Democratization and Political Tolerance in Seventeen Countries: A Multi-Level Model of Democratic Learning

Peffley, Mark; Rohrschneider, Robert

doi:10.2307/3219786

Cited by 60 publications

(123 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As explained by Peffley and Rohrschneider (2003, p. 244), ''political tolerance at a more concrete level is extremely difficult and...consequently, citizens must be exposed to experiences that encourage the application of democratic norms to specific instances.'' Such a democratic learning effect could produce different levels of political tolerance across countries with different democratic histories, and across individuals with different amounts of experience under a democratic regime (Peffley & Rohrschneider, 2003;Weil, 1991). That is, differences in the age of democratic institutions across established and newer democracies could produce differences in average levels of political tolerance.…”

Section: Tolerance In Comparative Perspectivementioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In Principle and in Practice: Learning Political Tolerance in Eastern and Western Europe

Marquart-Pyatt

Paxton

2006

Polit Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political tolerance is a key democratic value believed to undergird successful and healthy democracies. In nascent democracies especially, citizens must tolerate the views and participation of opposing groups in order to ensure methodical transfers of power with successive elections. Yet, despite its importance, little research considers tolerance outside established democracies. In this paper, we compare political tolerance across eight Eastern European countries and six Western countries. We demonstrate that mean levels of tolerance are lower in the newly democratized countries of Eastern Europe and then examine whether they are a function of East Europeans' limited experience with democracy. We also test whether established individual-level theories of tolerance replicate across this wide range of new and old democracies. We find some support for theories of democratic learning and also show that models of tolerance operate differently across the range of countries in our sample.

show abstract

Section: Tolerance In Comparative Perspectivementioning

confidence: 98%

“…Studies that explore tolerance in established and newer democracies at the same time are less prevalent (c.f., Karpov, 1999b;Rohrschneider, 1999). Even fewer attempt comparisons across a substantial number of countries (Peffley & Rohrschneider, 2003).…”

Section: Tolerance In Comparative Perspectivementioning

confidence: 98%

In Principle and in Practice: Learning Political Tolerance in Eastern and Western Europe

Marquart-Pyatt

Paxton

2006

Polit Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Foi também incluido um indicador de participação, mais concretamente a frequência da discussão de assuntos políticos, como em Sotelo (2000), Viegas (2007) ou Pattie e Johnston (2008) 10 . Contemplou-se um indicador de participação política extraeleitoral na senda de estudos semelhantes (Sullivan et al, 1982;Peffley & Rohrschneider 2003;Guérin, Petry & Crête 2004) 11 . O modelo incluiu também uma medida de patriotismo já utilizado em modelos explicativos do preconceito étnico (Duckitt & Mphuthing 1998;Vala, Lima & Lopes 2003; 12 .…”

Section: Variáveis De Controleunclassified

“…A hipótese da democratização defendia que quanto mais consolidada a democracia de um país, menos intolerantes serão os seus habitantes, uma vez que existe uma maior interiorização de valores e normas democráticas (Peffley & Rohrschneider 2003). Para tal foi utilizado como indicador a longevidade da democracia.…”

Section: Conclusõesunclassified

“…São conhecidos modelos multinível de preditores para a tolerância política (Peffley & Rohrschneider 2003) e para a tolerância social em face de homossexuais (Adamczyk & Pitt 2009), além de um trabalho não publicado sobre tolerância social (Peral, Ramos & Pereira 2011). Não conhecemos nenhum trabalho sobre tolerância social em que sejam testados efeitos de moderação.…”

unclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Product of the Environment: efeitos de interação entre preditores contextuais e individuais de intolerância social na Europa

Candeias

2016

Rev. Sociol. Polit.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumo O artigo analisa indicadores de intolerância social na Europa. O objetivo é testar efeitos de moderação entre preditores individuais e contextuais num modelo de regressão para indicadores de intolerância social. O material empírico consiste nos resultados da vaga de 2008 do European Value Studies. As hipóteses foram testadas com recurso ao software HLM. Confirmou-se a existência de dois efeitos de moderação: (i) entre o sentimento de ameaça e a dimensão do habitat e (ii) entre a longevidade e o suporte à democracia. Embora o tema da tolerância social já tenha sido vastamente estudado, são poucos os trabalhos que estudam esse fenômeno numa análise multinível, e menor ainda os que testam efeitos de moderação. Sugere-se a procura por novos efeitos de moderação na explicação da intolerância social.

show abstract

The Fairness of National Decision‐making Procedures: The Views of Adolescents in 18 European Countries

Ellenbroek

Verkuyten

Thijs

et al. 2014

Community & Applied Soc Psy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines adolescents' evaluation of the fairness of three forms of democratic decisionmaking procedures (direct democracy, representative democracy and group representation) and one non-democratic procedure (oligarchy). Social dominance orientation-Egalitarianism (SDO-E), religious group identification and the countries' level of democracy are examined as predictors. The 2008 Europroject dataset was used, which contained 4441 native majority adolescents (mean age = 16.1 years) in 18 European countries. Adolescents evaluated direct democracy as most fair, followed by group representation, representative democracy and oligarchy. This rank order was found independent of the issue under consideration (moral or social), and of SDO-E and religious identification, and across the countries. In addition, adolescents scoring higher on SDO-E and on religious identification found group representation and non-democratic oligarchy fairer.This study examines how native majority adolescents (12-21 years) evaluate the fairness of different forms of societal decision making and whether these evaluations depend on the issue under consideration and on concerns about group relations. The focus is on the perceived fairness of decision-making procedures for moral and social issues and in relation to individual differences in social dominance orientation (SDO) (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999) and religious group identification. The perceived fairness of different forms of decision making is examined in 18 European countries and in relation to their level of democracy. Perceived fairness of national decision makingIn democratic forms of social organization, individuals have a say in decisions that affect them. These forms allow individuals to express their viewpoints themselves or through their elected representatives and to have an impact on the decisions that are made. Most societies have a system of regular elections through representative democracy or direct democracy (e.g. referenda) in which decisions are based on the majority of the entire population, whereas other countries have forms of ethno-cultural group representation. Thus, different forms of (non-)democratic procedures can be defined and in this study a distinction is made between four forms of decision making. The most extensive democratic form is a direct democracy (a referendum), and the non-democratic form is an oligarchy in which, for example, the elite or the culturally or religiously largest group makes the decisions. In between these two extremes are two forms of staged democracy in which people choose (group) representatives to make decisions.Young people acquire conceptions of the fairness of democratic and non-democratic procedures through experiences with, for example, decision making in their peer group and in schools (Print, Ornstrom, & Nielsen, 2002;Torney-Purta, 2002). In these situations, children and adolescents are likely to become familiar with procedures such as majority rule, and they develop an understanding of what is fair. In a number of studie...

show abstract

Democratization and Political Tolerance in Seventeen Countries: A Multi-Level Model of Democratic Learning

Cited by 60 publications

References 0 publications

In Principle and in Practice: Learning Political Tolerance in Eastern and Western Europe

In Principle and in Practice: Learning Political Tolerance in Eastern and Western Europe

Product of the Environment: efeitos de interação entre preditores contextuais e individuais de intolerância social na Europa

The Fairness of National Decision‐making Procedures: The Views of Adolescents in 18 European Countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About