Suppr超能文献

防止政治态度的极端极化。

Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes.

机构信息

School of Public Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109;

Biodesign Center for Biocomputing, Security and Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85281.

出版信息

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Dec 14;118(50). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2102139118.

Abstract

Extreme polarization can undermine democracy by making compromise impossible and transforming politics into a zero-sum game. "Ideological polarization"-the extent to which political views are widely dispersed-is already strong among elites, but less so among the general public [N. McCarty, , 2019, pp. 50-68]. Strong mutual distrust and hostility between Democrats and Republicans in the United States, combined with the elites' already strong ideological polarization, could lead to increasing ideological polarization among the public. The paper addresses two questions: 1) Is there a level of ideological polarization above which polarization feeds upon itself to become a runaway process? 2) If so, what policy interventions could prevent such dangerous positive feedback loops? To explore these questions, we present an agent-based model of ideological polarization that differentiates between the tendency for two actors to interact ("exposure") and how they respond when interactions occur, positing that interaction between similar actors reduces their difference, while interaction between dissimilar actors increases their difference. Our analysis explores the effects on polarization of different levels of tolerance to other views, responsiveness to other views, exposure to dissimilar actors, multiple ideological dimensions, economic self-interest, and external shocks. The results suggest strategies for preventing, or at least slowing, the development of extreme polarization.

摘要

极端的两极分化可能会破坏民主,使妥协变得不可能,并使政治变成一场零和博弈。“意识形态两极分化”——政治观点广泛分散的程度——在精英阶层中已经很严重,但在普通公众中则不那么严重[ N. McCarty,, 2019, pp. 50-68]。美国民主党和共和党之间强烈的相互不信任和敌意,加上精英阶层已经很强的意识形态两极分化,可能导致公众的意识形态两极分化加剧。本文探讨了两个问题:1)是否存在一个两极分化程度的临界点,超过这个临界点,两极分化就会自我强化,形成失控的过程?2)如果是这样,有哪些政策干预可以防止这种危险的正反馈循环?为了探讨这些问题,我们提出了一个基于主体的意识形态极化模型,该模型区分了两个行为体相互作用的倾向(“接触”)和相互作用时的反应,假设相似行为体之间的相互作用会减少它们之间的差异,而不同行为体之间的相互作用会增加它们之间的差异。我们的分析探讨了不同程度的容忍其他观点、对其他观点的反应、与不同观点的行为体接触、多个意识形态维度、经济自身利益和外部冲击对极化的影响。结果表明了一些防止或至少减缓极端极化发展的策略。

相似文献

1
Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes.防止政治态度的极端极化。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Dec 14;118(50). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2102139118.
3
Generically partisan: Polarization in political communication.一般党派偏见:政治传播中的极化现象。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2023 Nov 21;120(47):e2309361120. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2309361120. Epub 2023 Nov 13.
9
Measuring norm pluralism and perceived polarization in US politics.衡量美国政治中的规范多元主义与感知到的两极分化
PNAS Nexus. 2024 Oct 15;3(10):pgae413. doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae413. eCollection 2024 Oct.

引用本文的文献

4
Success-driven opinion formation determines social tensions.成功驱动的舆论形成决定了社会紧张局势。
iScience. 2024 Feb 16;27(3):109254. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.109254. eCollection 2024 Mar 15.
5
The roots of polarization in the individual reward system.个体奖励系统中极化的根源。
Proc Biol Sci. 2024 Feb 28;291(2017):20232011. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2023.2011.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验