東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Partisan Polarization, Social Identi...

Strickler, Ryan.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Partisan Polarization, Social Identity, and Deliberative Democracy in the United States.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Partisan Polarization, Social Identity, and Deliberative Democracy in the United States./
作者:	Strickler, Ryan.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2017,
面頁冊數:	225 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-12(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International78-12A(E).
標題:	Political science. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10262359
ISBN:	9780355072136

Partisan Polarization, Social Identity, and Deliberative Democracy in the United States.
Strickler, Ryan.

Partisan Polarization, Social Identity, and Deliberative Democracy in the United States. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2017 - 225 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-12(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of South Carolina, 2017.

As of late, political theory, research, and practice have taken a deliberative turn, extolling the benefits of public discourse guided by norms such as inclusion, respect, and open-mindedness. Can these ideals, though, be approximated in the current era of partisan polarization? If so, what factors contribute to high quality, productive discourse?

ISBN: 9780355072136Subjects--Topical Terms:

528916
Political science.

Partisan Polarization, Social Identity, and Deliberative Democracy in the United States.
LDR:03014nmm a2200337 4500 001 2157142
005 20180531091027.5
008 190424s2017 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780355072136
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10262359
035 $a (MiAaPQ)sc:14946
035 $a AAI10262359
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Strickler, Ryan. $3 3344932
245 1 0 $a Partisan Polarization, Social Identity, and Deliberative Democracy in the United States.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2017
300 $a 225 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-12(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: David Darmofal.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of South Carolina, 2017.
520 $a As of late, political theory, research, and practice have taken a deliberative turn, extolling the benefits of public discourse guided by norms such as inclusion, respect, and open-mindedness. Can these ideals, though, be approximated in the current era of partisan polarization? If so, what factors contribute to high quality, productive discourse?
520 $a These are the questions this project addresses, assessing how partisanship and polarization impact the public's propensity to adopt the key deliberative attitude of reciprocity (or mutual respect) towards political argumentation. Drawing on social identity theory, the project conceptualizes partisan attachment as containing interrelated, yet separate ideological and social identity dimensions. Through a series of survey experiments, it then shows that partisan social identity attachment---in other words, the extent to which one views being a Democrat or a Republican as an important part of "who one is"---weakens one commitment to reciprocity in a variety of ways. Partisans with strong social identity attachments are more likely to heed party cues, as opposed to argumentative substance, in considering whether to afford reciprocity towards political disagreement. Partisans with strong social identity attachments are also less likely to support displays of reciprocity by an inparty political representative. The same effects, however, are not present for partisans with strong ideological commitments to their party. Moreover, the effects are not weaker for partisans who have regular social contact with outparty members.
520 $a Recent research shows that the partisan public has increasingly polarized not based on ideology or issue positions, but based on growing negative outparty affect and cross-party social distance. The research here thus shows that mass "social" polarization is creating a fundamental barrier to productive cross-party discourse, one that will need to be addressed if we want to establish a more deliberative democracy.
590 $a School code: 0202.
650 4 $a Political science. $3 528916
650 4 $a Psychology. $3 519075
650 4 $a Philosophy. $3 516511
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0621
690 $a 0422
710 2 $a University of South Carolina. $b Political Science. $3 1022390
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 78-12A(E).
790 $a 0202
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2017
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10262359