关于有效民主的测量
发布时间：2018-07-27 14:25
【摘要】：本文主要分析的是实质民主的定义操作化及方法论问题。作者强调,对于测量层次问题,指标设计者需要慎重的态度,否则指标就可能会出现严重的信度和效度问题,其结果是在经验分析中会出现严重的偏误。对于罗纳德·英格尔哈特和克里斯蒂安·魏泽尔提出的有效民主的概念,作者进行了测量。在英格尔哈特和魏泽尔的现代化理论中,两人已经从经验上进行过多次检验该理论假设。而检验的结果,也进一步支持了两人的理论观点。对于英格尔哈特和魏泽尔追求的"实质民主"而不是"形式民主"的观点,作者表示支持。然而,对于两人使用的具体测量方法,作者认为它有一些理论和指标分布的偏误,使用这种方法得到的结果也是具有误导性的。实证分析也表明,这一指标设计是有偏误的,它产生了偏向于西方富裕国家的分析结果。作者认为,从统计学意义上来说,这种测量方法可能会导致虚假推理。
[Abstract]:This paper mainly analyzes the definition, operationalization and methodology of substantive democracy. The author emphasizes that the indicator designer should take a cautious attitude to the measurement hierarchy, otherwise, the reliability and validity of the index may be serious, and the result is that there will be serious errors in the empirical analysis. The author measured the concept of effective democracy proposed by Ronald Inglart Hart and Christian Weizel. In Ingerhardt and Weizel's modernization theory, they have tested the hypothesis empirically many times. And the results of the test further support the two people's theoretical point of view. The author supports the idea that Ingerhardt and Weizel pursue "substantial democracy" rather than "formal democracy". However, for the specific measurement method used by two people, the author thinks that it has some errors in theory and index distribution, and the results obtained by using this method are also misleading. The empirical analysis also shows that the design of this index is biased, and it leads to the results of the analysis in favour of the rich countries in the West. The authors believe that, statistically speaking, this measurement may lead to false reasoning.
【作者单位】： 奥斯陆大学政治系;华东政法大学政治学研究院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金项目“全球治理与主权国家之间的协调关系研究”(13CGJ021),项目负责人:王金良 华东政法大学科研项目“跨国社会运动及其影响研究”(A-3101-15-154325),项目负责人:王金良;华东政法大学政治学研究院“华与罗‘世界文明与比较政治研究’项目”(HDZ005),项目负责人:高奇琦
【分类号】：D082
，
本文编号：2148112
[Abstract]:This paper mainly analyzes the definition, operationalization and methodology of substantive democracy. The author emphasizes that the indicator designer should take a cautious attitude to the measurement hierarchy, otherwise, the reliability and validity of the index may be serious, and the result is that there will be serious errors in the empirical analysis. The author measured the concept of effective democracy proposed by Ronald Inglart Hart and Christian Weizel. In Ingerhardt and Weizel's modernization theory, they have tested the hypothesis empirically many times. And the results of the test further support the two people's theoretical point of view. The author supports the idea that Ingerhardt and Weizel pursue "substantial democracy" rather than "formal democracy". However, for the specific measurement method used by two people, the author thinks that it has some errors in theory and index distribution, and the results obtained by using this method are also misleading. The empirical analysis also shows that the design of this index is biased, and it leads to the results of the analysis in favour of the rich countries in the West. The authors believe that, statistically speaking, this measurement may lead to false reasoning.
【作者单位】： 奥斯陆大学政治系;华东政法大学政治学研究院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金项目“全球治理与主权国家之间的协调关系研究”(13CGJ021),项目负责人:王金良 华东政法大学科研项目“跨国社会运动及其影响研究”(A-3101-15-154325),项目负责人:王金良;华东政法大学政治学研究院“华与罗‘世界文明与比较政治研究’项目”(HDZ005),项目负责人:高奇琦
【分类号】：D082
，
本文编号：2148112
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/minzhuminquanlunwen/2148112.html
