新刊速递 | APSR Vol.144, No.4, 2020
期刊简介：《美国政治学评论》（American Political Science Review, APSR）是美国政治学会（American Political Science Association, APSA）旗下最知名的季刊。自1906年创刊并由剑桥大学出版社出版以来，逐步成为政治学最具权威性的期刊之一。内容涉及政治学理论、美国政治、公共政策、公共管理、比较政治、国际关系等。
编者按：摘要编译主要由各高校在读硕士生和博士生自愿组织进行。受学生学识及翻译水平所限，译文可能有诸多不当之处，还望读者们见宥，也欢迎留言讨论。此外，由于版权所限，需要阅读原文的读者请通过所在学校/机构的图书馆数据库或其他途径访问下载。
期刊目录
1. 哪些身份结构强化了对“黑命攸关”运动的支持和动员？一个实证检验
2. 少数“异议者”的不同政治地位
3. 于政治中代表沉默
4. 女性代表与性别化的权力渠道
5. 在因果性和阐释性的社会解释伦理中对研究对象的尊重
6. 制度化的警察暴行：酷刑、安全机构军事化和墨西哥刑事司法审讯改革
7. 性别、执法与正义的获得：来自印度全女性警察站的证据
8. 政党竞争和联盟稳定：来自美国地方政府的证据
9. 计票质量：原因与结果
10. 购买权力：秘密投票前的选举策略
11. 分拆：找出自我利益对政策态度的真正影响
12. 极化多元主义：美国压力集团中的组织偏好与偏见
哪些身份结构强化了对“黑命贵”运动的支持和动员？
一个实证检验
题目：Which Identity Frames Boost Support for and Mobilization in the #BlackLivesMatter Movement? An Experimental Test
作者：Tabitha Bonilla，西北大学政策研究院助理教授；Alvin B. Tillery, Jr.，西北大学政治学系副教授
摘要：自2013年以来，“黑命攸关”（BLM）运动已在美国各个城市中组织了数百起破坏性抗议（Garza 2014; Harris 2015; Taylor 2016）。运动获得了美国媒体的高度关注，并受到美国民众的充分认可（Horowitz and Livingston 2016; Neal 2017）。社会运动领域的研究者们认为，这种强大的动员通常建立在清晰的社会运动结构上（Benford and Snow 2000; Snow et al. 1986）。Tillery(2019b)在“黑命攸关”（BLM）运动活跃人士的社交媒体交流中，确定了几个不同的信息结构。本文通过调查实验，检验了这些结构中的三个——黑人民族主义者、女权主义者以及LGBTQ+权利——对动员非裔美国人的影响。作者发现，对这些结构的接触会对受访者支持、信任、游说和记录“黑命攸关”（BLM）运动代表的意愿产生不同的影响。这些发现对在种族平等运动中跨区域信息调度策略提出了新的问题。
The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement has organized hundreds of disruptive protests in American cities since 2013 (Garza 2014; Harris 2015; Taylor 2016). The movement has garnered considerable attention from the U.S. media and is well recognized by the U.S. public (Horowitz and Livingston 2016; Neal 2017). Social movement scholars suggest that such robust mobilizations are typically predicated on clear social movement frames (Benford and Snow 2000; Snow et al. 1986). Tillery (2019b) has identified several distinct message frames within the social media communications of BLM activists. In this paper, we use a survey experiment to test the effect of three of these frames—Black Nationalist, Feminist, and LGBTQ+ Rights—on the mobilization of African Americans. We find that exposure to these frames generates differential effects on respondents’ willingness to support, trust, canvass, and write representatives about the Black Lives Matter movement. These findings raise new questions about the deployment of intersectional messaging strategies within movements for racial justice.
少数“异议者”的不同政治地位
题目：The Distinctive Political Status of Dissident Minorities
作者：David Schraub，加州大学伯克利分校法学院讲师、加州宪法研究中心高级研究员。
摘要：“少数异议者”这一群体是被边缘化的、对主要群体就某一事项达成共识而持异议但却对集体自由至关重要的群体。本文阐述了异议者这一少数群体独特的政治地位——权力、脆弱性以及义务。少数异议者群体可能特别容易受到“自我憎恨”的诋毁或排斥，但他们也可以通过将自己定位成自己群体中的特殊和模范成员而发挥重大的公众影响力。反过来，少数异议者群体的权力和脆弱性又都集中在“象征化”的前景上，即多数群体行动者利用少数异议者的不同意见作为履行与少数群体接触这一规定义务的手段。尽管少数异议者群体应能自由地在公共场所坚持和主张其不同的立场，但他们仍有一项特殊的义务，即不将自己作为与更广泛群体接触的适当替代者。
“Dissident minorities” are members of marginalized groups who dissent from the consensus group position on matters seen as critical to their group’s collective liberation. This paper articulates the distinctive political status—powers, vulnerabilities, and obligations—of dissident minorities. Dissident minorities may be especially vulnerable to slurs or ostracism as “self-hating.” But they also can wield significant public influence by positioning themselves as exceptional and exemplary members of their group. Both the powers and vulnerabilities of dissident minorities, in turn, converge around the prospect of “tokenization”—the use of the dissident minority’s dissident opinion by majority group actors as a means of discharging a stipulated obligation to engage with the minority group writ large. While dissident minorities should be free to hold and advocate for their divergent positions in public spaces, they retain a distinctive obligation to not offer themselves out as adequate replacements for engagement with the broader group.
于政治中代表沉默
题目：Representing Silence in Politics
作者：Mónica Brito Vieira，约克大学政治学系教授
摘要：民主代表理论往往关注“声音”：它以声音为代表的对象，以发声作为主要的代表模式。本文认为这一关注是有问题的，并以“沉默”的视角提出了一个基本问题：代表制能够为公民沉默的立场赋权吗？本文用三个部分探讨这一问题。第一，本文提出了新的关于沉默的概念化方式，认为对无声最恰当的理解应为“潜在的或实际的在场”。第二，本文用支配和代替参与的标准来评估在传送带代表模型中为沉默赋权的尝试。第三，本文批判地使用并加强了关于代表的建设性观点，这是通过发展这些标准以用来评估代表（所谓）“沉默的大多数”这一主张的合法性来实现的——也就是关注沉默选民，为他们发声。
Democratic representation focuses on voice: it conceives voice as that which is represented and as the prime mode of representing. This article argues that this focus is problematic and turns instead to silence to ask a fundamental question: Can representation empower citizens from their silent positions? I approach the question in three parts. First, I offer a new conceptualization of silence, arguing that silence is best understood as the site of a potential or actual presence. Second, I use criteria of domination and displaced involvement to assess attempts to enfranchise silence within the transmission-belt model of representation. Third, I critically engage and strengthen constructivist views of representation by developing these criteria to assess the legitimacy of claims to represent—speak about and for—silent constituencies—namely, the claim to represent an (alleged) silent majority.
女性代表与性别化的权力渠道
题目：Women’s Representation and the Gendered Pipeline to Power
作者：Danielle M. Thomsen，加州大学欧文分校政治学系助理教授；Aaron S. King，北卡罗来纳大学威尔明顿分校公共与国际事务部副教授
摘要：对美国政治中女性代表不足的主要解释是，竞选公职的女性比男性更少，但学界近年来对公职竞选渠道的性别构成问题关注较少。通过三种潜在候选人池，即：低级别官员、报纸上列为可能性候选人的人、有政治贡献的律师，本文检验了通往权力的性别化渠道。本文发现了支持女性较少寻求竞选公职地证据，然而，竞选渠道中女性数量的不足在女性候选人缺乏中起到了更大的作用。为了弥合候选人的性别差异，女性远比男性需要更积极地参与公职，特别是在共和党这一边。本文的结果强调，在女性代表不足的研究中，除了考虑当选率之外，还要考虑通向权力的性别化渠道。
The leading explanation for the underrepresentation of women in American politics is that women are less likely to run for office than men, but scholars have given less attention in recent years to the gender makeup of the pipeline to elected office. We examine the gendered pipeline to power across three potential candidate pools: lower-level officeholders, those named in newspapers as likely candidates, and lawyers who made political contributions. We find some evidence that women are less likely to seek elected office; however, the dearth of women in the pipeline plays a much greater role in the lack of women candidates. For the gender disparity in candidates to close, women have to be far more likely to run for office than men, particularly on the Republican side. Our results highlight the need to consider the gendered pipeline to power alongside rates of entry in studies of women’s underrepresentation.
在因果性和阐释性的社会解释伦理中对研究对象的尊重
题目：Respect for Subjects in the Ethics of Causal and Interpretive Social Explanation
作者：Michael L. Frazer，东安格利亚大学政治和社会学理论讲师
摘要：在对社会现象的解释上，相互竞争的因果性和阐释性路径有着重要的伦理差别。尽管我们可以把人类行为解释为因果机制、理性选择、或二者以某种方式结合的结果。但是社会科学家尊重他人，承认其人性，在道德上是十分重要的。阐释性的解释以这种方式尊重其研究对象，但是纯粹因果性的解释却不是这样。然而，尽管因果性的解释本身并不能表现出这种尊重，但如果因果性的研究可以纳入其研究对象的自主项目中，那么它们就能以尊重的方式被使用。当研究对象通过知情同意的程序能够正确理解并自主接受研究者的目标时，这种情况就得以发生。当研究者能够正确理解并接受其研究对象的目标，用其研究给研究对象赋权时，这一设定同样成立。
Rival causal and interpretive approaches to explaining social phenomena have important ethical differences. While human actions can be explained as a result of causal mechanisms, as a meaningful choice based on reasons, or as some combination of the two, it is morally important that social scientists respect others by recognizing them as persons. Interpretive explanations directly respect their subjects in this way, while purely causal explanations do not. Yet although causal explanations are not themselves expressions of respect, they can be used in respectful ways if they are incorporated into subjects’ self-directed projects. This can occur when subjects correctly understand and freely adopt researchers’ goals through a process of informed consent. It can also occur when researchers correctly understand and adopt their subject’s goals, using their research to empower those they study.
制度化的警察暴行：
酷刑、安全机构军事化和墨西哥刑事司法审讯改革
题目：Institutionalized Police Brutality: Torture, the Militarization of Security, and the Reform of Inquisitorial Criminal Justice in Mexico
作者：Beatriz Magaloni，斯坦福大学政治学系教授，Freeman Spogli国际问题研究所高级研究员；Luis Rodriguez，斯坦福大学政治学系博士生，“贫穷、暴力和治理”实验室研究员
摘要：社会成员如何约束他们的强制机关并使之向一个更为人道的刑事司法体系过渡？本文认为有两个主要因素能够解释为何酷刑甚至能够在民主社会中作为一种普遍行为持续存在：程序保护薄弱和警察军事化，这带来了策略、装备以及将犯罪嫌疑人视为战时敌人的心态。通过对墨西哥监狱犯人的大规模调查和对逮捕数据和地点的利用，本文为这两个解释变量如何形塑警察暴力提供了因果证明。本文指出了民主国家中存在的威权警察行为的严峻形势。本文还为刑事司法审讯机构的废除——殖民地遗产的残余和该地区的普遍趋势——抑制警察暴行的程度提供了新证据。
How can societies restrain their coercive institutions and transition to a more humane criminal justice system? We argue that two main factors explain why torture can persist as a generalized practice even in democratic societies: weak procedural protections and the militarization of policing, which introduces strategies, equipment, and mentality that treats criminal suspects as though they were enemies in wartime. Using a large survey of the Mexican prison population and leveraging the date and place of arrest, this paper provides causal evidence about how these two explanatory variables shape police brutality. Our paper offers a grim picture of the survival of authoritarian policing practices in democracies. It also provides novel evidence of the extent to which the abolition of inquisitorial criminal justice institutions—a remnant of colonial legacies and a common trend in the region—has worked to restrain police brutality.
性别、执法与正义的获得：
来自印度全女性警察站的证据
题目：Gender, Law Enforcement, and Access to Justice: Evidence from All-Women Police Stations in India
作者：Nirvikar Jassal，斯坦福大学全球发展中心博士后
摘要：根据性别划分的“飞地”能促进女性获得正义吗？本文调查了印度的全女性警察站来检验由特定群组构成的机构是否在执法中有助于性别暴力的受害者和女性警官。本文基于印度的警察报告创建了一个原始数据集，并利用哈里亚纳邦开设全女性警察站的方式来估计因果效应。执法飞地的设立并没有增加犯罪记录。事实上，这一干预通过正当化性别犯罪的偏离降低了警察站待处理的案件量，减少了女性警察所负责的事务，并增加了受害者寻求赔偿的交通成本。这一机构以嫌疑人逮捕为代价，鼓励与施暴者和解从而使受害者的“咨询”正式化。调查证据显示，全女性警察站也许和对女性警察的积极认知并不相关。概括来说，本文认为分离出的代表会产生非预期的后果。
Can gender-based “enclaves” facilitate women’s access to justice? I examine all-female police stations in India and test whether group-specific institutions assist victims of gender-based violence and female officers in law enforcement. I create an original dataset based on Indian police reports and leverage the manner in which all-women police stations were opened in Haryana state to estimate their causal effect. The creation of enclaves in law enforcement does not increase registered crime. In fact, the intervention lowers the caseload at standard stations by justifying the deflection of gendered crimes, reduces responsibilities for policewomen, and increases travel cost for victims seeking redress. The institutions formalize the “counseling” of victims by encouraging reconciliation with abusers at the expense of arrest of suspects, and survey evidence suggests that all-women stations might not be associated with positive perceptions of policewomen. Broadly, I argue that representation as separation may have unintended consequences.
政党竞争和联盟稳定：
来自美国地方政府的证据
题目：Party Competition and Coalitional Stability: Evidence from American Local Government
作者：Peter Bucchianeri，范德堡大学有效立法中心研究顾问
摘要：几十年来，政治学家一直认为，竞争是一个负责任的政党体系的基本组成部分，因此，当一个政党主导政治时，立法联盟就会不稳定，民主问责制就会受到影响。本文在美国地方政府这个重要但很大程度上未经彻底研究的立法环境中评估了这些预测。通过一个来自151个市议会的投票表决记录的原始资料，本文发现，当选举有党派色彩而选民在两党之间权衡时，立法行为会更加单一。然而，当缺乏上述任一特征时，精英的行为仍然是松散无组织的，联盟会随着时间和议题的变化而变化。这些制度和竞争环境的差异表明，党派选举——以及几乎总是与之相伴的政党组织——对将选举的不安全感转化为有组织的政府而言至关重要，这就提出了在全国各地越来越多一党主导的政府中选举问责性的问题。
For decades, political scientists have argued that competition is a fundamental component of a responsible party system, such that when one party dominates politics, legislative coalitions destabilize and democratic accountability suffers. In this paper, I evaluate these predictions in an important but largely unexplored legislative environment: American local government. Using an original collection of roll-call records from 151 municipal councils, I show that legislative behavior is more one-dimensional when elections are partisan and the electorate is evenly balanced between the parties. When either of these features is absent, however, elite behavior remains unstructured, with coalitions shifting over time and across issues. These differences across institutional and competitive contexts suggest that partisan elections—and the party organizations that nearly always come with them—are critical for translating electoral insecurity into organized government, raising questions about the capacity for electoral accountability in a growing set of one-party dominant governments across the country.
计票质量：原因与结果
题目：The Quality of Vote Tallies: Causes and Consequences
作者：Cristian Challú，卡内基梅隆大学机器学习专业博士生；Enrique Seira，墨西哥理工自治大学经济学系与经济研究中心教授；Alberto Simpser，墨西哥理工自治大学政治学系与经济研究中心教授
摘要：选举结果的有效性取决于投票统计的准确性。本文提供了有关计票质量的驱动因素与相应后果变化的因果证据。本文使用五次墨西哥全国大选的投票站数据记录，发现有超过40%的站级计票数据不一致。本文的证据有利表明了这些计票不一致是非党派性质的。本文通过分析超过150万投票站工作人员的数据，发现较低的学历、较高的工作量、以及较复杂的统计会导致更多的计票不一致。最后，本文通过对近8万名工作人员的调查以及详细的行政数据发现，计票不一致导致了重新计票，而重新计票又导致了人们对选举机构信任的降低。本文讨论了这其中的政策含义。
The credibility of election outcomes hinges on the accuracy of vote tallies. We provide causal evidence on the drivers and the downstream consequences of variation in the quality of vote tallies. Using data for the universe of polling stations in Mexico in five national elections, we document that over 40% of polling-station-level tallies display inconsistencies. Our evidence strongly suggests these inconsistencies are nonpartisan. Using data for more than 1.5 million poll workers, we show that lower educational attainment, higher workload, and higher complexity of the tally cause more inconsistencies. Finally, using an original survey of close to 80,000 poll workers together with detailed administrative data, we find that inconsistencies cause recounts and recounts lead to lower trust in electoral institutions. We discuss policy implications.
购买权力：
秘密投票前的选举策略
题目：Buying Power: Electoral Strategy before the Secret Vote
作者：Daniel W. Gingerich，弗吉尼亚大学政治学系副教授
摘要：关于庇护主义的研究强调通过捐客动员选民。为了有效地利用起这些代理人，政客必须了解捐客的相对能力并相应地聚合这些稀缺的资源。通过对巴西20世纪中期一个来自米纳斯吉拉斯州（Minas Gerais）的议会强人古斯塔夫·卡帕讷玛（Gustavo Capanema）的档案进行手动编码，本文为研究这些变化提供了一手直接证据。这些分析聚焦了巴西实施秘密投票之前的时代，那时对捐客表现的测量十分直接。与政治学习的理论相一致，数据显示，资源流向本地机器取决于在以往选举中实际收到的和预期选票之间的偏差。不仅如此，鉴于政客们有能力辨别动员能力，花在捐客身上的钱将极为有效地动员投票。
Research on clientelism emphasizes the use of brokers to mobilize voters. To utilize these agents efficiently, politicians must learn about brokers’ relative abilities and allocate scarce resources accordingly. Drawing upon a hand-coded dataset based on the archives of Gustavo Capanema, a powerful mid-twentieth-century congressman from Minas Gerais, Brazil, this paper offers the first direct evidence of such learning dynamics. The analysis concentrates on Brazil’s pre-secret ballot era, a time when measuring broker performance was particularly straightforward. Consistent with theories of political learning, the data demonstrate that resource flows to local machines were contingent on the deviation between actual and expected votes received in previous elections. Moreover, given politicians’ ability to discern mobilization capacity, payments to brokers were highly effective in bringing out the vote.
分拆：
找出自我利益对政策态度的真正影响
题目：Carving Out: Isolating the True Effect of Self-Interest on Policy Attitudes
作者：Jake Haselswerdt，密苏里大学政治学系和杜鲁门公共事务学院助理教授
摘要：自我利益在人们对公共政策的看法中有多重要?如果一项政策提案免除了目标群体中的一部分人必须支付的成本，或者否认了他们将享受到的好处，他们会根据自我利益作出反应吗?这项实验研究利用了政策建议的共同特征区分了真正的自我利益和个人所在群体的趋同性：即使用一种基于年龄的“分拆”方法（carve-outs），以防止人口中相似的子群体受到新政策的好处或者负担的影响(例如削减免除超过一定年龄的人们缴纳费用的养老项目)。本文发现，对于不受联邦医疗保险削减影响的美国老年人和年龄太大而无法从假设性的学生债务减免计划中受益的年轻人来说，自身利益会产生影响。这些影响的作用方式与现存的理论有所不同。
How important is self-interest in people’s opinions about public policy? If a policy proposal exempts a subset of the target group from costs that others will have to pay, or denies them benefits that others will enjoy, do they respond according to self-interest? This experimental study distinguishes between true self-interest and affinity for one’s in-group by exploiting a common feature of policy proposals: age-based “carve-outs” that prevent otherwise similar subgroups of a population from being affected by the benefits or burdens of a new policy (e.g., cuts to an old-age program that exempt people above a certain age). I find self-interest effects for older Americans exempt from cuts to Medicare and younger people too old to benefit from a hypothetical student debt relief program. These effects vary in ways that are consistent with extant theory.
极化多元主义：
美国压力集团中的组织偏好与偏见
题目：Polarized Pluralism: Organizational Preferences and Biases in the American Pressure System
作者：Jesse M. Crosson，普林斯顿大学民主政治研究中心研究员；Alexander C. Furnas，密歇根大学政治学系博士候选人；Geoffrey M. Lorenz，内布拉斯加大学林肯分校政治学系助理教授。
摘要：长久以来，多元政治的批评者一直认为，美国的利益集团体系对政策偏好表现出显著的偏态分布。本文通过测量群体直接显现出来的偏好来评估这一争论，为超过2600个利益集团和950名国会议员建立了一套名为IGscores的点估计值方法。本文通过联合缩放一个利益集团对国会中记名投票法案立场的大规模数据集来产生分数。对得分的分析发现，利益集团体系中异质性显著，在立法者与意识形态相似群体的偏好对应上，几乎没有向保守主义立场的偏斜和显著的党派间差异。但是，当根据团体的政治行动委员会（PAC）捐款和游说支出来衡量IGscores时，就会出现保守主义的偏差和同质性。这些发现表明，利益集团间的偏见取决于像PAC捐款和游说之类的活动在多大程度上影响了政策制定者对组织利益偏好的看法。
For decades, critics of pluralism have argued that the American interest group system exhibits a significantly biased distribution of policy preferences. We evaluate this argument by measuring groups’ revealed preferences directly, developing a set of ideal point estimates, IGscores, for over 2,600 interest groups and 950 members of Congress on a common scale. We generate the scores by jointly scaling a large dataset of interest groups’ positions on congressional bills with roll-call votes on those same bills. Analyses of the scores uncover significant heterogeneity in the interest group system, with little conservative skew and notable inter-party differences in preference correspondence between legislators and ideologically similar groups. Conservative bias and homogeneity reappear, however, when weighting IGscores by groups’ PAC contributions and lobbying expenditures. These findings suggest that bias among interest groups depends on the extent to which activities like PAC contributions and lobbying influence policymakers’ perceptions about the preferences of organized interests.
编译/校对：施榕、杨端程、康张城、殷昊、赵德昊、吴温泉
编辑：郭静远
【政文观止Poliview】系头条号签约作者
你在看政观么