解释有争议的选举后对民主满意度的党派差距:来自美国2020年选举小组调查的证据

IF 2.2 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Ps-Political Science & Politics Pub Date : 2023-07-10 DOI:10.1017/s1049096523000458
Sam Whitt, Alixandra B. Yanus, Mark Setzler, B. McDonald, J. Graeber, Gordon Ballingrud, Martin J. Kifer
{"title":"解释有争议的选举后对民主满意度的党派差距:来自美国2020年选举小组调查的证据","authors":"Sam Whitt, Alixandra B. Yanus, Mark Setzler, B. McDonald, J. Graeber, Gordon Ballingrud, Martin J. Kifer","doi":"10.1017/s1049096523000458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n What effects do contentious elections have on partisan appraisals of democracy? We consider the case of the November 2020 US election, a highly polarized partisan contest but also an objectively free and fair election by credible accounting. We conducted a panel study embedded within two nationally representative surveys before and after the election. Results indicate a familiar but underexamined partisan gap, in which satisfaction with democracy decreases among Republicans and increases among Democrats relative to nonpartisans. We find that the gap is fully mediated by partisan shifts in satisfaction with elections and the news media that cover them. Our results underscore how eroding institutional confidence can undermine democratic legitimacy in hitherto consolidated democracies. To overcome partisan divisions following contentious elections, we highlight the need to bolster confidence in democratic institutions to reduce partisan fears and uncertainties—both rational and irrational—that electoral losses may trigger.","PeriodicalId":48096,"journal":{"name":"Ps-Political Science & Politics","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Explaining Partisan Gaps in Satisfaction with Democracy after Contentious Elections: Evidence from a US 2020 Election Panel Survey\",\"authors\":\"Sam Whitt, Alixandra B. Yanus, Mark Setzler, B. McDonald, J. Graeber, Gordon Ballingrud, Martin J. Kifer\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s1049096523000458\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n What effects do contentious elections have on partisan appraisals of democracy? We consider the case of the November 2020 US election, a highly polarized partisan contest but also an objectively free and fair election by credible accounting. We conducted a panel study embedded within two nationally representative surveys before and after the election. Results indicate a familiar but underexamined partisan gap, in which satisfaction with democracy decreases among Republicans and increases among Democrats relative to nonpartisans. We find that the gap is fully mediated by partisan shifts in satisfaction with elections and the news media that cover them. Our results underscore how eroding institutional confidence can undermine democratic legitimacy in hitherto consolidated democracies. To overcome partisan divisions following contentious elections, we highlight the need to bolster confidence in democratic institutions to reduce partisan fears and uncertainties—both rational and irrational—that electoral losses may trigger.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48096,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ps-Political Science & Politics\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ps-Political Science & Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096523000458\",\"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":"Ps-Political Science & Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096523000458","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

有争议的选举对党派对民主的评价有什么影响?我们以2020年11月的美国大选为例,这是一场高度两极化的党派之争,但也是一场客观自由、公正的选举。我们在选举前后进行了两次具有全国代表性的调查,并进行了小组研究。结果显示了一个熟悉但未被充分研究的党派差距,其中共和党人对民主的满意度下降,而民主党人对民主的满意度相对于无党派人士有所上升。我们发现,党派对选举和报道选举的新闻媒体满意度的变化完全弥补了这一差距。我们的研究结果强调,在迄今为止稳固的民主国家,机构信心的侵蚀会如何破坏民主的合法性。为了克服有争议的选举后的党派分歧,我们强调有必要增强对民主制度的信心,以减少选举失败可能引发的党派恐惧和不确定性——无论是理性的还是非理性的。
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
Explaining Partisan Gaps in Satisfaction with Democracy after Contentious Elections: Evidence from a US 2020 Election Panel Survey
What effects do contentious elections have on partisan appraisals of democracy? We consider the case of the November 2020 US election, a highly polarized partisan contest but also an objectively free and fair election by credible accounting. We conducted a panel study embedded within two nationally representative surveys before and after the election. Results indicate a familiar but underexamined partisan gap, in which satisfaction with democracy decreases among Republicans and increases among Democrats relative to nonpartisans. We find that the gap is fully mediated by partisan shifts in satisfaction with elections and the news media that cover them. Our results underscore how eroding institutional confidence can undermine democratic legitimacy in hitherto consolidated democracies. To overcome partisan divisions following contentious elections, we highlight the need to bolster confidence in democratic institutions to reduce partisan fears and uncertainties—both rational and irrational—that electoral losses may trigger.
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
Ps-Political Science & Politics
Ps-Political Science & Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
27.30%
发文量
166
期刊介绍: PS: Political Science & Politics provides critical analyses of contemporary political phenomena and is the journal of record for the discipline of political science reporting on research, teaching, and professional development. PS, begun in 1968, is the only quarterly professional news and commentary journal in the field and is the prime source of information on political scientists" achievements and professional concerns. PS: Political Science & Politics is sold ONLY as part of a joint subscription with American Political Science Review and Perspectives on Politics.
期刊最新文献
The Invincible Gender Gap in Political Ambition Logging in to Learn: The Effects of Online Civic Education Pedagogy on a Latinx and AAPI Civic Engagement Youth Conference A Case for Description COVID-19 Direct Relief Payments and Political and Economic Attitudes among Tertiary Students: A Quasi-Experimental Study – CORRIGENDUM Escalating Political Violence and the Intersectional Impacts on Latinas in National Politics
×
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