Suchergebnisse

Federalism and separated institutions within levels of government in the American political system complicate citizen assessments of government. Using data from a statewide survey of Kentucky residents, we examine citizen trust in national, state, and local governments and citizen approval of state government institutions. We find trust to be highest in local government and approval to be highest of the state Supreme Court. Contrary to expectations, approval of the governor is not greater than that of the legislature and trust in the state government falls short of that in the national government. We contend that these patterns reflect problems facing the governor at the time of the survey rather than an ordering of trust and approval distinctive in Kentucky. Finally, in explaining both trust and institutional approval, we highlight the importance of partisanship and party control of governmental institutions.

AbstractVirtually all accounts of political trust in the US regard declining trust over the past half-century to be troubling. We argue that these interpretations are in need of reassessment since they often are rooted in the normatively questionable assumption that higher trust is always desirable. We review traditions in democratic theory and American thought extolling the virtues of skepticism and distrust of government and discuss potential problems in common trust measures and conclusions based on them. Using data from the 2014 General Social Survey, we explore relationships between trust, commitment to being vigilant watchdogs of government, and attitudes and behaviors generally considered desirable for a healthy democracy. Our findings indicate that higher trust is not always accompanied by characteristics of good democratic citizens. In fact, it is those individuals who exhibit lower levels of trust with high levels of vigilance who are most politically engaged. Thus, healthy skepticism of government may contribute to the vitality of democracy.

Las asunciones que los niveles más altos de la confianza en el gobierno siempre son beneficiosos para la democracia pueden ser inadecuadas, y el grado de confianza en el gobierno que tienen los residentes de los Estados Unidos (EE.UU) a menudo se subestima debido a interpretaciones comunes de datos de opinión pública. Reexaminando los datos de American National Election Studies (ANES) deuso común, encontramos que los ciudadanos estadounidenses son más confiados que generalmente se retrata y típicamente tenga actitudes y comportamientos que son sanos para la democracia. También perfilamos defectos con la pregunta de confianza de ANES . Usando una medida alternativa de la confianza política, demostramos que la pregunta ANES escondela variación importante en los niveles de los ciudadanos de la confianza y tiende a subestimar niveles de la confianza. En la suma, la preocupación a menudo expresada por nivelesactuales de la confianza política en los EE.UU probablemente se extravía e investigadores allí y en otra parte debería dar la larga deliberación a medición e interpretación de la confianza.Palabras clave: confianza política, ANES, la democracia, mensuración

Objectives. Partisanship should affect evaluations of Congress just as it affects evaluations of the president, and these institutional evaluations should affect political trust. We argue that the relationship between partisanship and trust is dependent on partisan control of Congress and that much of party identification's influence on trust occurs indirectly through approval of governmental institutions.Methods. Using data collected before and after the 2002 congressional elections by the Center for Survey Research and Analysis at the University of Connecticut, we examine changes in frequency distributions and mean values for trust and institutional approval. We use multivariate regression models and a path model to estimate the causes of political trust and self‐perceived change in trust.Results. We find evidence that party control of government and party identification are important in explaining trust and institutional approval. The Republican takeover of the Senate led Republicans to evaluate the Senate more favorably and to become more trusting of the government, while having the opposite effect on Democrats.Conclusions. The changes in approval and trust resulting from the 2002 elections suggest that at least some segment of the population is cognizant of changes in the political environment and updates its views of government when the political environment changes.

Objectives: Partisanship should affect evaluations of Congress just as it affects evaluations of the president, and these institutional evaluations should affect political trust. We argue that the relationship between partisanship and trust is dependent on partisan control of Congress and that much of party identification's influence on trust occurs indirectly through approval of governmental institutions. Methods: Using data collected before and after the 2002 congressional elections by the Center for Survey Research and Analysis at the University of Connecticut, we examine changes in frequency distributions and mean values for trust and institutional approval. We use multivariate regression models and a path model to estimate the causes of political trust and self-perceived change in trust. Results: We find evidence that party control of government and party identification are important in explaining trust and institutional approval. The Republican takeover of the Senate led Republicans to evaluate the Senate more favorably and to become more trusting of the government, while having the opposite effect on Democrats. Conclusions: The changes in approval and trust resulting from the 2002 elections suggest that at least some segment of the population is cognizant of changes in the political environment and updates its views of government when the political environment changes. Tables, Figures, References. Adapted from the source document.