Lip service to liberal democracy in Western Europe?

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE European Political Science Review Pub Date : 2024-05-13 DOI:10.1017/s1755773924000079
Lea Kaftan
{"title":"Lip service to liberal democracy in Western Europe?","authors":"Lea Kaftan","doi":"10.1017/s1755773924000079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Political scientists heavily rely on standard survey questions referring to “democracy” when they study citizens’ attitudes toward (liberal) democracy. However, we only know little about the way in which citizens respond to these questions. This article focuses on two frequently highlighted issues: social desirability and the consistency between citizens’ understanding and researchers’ understanding of the term “democracy.” To address these issues, I collected novel survey data via YouGov from 14,000 British, French, German, and Italian respondents. I use a list experiment to show that respondents do not feel socially pressured to misreport their support for democracy. However, what citizens have in mind when they claim to support democracy only reflects norms and institutions of minimal conceptions of democracy. Overall, this encourages the usage of questions regarding citizens’ support for democracy widely, although this should not be interpreted as the support for anything going beyond minimal conceptions of democracy (providing freedom and allowing for citizens’ influence on political decisions).","PeriodicalId":47291,"journal":{"name":"European Political Science Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Political Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1755773924000079","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Political scientists heavily rely on standard survey questions referring to “democracy” when they study citizens’ attitudes toward (liberal) democracy. However, we only know little about the way in which citizens respond to these questions. This article focuses on two frequently highlighted issues: social desirability and the consistency between citizens’ understanding and researchers’ understanding of the term “democracy.” To address these issues, I collected novel survey data via YouGov from 14,000 British, French, German, and Italian respondents. I use a list experiment to show that respondents do not feel socially pressured to misreport their support for democracy. However, what citizens have in mind when they claim to support democracy only reflects norms and institutions of minimal conceptions of democracy. Overall, this encourages the usage of questions regarding citizens’ support for democracy widely, although this should not be interpreted as the support for anything going beyond minimal conceptions of democracy (providing freedom and allowing for citizens’ influence on political decisions).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
西欧对自由民主的口惠而实不至?
政治学家在研究公民对(自由)民主的态度时,在很大程度上依赖于提及 "民主 "的标准调查问题。然而,我们对公民如何回答这些问题知之甚少。本文重点讨论两个经常被强调的问题:社会可取性以及公民和研究人员对 "民主 "一词理解的一致性。为了解决这些问题,我通过 YouGov 收集了来自 14000 名英国、法国、德国和意大利受访者的新颖调查数据。我通过列表实验表明,受访者不会因为社会压力而误报他们对民主的支持。然而,当公民声称支持民主时,他们心中所想的只是反映了最低限度的民主概念的规范和制度。总体而言,这鼓励广泛使用有关公民支持民主的问题,尽管这不应被解释为对超出最低民主概念(提供自由并允许公民对政治决策施加影响)的任何东西的支持。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
50
期刊最新文献
Widening the gap of political inequality? The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on political engagement Lip service to liberal democracy in Western Europe? What drives trust in regulatory agencies? Probing the relevance of governmental level and performance through a cross-national elite experiment on EU regulation Gamson going global? Cabinet proportionality in comparative perspective Election integrity across Europe: who thinks elections are held fairly and why?
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1