人道主义、平等主义和公众对政治妥协的支持

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE American Politics Research Pub Date : 2022-09-06 DOI:10.1177/1532673X221123037
D. Barker, C. Carman, S. Bowler
{"title":"人道主义、平等主义和公众对政治妥协的支持","authors":"D. Barker, C. Carman, S. Bowler","doi":"10.1177/1532673X221123037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Democratic policymaking requires compromise, but public support for it varies substantially. Scholars know relatively little about the psychology of such public attitudes. In this investigation, we consider the predictive capacities of humanitarianism (a commitment to helping those who are suffering) and egalitarianism (a commitment to treating people equally). Such altruistic values, we argue, foster concern for the common good and a cooperative vision of democratic policymaking — which, in turn, engender support for compromise. Moreover, we suggest that partisan differences in such values (with Democrats being more likely than Republicans to prioritize them, on average), help explain Democrats’ disproportionate support for compromise. Data from two nationally representative studies are consistent with this theoretical perspective, offering novel insights into the roots of political compromise, the reach of core values as political determinants, and the dynamics of partisan asymmetry.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Humanitarianism, Egalitarianism, and Public Support for Political Compromise\",\"authors\":\"D. Barker, C. Carman, S. Bowler\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1532673X221123037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Democratic policymaking requires compromise, but public support for it varies substantially. Scholars know relatively little about the psychology of such public attitudes. In this investigation, we consider the predictive capacities of humanitarianism (a commitment to helping those who are suffering) and egalitarianism (a commitment to treating people equally). Such altruistic values, we argue, foster concern for the common good and a cooperative vision of democratic policymaking — which, in turn, engender support for compromise. Moreover, we suggest that partisan differences in such values (with Democrats being more likely than Republicans to prioritize them, on average), help explain Democrats’ disproportionate support for compromise. Data from two nationally representative studies are consistent with this theoretical perspective, offering novel insights into the roots of political compromise, the reach of core values as political determinants, and the dynamics of partisan asymmetry.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Politics Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Politics Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X221123037\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Politics Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X221123037","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

民主政策制定需要妥协,但公众对它的支持程度差异很大。学者们对这种公众态度的心理学了解相对较少。在这项调查中,我们考虑了人道主义(致力于帮助那些受苦受难的人)和平等主义(承诺平等对待人们)的预测能力。我们认为,这种无私的价值观促进了对共同利益的关注和民主决策的合作愿景,而这反过来又产生了对妥协的支持。此外,我们认为,这些价值观中的党派差异(平均而言,民主党人比共和党人更有可能优先考虑这些价值观)有助于解释民主党人对妥协的过度支持。来自两项具有全国代表性的研究的数据与这一理论观点一致,为政治妥协的根源、作为政治决定因素的核心价值观的影响以及党派不对称的动态提供了新的见解。
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
Humanitarianism, Egalitarianism, and Public Support for Political Compromise
Democratic policymaking requires compromise, but public support for it varies substantially. Scholars know relatively little about the psychology of such public attitudes. In this investigation, we consider the predictive capacities of humanitarianism (a commitment to helping those who are suffering) and egalitarianism (a commitment to treating people equally). Such altruistic values, we argue, foster concern for the common good and a cooperative vision of democratic policymaking — which, in turn, engender support for compromise. Moreover, we suggest that partisan differences in such values (with Democrats being more likely than Republicans to prioritize them, on average), help explain Democrats’ disproportionate support for compromise. Data from two nationally representative studies are consistent with this theoretical perspective, offering novel insights into the roots of political compromise, the reach of core values as political determinants, and the dynamics of partisan asymmetry.
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
American Politics Research
American Politics Research POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
66
期刊介绍: The purpose of Amercian Politics Research is to promote and disseminate high-quality research in all areas of American politics, including local, state, and national. American Politics Research will publish significant studies concerning American political behavior, political parties, public opinion, legislative behavior, courts and the legal process, executive and administrative politics, public policy, and all other topics appropriate to our understanding of American government and politics. Manuscripts from all social science disciplines are welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Partisan Differences in Voters’ Desire for Punishment in Response to Politicians’ Moral Transgressions Voting in the Mall: Ideology, Grievance, and Political Consumerism The Size and Structure of the Gender Gap in Economic Evaluations The Role of Self-Threat and Self-Affirmation in Initiation of Political Conversations Race or Place: Partisanship Among Black Rural Voters
×
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