政治程序正义与对政治制度的态度之间的关系:一项元分析

IF 4 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Psychology Pub Date : 2023-10-28 DOI:10.1111/pops.12936
Olga Gulevich, Julia Borovikova, Maria Rodionova
{"title":"政治程序正义与对政治制度的态度之间的关系:一项元分析","authors":"Olga Gulevich, Julia Borovikova, Maria Rodionova","doi":"10.1111/pops.12936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A positive relationship between assessments of procedural justice and attitudes toward the political system has been identified in many studies of various countries. To quantify this relationship, a meta‐analysis was conducted on 69 samples from 50,814 respondents, reported in 37 manuscripts between 1981 and 2021. We found positive correlations between assessments of procedural justice and attitudes toward politicians, political institutions, and the political system in people of different ages and in countries with different political regimes. These positive correlations exist in real and hypothetical situations with various levels of authority. However, two factors moderated the association between the assessment of procedural justice and political attitudes. First, procedural justice as a set of norms is more strongly related to attitudes toward the system than procedural justice as a generalized assessment is. Second, the assessment of procedural justice is more strongly associated with attitudes toward political institutions and the system than attitudes toward the procedures and decisions. Moreover, the percentage of heterogeneity in the obtained models is fairly high; categorical moderators explain 43% of the variance of the effects obtained. The results should therefore be interpreted with consideration of this substantial heterogeneity in the correlations' sizes.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The relationship between political procedural justice and attitudes toward the political system: A meta‐analysis\",\"authors\":\"Olga Gulevich, Julia Borovikova, Maria Rodionova\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/pops.12936\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract A positive relationship between assessments of procedural justice and attitudes toward the political system has been identified in many studies of various countries. To quantify this relationship, a meta‐analysis was conducted on 69 samples from 50,814 respondents, reported in 37 manuscripts between 1981 and 2021. We found positive correlations between assessments of procedural justice and attitudes toward politicians, political institutions, and the political system in people of different ages and in countries with different political regimes. These positive correlations exist in real and hypothetical situations with various levels of authority. However, two factors moderated the association between the assessment of procedural justice and political attitudes. First, procedural justice as a set of norms is more strongly related to attitudes toward the system than procedural justice as a generalized assessment is. Second, the assessment of procedural justice is more strongly associated with attitudes toward political institutions and the system than attitudes toward the procedures and decisions. Moreover, the percentage of heterogeneity in the obtained models is fairly high; categorical moderators explain 43% of the variance of the effects obtained. The results should therefore be interpreted with consideration of this substantial heterogeneity in the correlations' sizes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48332,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12936\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12936","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

摘要

在各国的许多研究中,程序正义的评价与对政治制度的态度之间存在正相关关系。为了量化这种关系,我们对来自50,814名受访者的69个样本进行了荟萃分析,这些样本报告于1981年至2021年间的37份手稿中。我们发现,在不同年龄和不同政体的国家中,对程序正义的评估与对政治家、政治机构和政治制度的态度之间存在正相关。这些正相关存在于不同级别权威的真实和假设情境中。然而,有两个因素缓和了对程序公正的评价与政治态度之间的联系。首先,作为一套规范的程序正义比作为一种广义评价的程序正义更强烈地与对制度的态度相关。第二,对程序正义的评价与对政治机构和制度的态度的关系比与对程序和决定的态度的关系更密切。此外,所得模型的异质性百分比相当高;分类调节因子解释了所获得效果方差的43%。因此,在解释结果时应考虑到相关性大小的巨大异质性。
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
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The relationship between political procedural justice and attitudes toward the political system: A meta‐analysis
Abstract A positive relationship between assessments of procedural justice and attitudes toward the political system has been identified in many studies of various countries. To quantify this relationship, a meta‐analysis was conducted on 69 samples from 50,814 respondents, reported in 37 manuscripts between 1981 and 2021. We found positive correlations between assessments of procedural justice and attitudes toward politicians, political institutions, and the political system in people of different ages and in countries with different political regimes. These positive correlations exist in real and hypothetical situations with various levels of authority. However, two factors moderated the association between the assessment of procedural justice and political attitudes. First, procedural justice as a set of norms is more strongly related to attitudes toward the system than procedural justice as a generalized assessment is. Second, the assessment of procedural justice is more strongly associated with attitudes toward political institutions and the system than attitudes toward the procedures and decisions. Moreover, the percentage of heterogeneity in the obtained models is fairly high; categorical moderators explain 43% of the variance of the effects obtained. The results should therefore be interpreted with consideration of this substantial heterogeneity in the correlations' sizes.
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
8.00
自引率
6.50%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Understanding the psychological aspects of national and international political developments is increasingly important in this age of international tension and sweeping political change. Political Psychology, the journal of the International Society of Political Psychology, is dedicated to the analysis of the interrelationships between psychological and political processes. International contributors draw on a diverse range of sources, including clinical and cognitive psychology, economics, history, international relations, philosophy, political science, political theory, sociology, personality and social psychology.
期刊最新文献
When saying sorry is not enough: The paradox of a political apology offered to Irish mother and baby home survivors Political censorship feels acceptable when ideas seem harmful and false Dealing with uncertainty and cognitive biases in international politics Overcoming (vegan) burnout: Mass gatherings can provide respite and rekindle shared identity and social action efforts in moralized minority groups Perceived threat, compassion, and public evaluations toward refugees
×
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