Suchergebnisse

Категория «доверие» – одна из наиболее обсуждаемых и изучаемых в научном мире. Человечество обращалось к ее осмыслению еще в период древних цивилизаций, и по мере эволюции, научно-технического прогресса, сопровождающегося усложнением социальных и экономических отношений, актуальность роли доверия становилась все более значимой. В статье представлен авторский взгляд на ключевые причины, обусловливающие роль институционального доверия в контексте современного исторического этапа развития. Анализируются результаты авторитетных международных исследований институционального доверия (Edelman Trust Barometr, The European Social Survey). Основная часть статьи посвящена факторам, определяющим существующую структуру институционального доверия в России. Для этого использованы данные масштабных общероссийских социологических исследований (проводимых ВЦИОМ, Левада-Центром, Институтом социологии РАН), а также сделан акцент на результатах регионального мониторинга общественного мнения, проводимого Вологодским научным центром с 1996 г. на территории Вологодской области. Сделан вывод о том, что в настоящее время характер институционального доверия россиян обусловлен четырьмя группами факторов: традиционными для переходного общества с рыночной экономикой; связанными с исторической, социокультурной спецификой Российской Федерации; связанными со спецификой российской трансформации последних десятилетий, а также с современными проблемами эффективности государственного управления. В статье также обращается внимание на то, что существуют объективные обстоятельства, обусловливающие неизбежность дальнейшей актуализации роли доверия в формировании социально-экономических не только внутренних, но и геополитических отношений. В соответствии с этим сделан вывод о необходимости актуализации инновационных диагностических инструментов, способных адекватно отражать различные аспекты тенденций и факторов институционального доверия, что обусловливает важность содержательного включения социологической науки в деятельность органов управления и иных институтов общественного развития. ; The category «trust» is one of the most discussed and studied in the scientific world. People have shown interest in it since the Ancient period, and the role of trust has become increasingly relevant during the evolution of scientific and technological progress and the growing complexity of social and economic relations. This article presents the author's view on key reasons behind the role of institutional trust in the context of a modern historical development stage. It discloses the results of worthy international studies of institutional trust (Edelman Trust Barometer, the European Social Survey). A significant part of the paper studies the factors determining the current structure of institutional trust in Russia. For this purpose, the author uses the data of large-scale Russian sociological studies (conducted by VCIOM, Levada Center, and Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences). This article considers results of the regional public opinion monitoring conducted by the Vologda Research Center since 1996 in the Vologda Oblast. It concludes that the nature of institutional trust of the Russians is determined by four groups of factors: the traditional ones for a transitional society with a market economy; the ones related to Russian historical and socio-cultural specifics; the ones related to recent Russian transformation specifics; and the ones related to modern problems of public administration efficiency. This article also draws attention to the fact that there are objective circumstances that predetermine further actualization of the role of trust in the formation of socio-economic internal and geopolitical relations. Thus, the author makes a conclusion about the necessity to update innovative diagnostic tools that can adequately reflect various aspects of trends and factors of institutional trust. It determines the importance of meaningful inclusion of sociological science in the activities of government and other social development institutions.

The purpose of the study is to consider the advantages and disadvantages of pollster and sociological approaches to electoral research.The article shows that conducting electoral research in modern election campaigns is carried out equally by pollster (for purely political purposes) and sociological (for scientific and sociological purposes) technologies. It has been proven that optimal results can be achieved by combining pollster and sociological approaches to electoral research. It was determined that today the organization of an effective election campaign requires equally sociologists-pollsters and sociologists-analysts, the result of whose work is respectively collected empirical data and an analytical product, scientific expertise.It has been demonstrated that pollster and sociological approaches to conducting electoral research differ not only in the concepts of public opinion and the styles of its research, but also in the subject field. The electorate as a subject of electoral research acquires different content for different approaches. The pollster approach is more likely to understand the electorate as a circle of voters who vote for one or another party or candidate for an elected position and, in fact, are supporters of a certain political force or personality, while representatives of the sociological approach mostly consider the electorate as a collection of all citizens who vested with the right to vote and who exercise or do not exercise it under specially created conditions. It is argued that the integration of the subject fields of electoral polling and electoral sociological research will allow more effective and productive use of analytical potential in the election campaign, since such an organization of patronage work will help not only to record the results of electoral research, but also to predict the trends of electoral choice, the flow of votes, the reactions of electoral groups to specific political events. The availability of systematic ideas about the types of voters and their personal profiles will help to meaningfully approach the understanding of the electorate.

The ideological foundation of artificial intelligence as a scientific and applied field is an exact epistemology (EE), which is the study of the interaction of the cognizing subject and the corresponding object of cognition through heuristics and reasoning logics that generate new knowledge and its acceptance. Formal means of exact epistemology – languages of knowledge representation and logic of reasoning – and their practical implementation in computer systems provide constructive imitation and strengthening of some aspects of human intelligent activity. The formalization of cognitive activity is extremely in demand in the humanities, in particular, in the sciences of human and society. From the point of view of exact epistemology, a sociological poll – a traditional form of sociological research – is the interaction of the theoretical intelligence (one of the key concepts of EE) of the researcher and the respondents' common sense. For a correct description of social reality, the question of the respondents' rational perception of the elements of the questionnaire and the measure of rationality of individuals and their groups is not the last one. The scientific and constructively implemented apparatus of exact epistemology is the JSM-method of automated research support. The method has logical means for presenting opinions, as well as the formal presentation of a closed sociological poll. The instrumental capabilities of the JSM method provide a reasonable acceptance of new knowledge based on an expanded concept of rationality, including rationality as an argued opinion and argumentation, supported by formalized heuristics and the transformation of unclear ideas into precisely defined concepts.

Why did Dewey defeat Truman? How did Gore win and lose Florida? Political polls can be misleading, confusing, and poorly designed, but when done well, they are the best way to accurately gauge public opinion.

This book provides an effective analysis of political and sociological developments as well as electoral trends in Israel before and after the February 2009 elections.This book was published as a special issue of Israel Affairs.