To leave or not to leave? Understanding the support for the United Kingdom membership in the European Union: Identity, attitudes towards the political system and socio-economic status

IF 1.3 4区 社会学 Q3 SOCIOLOGY Rationality and Society Pub Date : 2020-07-25 DOI:10.1177/1043463120945268
Nicola Pensiero
{"title":"To leave or not to leave? Understanding the support for the United Kingdom membership in the European Union: Identity, attitudes towards the political system and socio-economic status","authors":"Nicola Pensiero","doi":"10.1177/1043463120945268","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article proposes a decision model of the British support for leaving the European Union (EU) that includes both identity aspirations, attitudes towards the political system and economic interest and test it on the Understanding Society 6th, 7th and 8th surveys. Current studies tend to interpret the British Euroscepticism as a combination of attachment to British identity, lack of economic opportunities and dissatisfaction with the political class. Using this approach where factors are additive, it is not possible to account for the substantial portion of socio-economically advantaged individuals which prefer to leave the EU, and for those who, despite their low attachment to their British identity, the relatively high educational level and satisfaction with domestic democracy, prefer to leave the EU. I use a theoretical approach which considers both economic and cultural considerations as rational considerations and conceptualise their interaction in terms of trade off. I use classification tree analysis to evaluate the relative importance of the main explanatory factors and of their interaction. The results show that the negative evaluation of the political system makes certain groups, which otherwise tend to support European integration, lean towards Euroscepticism. It helps to explain the Euroscepticism of those who are less attached to their British identity and of advantaged classes. The results have also showed that anti-establishment attitudes are not associated with disadvantaged socio-economic groups. The dissatisfaction with domestic democracy is relevant mostly for the advantaged classes, and the lack of political efficacy affects equally the attitudes of advantaged and disadvantaged groups. Last, disadvantaged groups’ support for European integration is driven by identity aspirations not by economic interest.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"32 1","pages":"255 - 277"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1043463120945268","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rationality and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1043463120945268","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This article proposes a decision model of the British support for leaving the European Union (EU) that includes both identity aspirations, attitudes towards the political system and economic interest and test it on the Understanding Society 6th, 7th and 8th surveys. Current studies tend to interpret the British Euroscepticism as a combination of attachment to British identity, lack of economic opportunities and dissatisfaction with the political class. Using this approach where factors are additive, it is not possible to account for the substantial portion of socio-economically advantaged individuals which prefer to leave the EU, and for those who, despite their low attachment to their British identity, the relatively high educational level and satisfaction with domestic democracy, prefer to leave the EU. I use a theoretical approach which considers both economic and cultural considerations as rational considerations and conceptualise their interaction in terms of trade off. I use classification tree analysis to evaluate the relative importance of the main explanatory factors and of their interaction. The results show that the negative evaluation of the political system makes certain groups, which otherwise tend to support European integration, lean towards Euroscepticism. It helps to explain the Euroscepticism of those who are less attached to their British identity and of advantaged classes. The results have also showed that anti-establishment attitudes are not associated with disadvantaged socio-economic groups. The dissatisfaction with domestic democracy is relevant mostly for the advantaged classes, and the lack of political efficacy affects equally the attitudes of advantaged and disadvantaged groups. Last, disadvantaged groups’ support for European integration is driven by identity aspirations not by economic interest.
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
走还是不走?了解对联合王国欧盟成员资格的支持:身份、对政治制度和社会经济地位的态度
本文提出了一个英国支持脱欧的决策模型,该模型包括身份愿望、对政治制度的态度和经济利益,并在理解社会第6、第7和第8次调查中进行了测试。目前的研究倾向于将英国的欧洲怀疑主义解释为对英国身份的依恋、缺乏经济机会和对政治阶层的不满。在因素是相加的情况下,使用这种方法,不可能解释大部分倾向于离开欧盟的社会经济优势个人,以及那些尽管对英国身份的依恋程度较低、教育水平相对较高、对国内民主的满意度较高但仍倾向于离开欧盟的人。我采用了一种理论方法,将经济和文化因素视为理性因素,并从权衡的角度对它们的相互作用进行概念化。我使用分类树分析来评估主要解释因素及其相互作用的相对重要性。结果表明,对政治制度的负面评价使某些倾向于支持欧洲一体化的群体倾向于欧洲怀疑主义。这有助于解释那些对自己的英国身份和优势阶级不太依恋的人的欧洲怀疑主义。研究结果还表明,反建制态度与弱势社会经济群体无关。对国内民主的不满主要与优势阶级有关,而政治效能的缺乏同样影响了优势群体和弱势群体的态度。最后,弱势群体对欧洲一体化的支持是由身份愿望而非经济利益驱动的。
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
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Rationality & Society focuses on the growing contributions of rational-action based theory, and the questions and controversies surrounding this growth. Why Choose Rationality and Society? The trend toward ever-greater specialization in many areas of intellectual life has lead to fragmentation that deprives scholars of the ability to communicate even in closely adjoining fields. The emergence of the rational action paradigm as the inter-lingua of the social sciences is a remarkable exception to this trend. It is the one paradigm that offers the promise of bringing greater theoretical unity across disciplines such as economics, sociology, political science, cognitive psychology, moral philosophy and law.
期刊最新文献
Does improved upward social mobility foster frustration and conflict? A large-scale online experiment testing Boudon’s model Effectiveness of technology for braille literacy education for children: a systematic review. Refined tastes, coarse tastes: Solving the stratification-of-goods enigma Explaining mobilization for revolts by private interests and kinship relations Graduated sanctioning, endogenous institutions and sustainable cooperation in common-pool resources: An experimental test
×
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