國立虎尾科技大學 |

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

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,手稿 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Partisan Polarization, Social Identity, and Deliberative Democracy in the United States./
作者:	Strickler, Ryan.
面頁冊數:	1 online resource (225 pages)
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:	click for full text (PQDT)
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. - 1 online resource (225 pages)

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

Thesis (Ph.D.)

Includes bibliographical references

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?

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2018

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9780355072136Subjects--Topical Terms:

558774
Political science.
Index Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Partisan Polarization, Social Identity, and Deliberative Democracy in the United States.
LDR:03351ntm a2200385Ki 4500 001 911659
005 20180531091027.5
006 m o u
007 cr mn||||a|a||
008 190606s2017 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9780355072136
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10262359
035 $a (MiAaPQ)sc:14946
035 $a AAI10262359
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ
099 $a TUL $f hyy $c available through World Wide Web
100 1 $a Strickler, Ryan. $3 1183628
245 1 0 $a Partisan Polarization, Social Identity, and Deliberative Democracy in the United States.
264 0 $c 2017
300 $a 1 online resource (225 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 78-12(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: David Darmofal.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.) $c University of South Carolina $d 2017.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
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.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2018
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Political science. $3 558774
650 4 $a Psychology. $3 555998
650 4 $a Philosophy. $3 559771
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0621
690 $a 0422
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a University of South Carolina. $b Political Science. $3 1183629
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 78-12A(E).
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10262359 $z click for full text (PQDT)