more affectively polarized over time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51359,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Opinion Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"87 1\",\"pages\":\"219-231\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10127533/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Opinion Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfad004\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Opinion Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfad004","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

现有的研究表明,情感两极分化在一些公众中加剧,在另一些公众中减弱,但在大多数公众中保持稳定。我们通过提供迄今为止最全面的情感两极分化的比较和纵向说明来促进这场辩论。我们采用了一个新组装的数据集,该数据集能够追踪过去六十年来18个民主国家中不同时间序列的党派影响。我们提出的结果基于两种不同的情感极化的操作措施:Reiljan的情感极化指数,仅基于报告的党派,和瓦格纳的加权距离最受欢迎的政党,基于全体选民。我们对党派之间情感两极分化的重新评估证实,在一些国家可以观察到一种加剧的趋势,但这绝不是所有老牌民主国家的普遍趋势。关于选民情感两极分化的纵向评估,我们确认,随着时间的推移,美国公民已经变得更加情感两极分化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Affective Polarization in Comparative and Longitudinal Perspective.

Affective Polarization in Comparative and Longitudinal Perspective.

Affective Polarization in Comparative and Longitudinal Perspective.

Affective Polarization in Comparative and Longitudinal Perspective.

Existent research shows that affective polarization has been intensifying in some publics, diminishing in others, and remaining stable in most. We contribute to this debate by providing the most encompassing comparative and longitudinal account of affective polarization so far. We resort to a newly assembled dataset able to track partisan affect, with varying time series, in eighteen democracies over the last six decades. We present results based on two different operational measures of affective polarization: Reiljan's Affective Polarization Index, based on reported partisans only, and Wagner's weighted distance from the most liked party, based on the whole electorate. Our reassessment of affective polarization among partisans confirms that an intensifying trend is observable in a number of countries but it is, by no means, generalizable to all established democracies. Regarding the longitudinal assessment of affective polarization among the electorate, we confirm that US citizens have become more affectively polarized over time.

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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
2.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Published since 1937, Public Opinion Quarterly is among the most frequently cited journals of its kind. Such interdisciplinary leadership benefits academicians and all social science researchers by providing a trusted source for a wide range of high quality research. POQ selectively publishes important theoretical contributions to opinion and communication research, analyses of current public opinion, and investigations of methodological issues involved in survey validity—including questionnaire construction, interviewing and interviewers, sampling strategy, and mode of administration. The theoretical and methodological advances detailed in pages of POQ ensure its importance as a research resource.
×
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