社会期望偏差是否扭曲了意识形态和自我利益的调查分析?累进税清单实验的证据

IF 2.9 1区 社会学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Public Opinion Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-01-31 DOI:10.1093/poq/nfac050
Tobias Heide-Jørgensen
{"title":"社会期望偏差是否扭曲了意识形态和自我利益的调查分析?累进税清单实验的证据","authors":"Tobias Heide-Jørgensen","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfac050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The relative importance of ideological orientations and material self-interest as determinants of political attitudes is still discussed. Using a novel list experiment on opposition to progressive taxation embedded in a large representative Danish online survey (N = 2,010), I study how social desirability concerns bias the conclusions survey researchers draw regarding the influence of self-interest (gauged by income) and ideology (measured by left-right self-identifications) on public opinion. I find that right-wingers are much less opposed to progressive taxation when attitudes are measured indirectly and unobtrusively by means of the list experiment relative to asking directly about their opinions. In fact, rightists are no more against progressive taxation than leftists and centrists. Furthermore, opposition to tax progressivity is considerably lower among low-income individuals when social desirability bias is addressed, thereby increasing the attitudinal gap between low- and high-income individuals. The implications of the findings are that survey research risks exaggerating the importance of ideological orientations and underestimating how much political views reflect material self-interest.","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Social Desirability Bias Distort Survey Analyses of Ideology and Self-Interest? Evidence from a List Experiment on Progressive Taxation\",\"authors\":\"Tobias Heide-Jørgensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/poq/nfac050\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The relative importance of ideological orientations and material self-interest as determinants of political attitudes is still discussed. Using a novel list experiment on opposition to progressive taxation embedded in a large representative Danish online survey (N = 2,010), I study how social desirability concerns bias the conclusions survey researchers draw regarding the influence of self-interest (gauged by income) and ideology (measured by left-right self-identifications) on public opinion. I find that right-wingers are much less opposed to progressive taxation when attitudes are measured indirectly and unobtrusively by means of the list experiment relative to asking directly about their opinions. In fact, rightists are no more against progressive taxation than leftists and centrists. Furthermore, opposition to tax progressivity is considerably lower among low-income individuals when social desirability bias is addressed, thereby increasing the attitudinal gap between low- and high-income individuals. The implications of the findings are that survey research risks exaggerating the importance of ideological orientations and underestimating how much political views reflect material self-interest.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51359,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Opinion Quarterly\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Opinion Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfac050\",\"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/nfac050","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: 2

摘要

意识形态取向和物质私利作为政治态度决定因素的相对重要性仍在讨论中。在丹麦一项具有代表性的大型在线调查中,使用了一项关于反对累进税的新颖列表实验(N = 2010年),我研究了社会可取性是如何使调查研究人员得出的关于利己主义(以收入衡量)和意识形态(以左右自我认同衡量)对公众舆论影响的结论产生偏见的。我发现,与直接询问他们的意见相比,当通过列表实验间接而不引人注目地衡量态度时,右翼分子对累进税的反对要少得多。事实上,右派并不比左派和中间派更反对累进税。此外,当社会愿望偏见得到解决时,低收入个人对税收累进性的反对要低得多,从而增加了低收入和高收入个人之间的态度差距。调查结果的含义是,调查研究有夸大意识形态取向重要性和低估政治观点在多大程度上反映物质私利的风险。
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
Does Social Desirability Bias Distort Survey Analyses of Ideology and Self-Interest? Evidence from a List Experiment on Progressive Taxation
The relative importance of ideological orientations and material self-interest as determinants of political attitudes is still discussed. Using a novel list experiment on opposition to progressive taxation embedded in a large representative Danish online survey (N = 2,010), I study how social desirability concerns bias the conclusions survey researchers draw regarding the influence of self-interest (gauged by income) and ideology (measured by left-right self-identifications) on public opinion. I find that right-wingers are much less opposed to progressive taxation when attitudes are measured indirectly and unobtrusively by means of the list experiment relative to asking directly about their opinions. In fact, rightists are no more against progressive taxation than leftists and centrists. Furthermore, opposition to tax progressivity is considerably lower among low-income individuals when social desirability bias is addressed, thereby increasing the attitudinal gap between low- and high-income individuals. The implications of the findings are that survey research risks exaggerating the importance of ideological orientations and underestimating how much political views reflect material self-interest.
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.
期刊最新文献
The Global Crisis of Trust in Elections The Electoral Misinformation Nexus: How News Consumption, Platform Use, and Trust in News Influence Belief in Electoral Misinformation. Where Are the Sore Losers? Competitive Authoritarianism, Incumbent Defeat, and Electoral Trust in Zambia's 2021 Election. The Trump Effect? Right-Wing Populism and Distrust in Voting by Mail in Canada. Trust in the Count: Improving Voter Confidence with Post-election Audits
×
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