The moral?emotional foundations of political discourse: a comparative analysis of the speech records of the U.S. and the Japanese legislatures
The moral?emotional foundations of political discourse: a comparative analysis of the speech records of the U.S. and the Japanese legislatures
复制标题
政治话语的道德情感基础：美国和日本立法机关演讲记录的比较分析
DOI：
10.1007/s11135-019-00912-7
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Sakamoto Takuto
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Takikawa Hiroki;Sakamoto Takuto
有越来越多的研究集中在一个人的道德情感行为和他/她的政治意识形态之间的所谓密切联系。一个突出的例子是海特的“道德心理学”，它声称政治自由主义者和保守主义者利用相互不同的道德基础。然而，这一论点和其他论点大多是在美国的社会背景下提出的，缺乏比较的视角。在这项研究中，我们研究这些论点在更广泛的时空设置的方式在美国和日本的立法机构的公众审议的比较分析。更具体地说，在完善的道德和情感词汇词典的帮助下，并采用先进的计算技术进行系统的数据收集，我们分析了大量的语音数据，这些数据记录了美国国会和日本国会几十年来的辩论，以获得纵向的道德情感动态。然后，我们使用多层次模型回归派生的道德情感模式的立法审议在每个国家的各种协变量，以找到这些模式的可能驱动因素。这些分析的结果揭示了道德情感框架和政治意识形态之间的关系比前面的论点所建议的更合格，对文献中迅速依赖意识形态解释的普遍趋势提出了严重质疑。研究结果表明，需要一个更全面的方法来处理政治学中的道德情感现象。
There is a growing body of research that focuses on the supposedly close association between an individual’s moral–emotional behavior and his/her political ideology. A prominent example is Haidt’s “moral psychology,” which claims that political liberals and conservatives draw on mutually different sets of moral foundations. However, this and other arguments, which have mostly been advanced in the social context of the United States, lack a comparative perspective. In this study, we examine these arguments in broader spatio-temporal settings by way of a comparative analysis of public deliberations in the U.S. and Japanese legislatures. More specifically, with the help of well-established moral- and emotional-word dictionaries, and employing advanced computational techniques for systematic data collection, we analyze a large volume of speech data that records floor debates over decades in the U.S. Congress and the Japanese Diet to derive longitudinal moral–emotional dynamics. We then use multilevel modeling to regress the derived moral–emotional patterns of legislative deliberations in each country on various covariates to locate possible drivers of these patterns. The results of these analyses reveal more qualified relationships between a moral–emotional framework and political ideology than preceding arguments have suggested, casting serious doubt on the widespread tendency in the literature to quickly rely on an ideological explanation. The findings suggest the need for a more comprehensive approach to handling moral–emotional phenomena in political science.