人民清廉感知如何影响其制度性政治参与行为:政府信任的中介效应
作者:
中图分类号:

D630;D262.6

基金项目:

重庆市社会科学规划重点项目"重庆乡村干部群众工作能力评估与提升策略研究"(2023NDZD03)


How people’s perception of honesty and integrity affects their institutional political participation behavior: The mediating effect of government trust
Author:
  • 摘要
  • | |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献 [41]
  • |
  • 相似文献 [20]
  • | | |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    人民有序政治参与是民主政治建设的重要环节,也是促进决策科学化、社会现代化的有效途径。党的二十大报告强调,要"健全人民当家作主制度体系,扩大人民有序政治参与"。有序政治参与即制度化政治参与。在此背景下,探究影响人民制度化政治参与的因素及其作用路径具有重要的意义。人民制度化政治参与会受到内外部因素的多重影响,清廉感知水平作为人民对政府作风形象的直接评价、政府信任程度作为政府公信力的体现与人民政治生活的心理基础,均可能对人民有序政治参与行为产生影响。为此,本研究基于中国综合社会调查(CSS)数据,以计划行为理论为分析框架,试图探究清廉感知对制度化政治参与的内在影响机制,具体包括:清廉感知与政治参与作用路径;政府信任是否是路径中的一环;人民对于各级政府的信任是否存在差异、是否在路径中发挥有差异性的作用。通过运用SPSS及Process插件对数据进行分析检验,本研究得出以下主要结论:(1)清廉感知水平正向影响人民政治参与行为;(2)清廉感知水平正向影响政府信任水平;(3)政府信任水平正向影响人民政治参与行为;(4)政府信任水平在清廉感知与政治参与的关系中起完全中介作用;(5)我国存在差序政府信任,自地方到中央,人民的信任水平依次升高;(6)在政府信任的完全中介作用中,起主要作用的是中央政府信任。据此,本研究进一步从拓宽制度化政治参与渠道、增进公众了解、宣扬反腐成效、加强政府形象塑造几个方面提出了有针对性的对策建议,以期完善参与的各个链条,进而提升公民对于反腐倡廉的实感,拉近政民距离,促进人民有序政治参与,进而推进我国新时代政治民主化建设进程。本研究从反腐与民主的两大宏观议题着手,从微观个体层面探究清廉感知、政府信任与政治参与的关系,在学理上,是一种新尝试,丰富了制度化政治参与的研究视角,完善了其路径建构;在实践上,是一个新的落脚点,为切合实际的科学决策与民主化政治建设提供了一定启示性建议;在现实意义上,对反腐与民主的宏观议题的内在逻辑构建有一定程度的借鉴意义,两者共同服务于我国社会主义民主政治的本质特征——人民当家作主。

    Abstract:

    The orderly political participation of the people is an important link in the building of democratic politics and an effective way to promote scientific decision-making and social modernization. The report of the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China emphasizes the expansion of people’s orderly political participation. Orderly political participation means institutionalized political participation, and in this context, it is of particular significance to explore the factors affecting people’s institutionalized political participation and their paths of action. People’s institutionalized political participation is affected by multiple internal and external factors, including the level of perceived honesty and integrity as the people’s direct evaluation of the government’s style of work and image, the level of government trust as the embodiment of the government’s credibility and the psychological basis of people’s political life, which may all have an impact on people’s political participation behavior. Therefore, based on the data from China General Social Survey (CSS) and using the theory of planned behavior as the analytical framework, this study attempts to explore the internal influence mechanism of perceived honesty and integrity and institutionalized political participation, specifically: the action path of perceived honesty and integrity and political participation; whether government trust is a part of the path; whether there are differences in people’s trust in governments at all levels, and whether they play different roles in the path. By using SPSS and Process plug-in to analyze and test the data, this study draws the following main conclusions: 1) The level of honesty and integrity perception positively affects people’s political participation behavior; 2) The level of honesty and integrity perception positively affects the level of government trust; 3) The level of government trust positively affects people’s political participation behavior; 4) The level of government trust plays a fully mediating role in the relationship between honesty and integrity perception and political participation; 5) There is differential government trust in China, with the level of people’s trust increasing in order from local to central government; 6) In the fully mediating role of government trust, it is central government trust that plays the main role. Accordingly, this study further puts forward targeted countermeasure suggestions from the aspects of broadening the channels of institutionalized political participation, enhancing public understanding, publicizing the effectiveness of anti-corruption, and strengthening the government’s image building, with a view to perfecting the various chains of participation, thus enhancing the citizens’ sense of anti-corruption, honesty and integrity, narrowing the distance between the government and the people, promoting the orderly political participation of the citizens, and thus advancing the process of political democratization in the new era of China. Starting from the two macro issues of anti-corruption and democracy, this study explores the relationship between the perception of honesty and integrity, government trust and political participation at the micro individual level. Theoretically, it is a new attempt to enrich the research perspectives of institutionalized political participation and improve its path construction; practically, it is a new landing point, providing certain revelatory suggestions for practical scientific decision-making and democratization of political construction; realistically, there is certain reference significance in the construction of the internal logic of the macro-issues of anti-corruption and democracy, both of which together serve the essential feature of socialist democratic politics in China—the people as masters of the country.

    参考文献
    [1] 习近平.高举中国特色社会主义伟大旗帜 为全面建设社会主义现代化国家而团结奋斗——在中国共产党第二十次全国代表大会上的报告[N].人民日报,2022-10-26(01).
    [2] 中共中央关于进一步全面深化改革 推进中国式现代化的决定[N].人民日报,2024-07-22(01).
    [3] 王浦劬.政治学基础[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2005:152.
    [4] AJZEN I.From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior[EB/OL]. 2017-12-10].https://link.sprinqer.com/chapter/10.10071/978-3-642-69756-6_2.
    [5] MAN CHO JIN,EOM,KIHONG.Empirical analyses on the relationships between the citizen’s perception about the political corruptions and the evaluations of the democracy in Korea [J].National strategy,2010(16):179-206.
    [6] TREISMAN D.The causes of corruption:a cross-national study[J].Journal of public economics, 2000, 76(3): 399-457.
    [7] SANDHOLTZ W,KOETZLE W.Accounting for corruption:Economic structure, democracy, and trade[J].International Studies Quarterly,2000,44(1):31-50.
    [8] MONTINOLA G R,JACKMAN R W.Sources of corruption:A cross-country study[J].British Journal of Political Science,2002,32(01):147-170.
    [9] 李辉, 呼和那日松, 唐敏.民主、主观经济评价与腐败感知:基于亚洲、非洲与拉美舆情表合并数据的多层分析[J].经济社会体制比较,2015(3):162-174.
    [10] JUDGE WQ,MCNATT D B,XU W.The antecedents and effects of national corruption:A meta-analysis.Journal of World Business,2011,46(1):93-103.
    [11] 岳磊, 刘乾.腐败治理如何影响公众的反腐败参与意愿:腐败程度感知与腐败容忍度的链式中介效应[J].广州大学学报(社会科学版),2022(6):94-106.
    [12] HOOGHE M,QUINTELIER E.Political Participation in European Countries:The Effect of Authoritarian Rule,Corruption,Lack of Good Governance and Economic Downturn[J].Comparative European Politics, 2014(2).
    [13] 裴志军,陈珊珊.腐败感知、政府绩效满意度与村民选举参与:基于中国农村社会调查的实证研究[J].东北农业大学学报(社会科学版),2018(2):39-46+68.
    [14] 王晶晶.腐败感知及其对村民政治参与的影响分析:基于中国乡镇民主与治理调查数据[J].湖南农业大学学报(社会科学版),2016(3):65-71.
    [15] 陈珊珊.腐败感知、政府满意度对村民选举参与的影响研究[D].浙江财经大学,2018.
    [16] 白描,苑鹏.福祉视角下农民政治参与的现状及影响因素分析[J].重庆社会科学,2018(10):73-81.
    [17] 孙昕,徐志刚,陶然,等.政治信任、社会资本和村民选举参与:基于全国代表性样本调查的实证分析[J].社会学研究,2007(4):165-187,245.
    [18] 谢冶菊.农民对基层政府的信任与选举参与的关联性探索[J].吉首大学学报(社会科学版),2012(9):86-94.
    [19] KRAUSS E, NEMOTO K, PEKKANEN R J, et al.Party politics,election and (mis-) trust in Japan[J].Japan Forum,2017(1):19-38.
    [20] 郑建君.政治信任、社会公正与政治参与的关系:一项基于625名中国被试的实证研究[J].政治学研究,2013(6):61-74.
    [21] 易承志.政治信任与内在效能感对基层选举投票的影响[J].华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2015(6):16-26.
    [22] 段雪辉.政府信任与政治参与研究[J].中共福建省委党校学报,2016(3):61-68.
    [23] 柴寿升,张雪唱,龙春凤.社会公平感对景区:社区冲突的影响机制研究:基于政府信任的中介效应[J].经济问题,2024(3):113-120.
    [24] CHANG E C,CHU Y H.Corruption and Trust: Exceptionalism in Asian Democracies?[J].Journal of Politics,2006(2).
    [25] KIM S.Public Trust in Government in Japan and South Korea: Dose the Rise of Critical Citizens Matter?[J].Public Administration Review, 2010(5).
    [26] VILLORIA M, VAN RYZIN G G, LAVENA C F.Social and Political Consequences of Administrative Corruption: A Study of Public Perceptions in Spain[J].Public Administration Review,2013(1).
    [27] 倪星,李珠.政府清廉感知:差序格局及其解释-基于2015年度全国廉情调查的数据分析[J].公共行政评论,2016(3):4-18.
    [28] 赵晶晶,葛颜祥,李颖.公平感知、社会信任与流域生态补偿的公众参与行为[J].中国人口·资源与环境,2023(6):196-205.
    [29] 郑建君,孙瑞佳,马瑾霏.个体公平感如何影响政治参与意愿:基于政治信任的分析[J].华东理工大学学报(社会科学版),2023(6):123-134.
    [30] MCMANUS-CZUBINSKA C,MILER W L,MARKOWSKI R,etal.Why is corruption in Poland'a serious cause for concern’?[J].Crime,Law and Social Change,2004,(2):107-132.
    [31] CLAUSEN B,KRAAY A,NYIRI Z.Corruption and confidence in public institutions:Evidence from a global survey[J].The World Bank Economic Review,2011,(2):212-249.
    [32] 李连江.差序政府信任[J].二十一世纪双月刊, 2012(6):108-119.
    [33] 于建嵘.利益博弈与抗争性政治:当代中国社会冲突的政治社会学理解[J].中国农业大学学报(社会科学版),2009(1):16-21.
    [34] 易承志,刘彩云.政治信任、相对剥夺感与群体性事件参与一基于CGSS2010数据分析[J].广东行政学院学报,2017(4):5-14.
    [35] 王浦劬,郑姗姗.政府回应、公共服务与差序政府信任的相关性分析:基于江苏某县的实证研究[J].中国行政管理,2019(5):101-108.
    [36] 杜晓燕,张江楠.新媒介环境下反腐信息媒介接触对民众清廉感知的影响机制[J].河南社会科学,2023(4):45-55.
    [37] 帅满,罗家德,郭孟伦.媒介使用对地方政府信任的作用机制研究[J].国际新闻界,2021(2):27-46.
    [38] 何文盛,何忍星.数据呈现方式、公众参与和政府信任:一项调查实验[J].公共管理与政策评论,2023(6):17-30.
    [39] 高学德,王镇江.危机沟通策略对地方政府信任的影响研究[J/OL].公共管理评论.http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/10.1653.D0.20240730.1732.002.html.
    [40] 倪星,李珠.政府清廉感知:差序格局及其解释:基于2015年度全国廉情调查的数据分析[J].公共行政评论,2016(3):4-20.
    [41] 谢思捷.负性生活事件对政府评价的影响研究[D].重庆:重庆大学,2021.
    引证文献
    网友评论
    网友评论
    分享到微博
    发 布
引用本文

李志,陈汭,刘敏.人民清廉感知如何影响其制度性政治参与行为:政府信任的中介效应[J].重庆大学学报社会科学版,2024,30(5):270-289. DOI:10.11835/j. issn.1008-5831. zs.2024.08.006

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:339
  • 下载次数: 372
  • HTML阅读次数: 670
  • 引用次数: 0
历史
  • 在线发布日期: 2024-11-12
文章二维码