首页> 外文期刊>Motivation and emotion >Articulating ideology: How liberals and conservatives justify political affiliations using morality-based explanations
【24h】

Articulating ideology: How liberals and conservatives justify political affiliations using morality-based explanations

机译:阐明意识形态:自由主义者和保守主义者如何使用基于道德的解释为政治联系辩护

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Two studies examined the degree to which participants' were aware of their morality-based motivations when determining their political affiliations. Participants from the U.S. indicated what political party (if any) they affiliated with and explained their reasons for that affiliation. For participants who identified as "Liberal/Democrat" or "Conservative/Republican," coders read the responses and identified themes associated with Moral Foundations Theory. In Study 1, thematic differences between liberals and conservatives paralleled previous research, although the extent of the disparities was more pronounced than expected, with the two groups showing little overlap. In Study 2, the actual influence of Moral Foundations (as measured by the Moral Foundations Questionnaire) was dramatically greater than was indicated by the coding of participants' open-ended responses. In addition, actual disparities in use of Moral Foundations between liberals and conservatives were greater than participants' stereotyped perceptions. We discuss how this research furthers our understanding of conscious motivations for political affiliation and can help to facilitate political discourse.
机译:两项研究检查了参与者在确定其政治隶属关系时意识到基于道德的动机的程度。来自美国的参与者指出了他们所属的政党(如果有),并解释了加入该政党的原因。对于识别为“自由主义者/民主人士”或“保守主义者/共和党人”的参与者,编码人员会阅读回答并确定与道德基础理论相关的主题。在研究1中,自由主义者和保守主义者之间的主题差异与以前的研究相似,尽管差异的程度比预期的更为明显,两组之间几乎没有重叠。在研究2中,道德基金会的实际影响力(由道德基金会问卷调查得出)远大于参与者开放式回答的编码所表明的影响力。此外,自由主义者和保守主义者之间在使用道德基金会方面的实际差距大于参与者的定型观念。我们讨论了这项研究如何增进我们对政治归属的意识动机的理解,并有助于促进政治话语。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号