Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-263-286
Andrey Rezaev, Natalia Tregubova
This paper aims to analyze Bitcoin as an identifiable system of human-machine interdependence. The authors start with a brief historical outline of the Bitcoin project and discuss questions that Bitcoin poses to social sciences, such as whether Bitcoin is money, how the Bitcoin project relates to economic theory, what determines the value of a Bitcoin, and what are the conditions for trust in Bitcoin? Finally, what happens when the Bitcoin project becomes a reality? In what follows, the authors correlate the existence of Bitcoin with the spread of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies as active intermediaries and participants in human interactions. After observing the similarities and differences between AI and the Bitcoin project, the idea of whether Bitcoin can act as “artificial money” for AI is discussed, and the reality of human-machine interdependence is exemplified. In conclusion, the authors define Bitcoin as a particular system of human-machine interdependence initially conceived as an alternative to money; however, in reality, it supplements the existing economic order.
{"title":"Human-Machine Interdependence Beyond Ai Development: the Case of Bitcoin","authors":"Andrey Rezaev, Natalia Tregubova","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-263-286","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-263-286","url":null,"abstract":"This paper aims to analyze Bitcoin as an identifiable system of human-machine interdependence. The authors start with a brief historical outline of the Bitcoin project and discuss questions that Bitcoin poses to social sciences, such as whether Bitcoin is money, how the Bitcoin project relates to economic theory, what determines the value of a Bitcoin, and what are the conditions for trust in Bitcoin? Finally, what happens when the Bitcoin project becomes a reality? In what follows, the authors correlate the existence of Bitcoin with the spread of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies as active intermediaries and participants in human interactions. After observing the similarities and differences between AI and the Bitcoin project, the idea of whether Bitcoin can act as “artificial money” for AI is discussed, and the reality of human-machine interdependence is exemplified. In conclusion, the authors define Bitcoin as a particular system of human-machine interdependence initially conceived as an alternative to money; however, in reality, it supplements the existing economic order.","PeriodicalId":43314,"journal":{"name":"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie","volume":"2016 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135506168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-96-124
Viacheslav Kondurov
Discussions about the nature of constitutional rights set out in the Constitution emerged in post-war Germany in the late 1950s and early 1960s, triggered by the judgement of the German Federal Constitutional Court in the so-called “Lüth case”. In this judgement, for the first time, the Court clearly articulated the position that fundamental rights are an objective value system that extends its legal force to all branches of law, including civil law. One of the fiercest critics of the Court decision was Ernst Forsthoff, a disciple of Carl Schmitt. In a series of articles, he attacked the “value” legal interpretation, pointing out that it leads not only to the destruction of the legal method and the loss of jurisprudence autonomy, but also to changes in the institutional structure of the state. E. Forsthoff’s criticism was predominantly juridical, focusing on the actual law enforcement, as well as on the theoretical-legal origins of value interpretation which he found in R. Smend’s “integration theory”. In contrast, C. Schmitt, in Tyranny of Values, practically omitted legal arguments and attacked the philosophical basis of the German Court’s position. Relying on M. Weber, the German legal scholar attempted to demonstrate that the adoption of value interpretation by constitutional justice means the direct application of values, which destroys the rule of law. Despite the different trends of criticism, the conclusions reached by E. Forsthoff and C. Schmitt show a significant similarity in that both call for the autonomy of legal science and a return to the formal legal state.
{"title":"Carl Schmitt's “Tyranny of Values” in the Context of the Debate on the Nature of Constitutional Rights","authors":"Viacheslav Kondurov","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-96-124","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-96-124","url":null,"abstract":"Discussions about the nature of constitutional rights set out in the Constitution emerged in post-war Germany in the late 1950s and early 1960s, triggered by the judgement of the German Federal Constitutional Court in the so-called “Lüth case”. In this judgement, for the first time, the Court clearly articulated the position that fundamental rights are an objective value system that extends its legal force to all branches of law, including civil law. One of the fiercest critics of the Court decision was Ernst Forsthoff, a disciple of Carl Schmitt. In a series of articles, he attacked the “value” legal interpretation, pointing out that it leads not only to the destruction of the legal method and the loss of jurisprudence autonomy, but also to changes in the institutional structure of the state. E. Forsthoff’s criticism was predominantly juridical, focusing on the actual law enforcement, as well as on the theoretical-legal origins of value interpretation which he found in R. Smend’s “integration theory”. In contrast, C. Schmitt, in Tyranny of Values, practically omitted legal arguments and attacked the philosophical basis of the German Court’s position. Relying on M. Weber, the German legal scholar attempted to demonstrate that the adoption of value interpretation by constitutional justice means the direct application of values, which destroys the rule of law. Despite the different trends of criticism, the conclusions reached by E. Forsthoff and C. Schmitt show a significant similarity in that both call for the autonomy of legal science and a return to the formal legal state.","PeriodicalId":43314,"journal":{"name":"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135506165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-172-195
Andrey Scherbak
The article explores the relationship between Orthodox religiosity and voting in Russia in 2011–2021. Using the theoretical framework of de-secularization from above which claims that church structures play a key role in the religious renaissance policy, we argue that the rise of the political influence of the ROC (Russian Orthodox Church) may be explained by its capacity for the dissemination of traditional values that ultimately results in votes for United Russia and President Vladimir Putin in national elections. This study reveals the emergence of a new area on Russia’s political map, that of the Orthodox belt, which combines higher levels of Orthodox religiosity and pro-Kremlin voting in national elections. Using multiple empirical strategies, we construct an index of religiosity on the regional level and identify the Orthodox Belt regions, test the relationship between Orthodox religiosity and voting in the national elections in 2011–2018, and test the differences in value orientations and electoral support between the Orthodox Belt regions and others. We conclude that non-Orthodox Belt regions in Russia with higher Orthodox religiosity, conservatism, and loyalty are an emerging trend in the Russian political geography.
{"title":"The “Orthodox Belt” on Russia’s Electoral Map in 2011–2021","authors":"Andrey Scherbak","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-172-195","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-172-195","url":null,"abstract":"The article explores the relationship between Orthodox religiosity and voting in Russia in 2011–2021. Using the theoretical framework of de-secularization from above which claims that church structures play a key role in the religious renaissance policy, we argue that the rise of the political influence of the ROC (Russian Orthodox Church) may be explained by its capacity for the dissemination of traditional values that ultimately results in votes for United Russia and President Vladimir Putin in national elections. This study reveals the emergence of a new area on Russia’s political map, that of the Orthodox belt, which combines higher levels of Orthodox religiosity and pro-Kremlin voting in national elections. Using multiple empirical strategies, we construct an index of religiosity on the regional level and identify the Orthodox Belt regions, test the relationship between Orthodox religiosity and voting in the national elections in 2011–2018, and test the differences in value orientations and electoral support between the Orthodox Belt regions and others. We conclude that non-Orthodox Belt regions in Russia with higher Orthodox religiosity, conservatism, and loyalty are an emerging trend in the Russian political geography.","PeriodicalId":43314,"journal":{"name":"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie","volume":"69 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135505397","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-125-146
Elena Timoshina
K. Schmitt’s essay “The Tyranny of Values” helps to clarify the genealogy and effects of the value turn in justice. The first part of the article explains the differences between the traditional judicial method, which operates with norms and the way judges deal with values. It is noted that judges’ methods of dealing with values are hermetic and irrational. The second part substantiates that the main object of Schmitt’s criticism was F. Nietzsche’s metaphysics of values in the analysis of which he follows M. Heidegger. Schmitt notes such a property of values as their subjective significance, as well as the interrelated punctuality and perspectivism of value thinking conditioning its aggressiveness. He omits the reference to the connection of value thinking with the Nietzschean concept of the will to power, but the assumption of such a connection is necessary to explain the aggressiveness of the logic of values. In the third part, several cases from case law of the European Court of Human Rights are presented. It is shown that the Court determines the value of an act of behavior not by correlating it with legally valid norms, but voluntarily. It is this mode of the judicial resolution of cases that Schmitt called the terror of the automatic realization of values unmediated by norms. In conclusion, it is noted that Schmitt’s essay points with varying degrees of clarity to the three implications of value discourse in justice, those of the methodological, political-institutional, and ethical.
施米特(K. Schmitt)的文章《价值的暴政》(The Tyranny of Values)有助于澄清正义中价值转向的谱系及其影响。文章的第一部分阐述了传统的以规范操作的司法方法与法官处理价值的方式的区别。值得注意的是，法官处理价值的方法是封闭的和非理性的。第二部分证实了施米特批判的主要对象是尼采的价值形而上学，他在分析中追随了海德格尔。Schmitt注意到价值观的这种属性，即它们的主观意义，以及价值思维的相互关联的及时性和透视性，制约了价值思维的攻击性。他省略了价值思维与尼采的权力意志概念之间的联系，但是这种联系的假设对于解释价值逻辑的攻击性是必要的。第三部分介绍了欧洲人权法院判例法中的几个案例。这表明，法院决定行为行为的价值不是通过将其与法律上有效的规范相关联，而是自愿的。正是这种案件的司法解决模式，施米特称之为对不受规范影响的价值自动实现的恐惧。最后，值得注意的是，施密特的文章以不同程度的清晰度指出了正义价值话语的三种含义，即方法论，政治制度和伦理。
{"title":"The “Tyranny of Values” as the “will to Power”: on the Genealogy and Effects of Value Discourse in Justice","authors":"Elena Timoshina","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-125-146","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-125-146","url":null,"abstract":"K. Schmitt’s essay “The Tyranny of Values” helps to clarify the genealogy and effects of the value turn in justice. The first part of the article explains the differences between the traditional judicial method, which operates with norms and the way judges deal with values. It is noted that judges’ methods of dealing with values are hermetic and irrational. The second part substantiates that the main object of Schmitt’s criticism was F. Nietzsche’s metaphysics of values in the analysis of which he follows M. Heidegger. Schmitt notes such a property of values as their subjective significance, as well as the interrelated punctuality and perspectivism of value thinking conditioning its aggressiveness. He omits the reference to the connection of value thinking with the Nietzschean concept of the will to power, but the assumption of such a connection is necessary to explain the aggressiveness of the logic of values. In the third part, several cases from case law of the European Court of Human Rights are presented. It is shown that the Court determines the value of an act of behavior not by correlating it with legally valid norms, but voluntarily. It is this mode of the judicial resolution of cases that Schmitt called the terror of the automatic realization of values unmediated by norms. In conclusion, it is noted that Schmitt’s essay points with varying degrees of clarity to the three implications of value discourse in justice, those of the methodological, political-institutional, and ethical.","PeriodicalId":43314,"journal":{"name":"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135505399","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-9-52
Dmitry Kurakin
The first part of the article introduces a new research program that focuses on the constitutive role of emotions, affect, and their intensity in meaning-making. It opposes the existing broad tradition that effectively posits culture as information and sees cultural processes as coding, transferring, and processing information. I suggest that such a “cybernetic” paradigm of culture stems from the implicit or explicit domination of the computational models of cognition in sociology. However, current progress in cognitive neuroscience and its theoretical comprehension makes these models inadequate. The ongoing shift to distributed models of cognition calls for an adjustment of the concept of culture regarding its “vertical”, emotional dimension. Instead of seeing emotions as an “amplifier” of pre-existing cultural meanings or as a “fuel” of social processes, we should see emotions as an ingredient of an emergent synthesis that creates culture. The first part of the article introduces a historical-sociological reconstruction of theories recognizing an integral emotional dimension of culture; this is opposed to the entire sub-discipline of the sociology of emotions that broadly describes the mutual influences between social life and emotions as a human psychic trait. In the context of the ongoing debates about a cognitive turn in sociology, this historical-sociological reconstruction allows me to build a Durkheimian theory of cathectic mechanisms of culture based on the re-interpretation of the Freudian concept of cathexis. The article also contains the basic principles and implications of the sociological theory of cathexis.
{"title":"Cathectic Mechanisms of Culture. Part 1","authors":"Dmitry Kurakin","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-9-52","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-9-52","url":null,"abstract":"The first part of the article introduces a new research program that focuses on the constitutive role of emotions, affect, and their intensity in meaning-making. It opposes the existing broad tradition that effectively posits culture as information and sees cultural processes as coding, transferring, and processing information. I suggest that such a “cybernetic” paradigm of culture stems from the implicit or explicit domination of the computational models of cognition in sociology. However, current progress in cognitive neuroscience and its theoretical comprehension makes these models inadequate. The ongoing shift to distributed models of cognition calls for an adjustment of the concept of culture regarding its “vertical”, emotional dimension. Instead of seeing emotions as an “amplifier” of pre-existing cultural meanings or as a “fuel” of social processes, we should see emotions as an ingredient of an emergent synthesis that creates culture. The first part of the article introduces a historical-sociological reconstruction of theories recognizing an integral emotional dimension of culture; this is opposed to the entire sub-discipline of the sociology of emotions that broadly describes the mutual influences between social life and emotions as a human psychic trait. In the context of the ongoing debates about a cognitive turn in sociology, this historical-sociological reconstruction allows me to build a Durkheimian theory of cathectic mechanisms of culture based on the re-interpretation of the Freudian concept of cathexis. The article also contains the basic principles and implications of the sociological theory of cathexis.","PeriodicalId":43314,"journal":{"name":"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135505886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-53-74
Vladimir Malakhov
The rise of the post-colonial and de-colonial narrative that is being experienced nowadays in post-Soviet countries stands in contrast with the rejection of this narrative by the Russian academic and sociocultural mainstream. The paper analyzes the opportunities and constrains of the “post-colonialism” conceptual framework. As well, the arguments of researchers who were skeptical about this framework are reconstructed. The author separates “post-colonialism” as a research strategy and “de-colonialism” (“de-colonial thought”) as a form of activism. According to the author, the paradigm of post-colonial studies, despite its inherent theoretical shortcomings, contains a serious analytical potential, while de-colonialism is an internally contradictory ideological program. In addition, the article makes a distinction between post-colonialism as a situation and post-colonialism as a reflection on this situation. Post-coloniality is possible without colonialism. It denotes the comprehension and rethinking of a certain historical experience, regardless of whether the past condition qualifies as colonial.
{"title":"Retroactive Categorizations, or Post-Coloniality as Condition","authors":"Vladimir Malakhov","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-53-74","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-53-74","url":null,"abstract":"The rise of the post-colonial and de-colonial narrative that is being experienced nowadays in post-Soviet countries stands in contrast with the rejection of this narrative by the Russian academic and sociocultural mainstream. The paper analyzes the opportunities and constrains of the “post-colonialism” conceptual framework. As well, the arguments of researchers who were skeptical about this framework are reconstructed. The author separates “post-colonialism” as a research strategy and “de-colonialism” (“de-colonial thought”) as a form of activism. According to the author, the paradigm of post-colonial studies, despite its inherent theoretical shortcomings, contains a serious analytical potential, while de-colonialism is an internally contradictory ideological program. In addition, the article makes a distinction between post-colonialism as a situation and post-colonialism as a reflection on this situation. Post-coloniality is possible without colonialism. It denotes the comprehension and rethinking of a certain historical experience, regardless of whether the past condition qualifies as colonial.","PeriodicalId":43314,"journal":{"name":"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie","volume":"217 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135506162","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-287-317
Mikhail Minkov, Boris Sokolov, Ilya Lomakin
Some 40 years ago, the Dutch social scientist Geert Hofstede laid the foundations of the science of modern cultural comparisons and created the most popular model of national culture that is still in use today across the world. Meanwhile, numerous issues with that model have been identified and the need for a thorough revision has become obvious. This article briefly explains Hofstede’s model and its issues and summarizes the existing revisions of it, resulting in a new, simpler, and more robust Minkov-Hofstede model. This new version explains a wide range of differences in national indicators, such as transparency-corruption, gender equality, road death tolls and industrial fatalities, educational achievement, violent crime, adolescent fertility, family structure, and innovation rates, to name just a few. These indicators form a pattern that is similar to the new Minkov-Hofstede model and can be explained through similar theories. This is evidence that subjective culture (what people think and feel) has a mirror image in objective culture (what people do). The new Minkov-Hofstede model can be applied to countries, as well as to some sub-national units such as US states.
{"title":"Evolution of the Hofstede Model of Cultural Dimensions: Parallels Between Objective and Subjective Culture","authors":"Mikhail Minkov, Boris Sokolov, Ilya Lomakin","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-287-317","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-287-317","url":null,"abstract":"Some 40 years ago, the Dutch social scientist Geert Hofstede laid the foundations of the science of modern cultural comparisons and created the most popular model of national culture that is still in use today across the world. Meanwhile, numerous issues with that model have been identified and the need for a thorough revision has become obvious. This article briefly explains Hofstede’s model and its issues and summarizes the existing revisions of it, resulting in a new, simpler, and more robust Minkov-Hofstede model. This new version explains a wide range of differences in national indicators, such as transparency-corruption, gender equality, road death tolls and industrial fatalities, educational achievement, violent crime, adolescent fertility, family structure, and innovation rates, to name just a few. These indicators form a pattern that is similar to the new Minkov-Hofstede model and can be explained through similar theories. This is evidence that subjective culture (what people think and feel) has a mirror image in objective culture (what people do). The new Minkov-Hofstede model can be applied to countries, as well as to some sub-national units such as US states.","PeriodicalId":43314,"journal":{"name":"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135505879","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-196-218
Ruslan Mukhametov
Political trust is central to the study of political regimes. The level of public support for a government or party is one of the most important indicators of political legitimacy and stability. The article examines the quantitative indicators of the influence of socio-psychological, civic, institutional, and informational factors on political trust. The purpose of the study was to understand the factors influencing trust in the Russian government. The analysis was based on data from the sociological survey of the 7th wave of the World Values Survey (2017-2022). Using the Russian data set, the authors assessed the impact of interpersonal and general trust, involvement in non-profit and non-governmental organizations, citizens’ perceptions of their financial situation, security and corruption, and watching TV news on trust in government institutions. This study shows that high levels of interpersonal and societal trust have a positive impact on political trust. This study proposes and confirms the hypothesis that watching political television programs improves trust in the government. The article complements existing empirical studies on institutional trust and adapts well-known theories explaining the origin of trust to the Russian political context.
{"title":"Why Do Citizens Trust the Government? The Origins of Political Trust in Modern Russia","authors":"Ruslan Mukhametov","doi":"10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-196-218","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2023-3-196-218","url":null,"abstract":"Political trust is central to the study of political regimes. The level of public support for a government or party is one of the most important indicators of political legitimacy and stability. The article examines the quantitative indicators of the influence of socio-psychological, civic, institutional, and informational factors on political trust. The purpose of the study was to understand the factors influencing trust in the Russian government. The analysis was based on data from the sociological survey of the 7th wave of the World Values Survey (2017-2022). Using the Russian data set, the authors assessed the impact of interpersonal and general trust, involvement in non-profit and non-governmental organizations, citizens’ perceptions of their financial situation, security and corruption, and watching TV news on trust in government institutions. This study shows that high levels of interpersonal and societal trust have a positive impact on political trust. This study proposes and confirms the hypothesis that watching political television programs improves trust in the government. The article complements existing empirical studies on institutional trust and adapts well-known theories explaining the origin of trust to the Russian political context.","PeriodicalId":43314,"journal":{"name":"Sociologiceskoe Obozrenie","volume":"180 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135505882","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：