社会运动的政策影响:通过定性比较分析的复制

IF 1.3 2区 社会学 Q3 SOCIOLOGY Mobilization Pub Date : 2009-12-01 DOI:10.17813/MAIQ.14.4.M2W21H55X5562R57
Marco Giugni, S. Yamasaki
{"title":"社会运动的政策影响:通过定性比较分析的复制","authors":"Marco Giugni, S. Yamasaki","doi":"10.17813/MAIQ.14.4.M2W21H55X5562R57","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reanalyzes the data of a previous study on the policy impact of antinuclear, ecology, and peace movements in three countries with the aim of replicating its findings. Our goal is to see whether using a different analytical technique will yield similar results. The previous study, used a regression approach to time-series analysis. Here, the use qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to analyze the previous study's data. Specifically, the test the two main hypotheses based on the joint-effect model of social movement outcomes: (1) that the policy impact of social movements is conditioned by the presence of powerful allies within the institutional arenas. by, the presence of a favorable public opinion. and/or by both factors simultaneously; and (2) that social movements are more likely, to have policy impacts when they address issues and policy, domains of low saliency. In addition, we compare the policy, impact of social movements across countries. Our analysis confirms to a large extent the findings of the earlier time-series analysis, namely, the strong explanatory power of the joint-effect model of social movement outcomes and the varying impact of different movements on public policy.","PeriodicalId":47309,"journal":{"name":"Mobilization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2009-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.17813/MAIQ.14.4.M2W21H55X5562R57","citationCount":"61","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Policy Impact of Social Movements: a Replication Through Qualitative Comparative Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Marco Giugni, S. Yamasaki\",\"doi\":\"10.17813/MAIQ.14.4.M2W21H55X5562R57\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article reanalyzes the data of a previous study on the policy impact of antinuclear, ecology, and peace movements in three countries with the aim of replicating its findings. Our goal is to see whether using a different analytical technique will yield similar results. The previous study, used a regression approach to time-series analysis. Here, the use qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to analyze the previous study's data. Specifically, the test the two main hypotheses based on the joint-effect model of social movement outcomes: (1) that the policy impact of social movements is conditioned by the presence of powerful allies within the institutional arenas. by, the presence of a favorable public opinion. and/or by both factors simultaneously; and (2) that social movements are more likely, to have policy impacts when they address issues and policy, domains of low saliency. In addition, we compare the policy, impact of social movements across countries. Our analysis confirms to a large extent the findings of the earlier time-series analysis, namely, the strong explanatory power of the joint-effect model of social movement outcomes and the varying impact of different movements on public policy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47309,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mobilization\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.17813/MAIQ.14.4.M2W21H55X5562R57\",\"citationCount\":\"61\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mobilization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17813/MAIQ.14.4.M2W21H55X5562R57\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mobilization","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17813/MAIQ.14.4.M2W21H55X5562R57","RegionNum":2,"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: 61

摘要

本文重新分析了之前关于三个国家的反核、生态和和平运动的政策影响的研究数据,目的是复制其研究结果。我们的目标是看看使用不同的分析技术是否会产生类似的结果。之前的研究,采用回归方法进行时间序列分析。在此,采用定性比较分析(QCA)对以往研究的数据进行分析。具体而言,本文基于社会运动结果的联合效应模型检验了两个主要假设:(1)社会运动的政策影响取决于制度领域内强大盟友的存在。有利的舆论的存在。和/或同时受到两个因素的影响;(2)社会运动更有可能在解决不太突出的问题和政策领域时产生政策影响。此外,我们比较了各国社会运动的政策影响。我们的分析在很大程度上证实了之前时间序列分析的发现,即社会运动结果的联合效应模型和不同运动对公共政策的不同影响的强大解释力。
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 Policy Impact of Social Movements: a Replication Through Qualitative Comparative Analysis
This article reanalyzes the data of a previous study on the policy impact of antinuclear, ecology, and peace movements in three countries with the aim of replicating its findings. Our goal is to see whether using a different analytical technique will yield similar results. The previous study, used a regression approach to time-series analysis. Here, the use qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to analyze the previous study's data. Specifically, the test the two main hypotheses based on the joint-effect model of social movement outcomes: (1) that the policy impact of social movements is conditioned by the presence of powerful allies within the institutional arenas. by, the presence of a favorable public opinion. and/or by both factors simultaneously; and (2) that social movements are more likely, to have policy impacts when they address issues and policy, domains of low saliency. In addition, we compare the policy, impact of social movements across countries. Our analysis confirms to a large extent the findings of the earlier time-series analysis, namely, the strong explanatory power of the joint-effect model of social movement outcomes and the varying impact of different movements on public policy.
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
Mobilization
Mobilization SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Mobilization: An International Quarterly is the premier journal of research specializing in social movements, protests, insurgencies, revolutions, and other forms of contentious politics. Mobilization was first published in 1996 to fill the need for a scholarly review of research that focused exclusively with social movements, protest and collective action. Mobilization is fully peer-reviewed and widely indexed. A 2003 study, when Mobilization was published semiannually, showed that its citation index rate was 1.286, which placed it among the top ten sociology journals. Today, Mobilization is published four times a year, in March, June, September, and December. The editorial board is composed of thirty internationally recognized scholars from political science, sociology and social psychology. The goal of Mobilization is to provide a forum for global, scholarly dialogue. It is currently distributed to the top international research libraries and read by the most engaged scholars in the field. We hope that through its wide distribution, different research strategies and theoretical/conceptual approaches will be shared among the global community of social movement scholars, encouraging a collaborative process that will further the development of a cumulative social science.
期刊最新文献
THE INDOCTRINATION DIMENSION OF REPRESSION: TELEVISED CONFESSIONS IN CHINA* CATALOGING PROTEST: NEWSPAPERS, NEXIS UNI, OR TWITTER?* A LONGITUDINAL APPROACH TO ONLINE “COLLECTIVE IDENTITY WORK”: THE CASE OF THE GILETS JAUNES IN THE VAR DEPARTMENT* STRATEGIC ALLIANCES: THE POLITICAL EFFICACY OF RELIGIOUSSECULAR TIES* GAINS AND LOSSES IN THE URBAN POLITICAL FIELD: MULTILAYERED OUTCOMES OF MOBILIZATION IN MOSCOW’S HOUSING CONTROVERSY*
×
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