« Political Behaviour: Historical and methodological benchmarks » : différence entre les versions

De Baripedia
(Page créée avec « {{Infobox Lecture | image = | image_caption = | cours = Political behaviour | faculté = | département = | professeurs = Marco Giugni<ref>[https://www.u… »)
 
Aucun résumé des modifications
 
(13 versions intermédiaires par le même utilisateur non affichées)
Ligne 11 : Ligne 11 :
* [[Political Behaviour: Historical and methodological benchmarks]]
* [[Political Behaviour: Historical and methodological benchmarks]]
* [[The structural foundations of political behaviour]]
* [[The structural foundations of political behaviour]]
* [[The Cultural Basis of Political Behaviour]]
* [[The cultural basis of political behaviour]]
* [[Political socialization]]
* [[Political socialization]]
* [[The rational actor]]
* [[The rational actor]]
Ligne 19 : Ligne 19 :
}}
}}


Nous allons situer l’étude du comportement politique dans l’histoire et aborder quelques éléments méthodologiques. Idéalement, il faudrait distinguer entre la constitution historique de l’étude du comportement électoral et celle du comportement non électoral puisque ce sont deux domaines qui se sont très peu parlé historiquement. Comment l’étude du comportement électoral s’est développée et constituée ?
We will situate the study of political behaviour in history and discuss some methodological elements. Ideally, a distinction should be made between the historical constitution of the study of electoral behaviour and that of non-electoral behaviour, since these two fields have historically spoken very little to each other. How has the study of electoral behaviour developed and constituted?


L’émergence du sujet nous interroge sur comment le sujet a émergé dans la pensée européenne. L’émergence de l’approche behavioriste constitue le point de départ de l’étude empirique du comportement politique. Nous allons traiter de l’émergence du citoyen autonome, à savoir le citoyen « intentionnel » qui introduit les théories du choix rationnel avec notamment les théories économiques du vote. Enfin, nous allons parler du développement des techniques d’analyse qui ont contribué à faire de l’étude du comportement politique l’une des disciplines les plus importantes de la science politique avec des instruments principaux comme celui du sondage.
The emergence of the subject raises questions about how the subject emerged in European thought. The emergence of the behaviourist approach is the starting point for the empirical study of political behaviour. We will deal with the emergence of the autonomous citizen, i.e. the "intentional" citizen who introduces the theories of rational choice with, in particular, the economic theories of the vote. Finally, we will discuss the development of analytical techniques that have contributed to making the study of political behaviour one of the most important disciplines of political science with main instruments such as polling.


{{Translations
{{Translations
| fr = Repères historiques et méthodologiques
| fr = Repères historiques et méthodologiques
| es =  
| es = Comportamiento político: puntos de referencia históricos y metodológicos
| it = Comportamento politico: parametri storici e metodologici
}}
}}


= Émergence de l’étude du comportement politique =
=Emergence of the study of political behaviour=
Il faut considérer l’étude du comportement politique dans une longue histoire où le sujet est l’individu, allant de la Renaissance où on a commencé à mettre le sujet au centre de l’univers. Dans une perspective à long terme, c’est grâce à ce premier pas qu’il fut possible des siècles plus tarde de développer la science des comportements et plus particulièrement l’étude du comportement politique. Il faut garder en tête l’enracinement historique dans la Renaissance et plus tard dans le siècle des Lumières qui a œuvré pour mettre le sujet au centre de la réflexion. Dans une perspective plus politique et institutionnelle, il faut considérer comment la constitution de l’État-Nation a contribué à la centralisation de l’individu, de la mise au centre et de la réflexion autour de l’individu. Avec les révolutions démocratiques en Europe, cela a contribué à placer l’individu dans le centre notamment avec l’émergence et la constitution de l’idée de citoyenneté. Pour l’étude du comportement électoral, l’idée qu’il y ait un ou une citoyenne est quelque chose de fondamental.  
The study of political behaviour must be seen in a long history where the subject is the individual, going back to the Renaissance when the subject began to be put at the centre of the universe. In a long-term perspective, it is thanks to this first step that it was possible centuries later to develop the science of behaviour and more particularly the study of political behaviour. We must bear in mind the historical roots in the Renaissance and later in the Age of Enlightenment which worked to put the subject at the centre of reflection. In a more political and institutional perspective, we must consider how the constitution of the nation-state contributed to the centralization of the individual, of putting the individual at the centre and of reflection around the individual. With the democratic revolutions in Europe, this has contributed to placing the individual at the centre, particularly with the emergence and constitution of the idea of citizenship. For the study of electoral behaviour, the idea that there is a citizen is fundamental.  


Le développement d’une discipline scientifique relève aussi et hérite de transformations plus larges dans l’histoire des mentalités et même dans la culture d’un continent ou d’un pays donné. Tous ces éléments qui ont mis au centre l’individu se sont traduits dans l’émergence au XXème siècle d’une approche qui a été dominante et née aux États-Unis à partir des années 1920 et 1930 et qui a connu son essor dans les années 1940 qui est le behaviorisme. C’est un terme utilisé dans plusieurs disciplines différentes notamment en psychologie est qui n’est pas nécessairement très proche du behaviorisme tel que connu en science politique.
The development of a scientific discipline also stems from and inherits broader transformations in the history of mentalities and even in the culture of a given continent or country. All these elements that have placed the individual at the centre have been translated into the emergence in the 20th century of an approach that was dominant and born in the United States from the 1920s and 1930s and which saw its rise in the 1940s, namely behaviourism. It is a term used in several different disciplines, particularly in psychology, and is not necessarily very close to behaviorism as known in political science.


== Caractéristiques de l’ancien institutionnalisme ==
==Characteristics of old institutionalism==
Pour comprendre le behaviorisme, il faut comprendre ce qu’était le point de départ et la situation de la science politique au moment où le behaviorisme a émergé. Cette science politique était une science politique que l’on peut rapprocher de l’ancien institutionnalisme. C’était en particulier une science politique qui avait un certain nombre de caractéristiques au début du XXème siècle :
To understand behaviorism, we need to understand what the starting point and the state of political science was when behaviorism emerged. Political science was a political science that can be traced back to the old institutionalism. In particular, it was a political science that had a number of characteristics at the beginning of the 20th century:
*légalisme : c’était une science politique proche du droit et du droit constitutionnel. Il y a relativement peu de distinction entre l’étude du droit et la science politique telle que nous la connaissons aujourd’hui. L’accent était mis sur la loi et le rôle central du cadre légal pour les gouvernements.
*structuralisme : c’est un terme qui fut utilisé de manière transversale dans plusieurs disciplines avec des connotations différentes. L’idée est ici que les structures déterminent très largement les comportements individuels. Les structures sont vues comme des caractéristiques du système institutionnel politique. C’est pourquoi on parle aussi de science institutionnaliste. Si jamais on s’intéressait au comportement, ce ou ces comportements étaient très structurés, voire surdéterminés par les institutions. On ne portait pas attention aux comportements.
*holisme : c’est une notion qui fut inventée par Émile Durkheim consistant à considérer l’ensemble des choses et à rester au niveau de cet ensemble. On entend le holisme plutôt comme une tendance à comparer les systèmes politiques dans leur ensemble plutôt que de comparer les institutions individuelles prises singulièrement.
*historicisme : la fondation historique de l’analyse de l’ancien institutionnalisme propose une conception développementaliste des institutions, c’est-à-dire des institutions qui se succèdent. Il faut considérer le développement de ces institutions dans leur développement historique.
*analyse normative : ce qui intéressait les anciens institutionnalistes au début du XXème siècle était de poser des notions normatives avec des notions de juste, de bon ou encore de désirable qui seraient des valeurs pouvant juger de ce qu’est une bonne institution.


C’est en réaction à cette science politique que les behavioristes ont lancé ce mouvement qui a influencé énormément et en particulier l’analyse du comportement politique.
*legalism: it was a political science close to law and constitutional law. There is relatively little distinction between the study of law and political science as we know it today. The emphasis was on the law and the central role of the legal framework for governments.
*structuralism: this is a term that has been used across several disciplines with different connotations. The idea here is that structures very largely determine individual behaviour. Structures are seen as characteristics of the political institutional system. This is why we also speak of institutionalist science. If we were ever interested in behaviour, this or these behaviours were highly structured, even over-determined by institutions. No attention was paid to behaviour.
*holism: this is a notion that was invented by Émile Durkheim, which consists of considering the whole of things and staying at the level of this whole. Holism is understood more as a tendency to compare political systems as a whole rather than individual institutions taken singularly.
*historicism: the historical foundation of the analysis of old institutionalism proposes a developmentalist conception of institutions, that is to say, institutions that succeed one another. The development of these institutions must be considered in their historical development.  normative analysis: what interested the former institutionalists at the beginning of the 20th century was to pose normative notions with notions of right, good or desirable that would be values that could judge what a good institution is.


== Béhaviorisme ==
It was in reaction to this political science that behaviourists launched this movement, which has had an enormous influence, particularly on the analysis of political behaviour.
Le behaviorisme est une science qui étudie les comportements, donc on ne s’intéresse pas uniquement aux institutions et à leur fonctionnement, on ne s’intéresse plus au cadre légal normatif donné par les institutions, on ne s’intéresse plus aux structures, mais on s’intéresse à l’étude des comportements individuels. On ne peut parler de comportement que si on les attribue aux individus.  


Les caractéristiques du behaviorisme se retrouvent encore aujourd’hui dans l’analyse du comportement politique. Il s’agit d’expliquer les comportements sur la base d’hypothèses causales avec l’idée d’expliquer quelque chose en décrivant les comportements signifiant qu’on veut vérifier ces hypothèses en les testant empiriquement. C’est un point crucial parce que l’ancien institutionnalisme ne s’intéressait pas à la dimension empirique, elle ne s’appuyait pas sur des évidences empiriques. Pour les behavioristes, il s’agit d’expliquer les comportements des individus par le biais d’hypothèses causales et en les testant empiriquement. De là découlent certains instruments méthodologiques, dont l’instrument du sondage.  
==Behaviourism==
Behaviourism is a science that studies behaviour, so we are not only interested in institutions and how they function, we are no longer interested in the normative legal framework given by institutions, we are no longer interested in structures, but we are interested in the study of individual behaviour. We can only speak of behaviour if we attribute it to individuals.  


En même temps, les behavioristes avaient l’ambition d’essayer d’élaborer des modèles et théories généraux. Ce n’est pas évidemment des lois comme dans la sociologie du XIXème siècle qui voulait établir des lois universelles. Désormais, on cherche à comprendre pourquoi une population se comporte d’une telle manière ou encore à développer des théories qui s’adaptent à différents contextes.
The characteristics of behaviourism are still found today in the analysis of political behaviour. It is a matter of explaining behaviour on the basis of causal hypotheses with the idea of explaining something by describing the behaviour meaning that one wants to test these hypotheses by testing them empirically. This is a crucial point because the old institutionalism was not interested in the empirical dimension, it did not rely on empirical evidence. For behaviourists, it is a matter of explaining the behaviour of individuals through causal hypotheses and testing them empirically. From this, certain methodological instruments are derived, including the survey instrument.


{| border="1" cellpadding="20" cellspacing="0" align="center"
At the same time, behaviourists had the ambition to try to develop general models and theories. These were not obviously laws as in 19th century sociology, which wanted to establish universal laws. From now on, we are trying to understand why a population behaves in such a way or to develop theories that can be adapted to different contexts.
!Mérites
 
!Critiques et limites
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="20" border="1" align="center"
!Merits
!Criticisms and Limitations
|-
|-
| - à remis l’individu et son comportement au centre de la réflexion scientifique et de la recherche en science politique ;<div>- à permis le développement de techniques d’analyses scientifiques et systématiques pour l’étude du comportement politique.  
| - to place the individual and his behaviour at the centre of scientific reflection and research in political science ;<div>- to enable the development of scientific and systematic analytical techniques for the study of political behaviour.  
| - impérialisme de la méthodologie : le risque est de mettre la méthode pas au service de la théorie, mais avant la théorie ;<div>- occultation des valeurs : le souci de s’éloigner de l’ancien institutionnalisme a parfois amené à complètement négliger le fait que les valeurs jouent également un rôle, pas seulement en tant que valeur qui pourraient influencer le comportement, mais aussi en fonction des valeurs du chercheur ;<div>- déficit théorique.
| - imperialism of methodology: the risk is to put the method not at the service of the theory, but before the theory ;<div>- concealment of values: the concern to move away from the old institutionalism has sometimes led to a complete neglect of the fact that values also play a role, not only as values that could influence behaviour, but also according to the values of the researcher ;<div>- theoretical deficit.
|}
|}


== Théorie du choix rationnel ==
==Rational Choice Theory==
Certaines théories du modèle explicatif du vote s’appuient largement sur la théorie du choix rationnel. C’est une théorie qui s’applique à différents domaines de manière transversale.  
Some theories of the explanatory model of voting are largely based on rational choice theory. It is a theory that applies to different areas in a cross-cutting manner.  


Parmi les caractéristiques de la théorie du choix rationnel, il faut d’abord distinguer l’individualisme méthodologique qui s’oppose dans certains débats sociologiques avec le holisme sociologique. En ce sens, l’explication des phénomènes sociaux doit être fait en termes de calculs rationnels faits par des individus égocentriques réfléchissant en fonction de leurs propres intérêts. Le second élément découle du premier est que les interactions sont faites sur la base de l’échange social modelé sur l’action économique, c’est-à-dire que les échanges sont faits sur le modèle de coûts – bénéfices que les acteurs font. La théorie du choix rationnel n’a pas seulement influencé l’étude du vote, mais aussi la théorie des mouvements sociaux. Dans les théories du choix rationnel, la rationalité est vue comme résultat du conditionnement psychologique ou d’individus agissant comme s’ils étaient complètement rationnels.
Among the characteristics of rational choice theory, we must first distinguish methodological individualism, which in some sociological debates is opposed to sociological holism. In this sense, the explanation of social phenomena has to be made in terms of rational calculations made by self-centred individuals thinking according to their own interests. The second element derives from the first is that interactions are made on the basis of social exchange modelled on economic action, i.e. exchanges are made on the cost-benefit model that actors make. Rational choice theory has influenced not only the study of voting, but also the theory of social movements. In rational choice theories, rationality is seen as the result of psychological conditioning or individuals acting as if they were completely rational.


{| border="1" cellpadding="20" cellspacing="0" align="center"
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="20" border="1" align="center"
!Mérites
!Merits
!Critiques et limites
!Criticisms and Limitations
|-
|-
| - a placé l’individu au centre de l’analyse ;<div>- a donné autonomie et pouvoir décisionnel à l’individu.  
| - placed the individual at the centre of the analysis ;<div>- gave autonomy and decision-making power to the individual.  
| - problème de l’action collective : il est difficile d’expliquer par des théories purement rationnelles pourquoi il y a des actions collectives ;<div>- problème des normes sociales : il est difficile d’expliquer l’émergence des normes sociales par une théorie purement rationaliste ;<div>- problème de la structure sociale.
| - problem of collective action: it is difficult to explain by purely rational theories why there are collective actions ;<div>- problem of social norms: it is difficult to explain the emergence of social norms by a purely rationalist theory ;<div>- problem of social structure.
|}
|}


== Caractéristiques des approches behavioristes et rationalistes ==
==Characteristics of behaviourist and rationalist approaches==
Ce qui rapproche ces deux approches est une forte préoccupation avec la théorie et la méthodologie en tout cas en termes d’ambition avec une volonté d’éliminer tout élément normatif de la réflexion et de l’étude de tout comportement politique. On ne veut pas juger des bons comportements, mais les observer et les expliquer. L’individualisme méthodologique est que l’unité de base doit être l’individu partagé par ces deux approches qui mettent également l’accent sur les inputs en analysant les comportements et les inputs qui en découlent.  
What brings these two approaches together is a strong preoccupation with theory and methodology, at least in terms of ambition, with a desire to eliminate any normative element from the reflection and study of any political behaviour. The aim is not to judge good behaviour, but to observe and explain it. Methodological individualism is that the basic unit must be the individual shared by these two approaches, which also emphasize inputs by analyzing behaviours and the inputs that result from them.  


À partir des années 1980 et des années 1990, il y a eu un retour des institutions dans l’analyse des comportements à travers un nouvel institutionnalisme qui se distancie de l’ancien institutionnalisme notamment par l’évacuation de la dimension normative, par un accent qui est mis non pas seulement sur le cadre légal, mais aussi sur les procédures informelles qui constituent un contexte qui peut déterminer ou canaliser les comportements politiques.
From the 1980s and 1990s, there was a return of institutions in the analysis of behaviours through a new institutionalism that distanced itself from the old institutionalism in particular by evacuating the normative dimension, by an emphasis that is placed not only on the legal framework, but also on informal procedures that constitute a context that can determine or channel political behaviour.


== « Reasoning voter » ==
=="Reasoning voter"==
La révolution rationaliste plus que behavioriste a fait émerger l’idée que le citoyen a un pouvoir décisionnel faisant également émerger la figure de l’électeur rationnel jusqu’au point où toute décision de se comporter politiquement est le fruit d’un choix rationnel donc d’une évolution des coûts et des bénéfices que l’acteur lui-même aurait dans un cas plutôt qu’un autre. L’idée de l’électeur rationnel qui a un peu poussé à l’extrême les présupposés de la théorie du choix rationnel ont été critiqués à la fois de l’intérieur et de l’extérieur. De l’intérieur, puisqu’il y a des auteurs rationalistes qui ont posés certaines limites à la rationalité et, de l’extérieur, puisqu’il y a eu tout un tas de critiques qui sont les critiques que l’on fait habituellement dans la théorie du choix rationnel et que si on va dans cette direction, on néglige l’impact des structures, des contextes ou encore des dimensions culturelles.  
The rationalist rather than behaviourist revolution has given rise to the idea that the citizen has a decision-making power that also gives rise to the figure of the rational voter, to the point where any decision to behave politically is the result of a rational choice, i.e. an evolution of the costs and benefits that the actor himself would have in one case rather than another. The idea of the rational voter, which has taken the assumptions of rational choice theory to the extreme, has been criticized both from within and without. From the inside, since there are rationalist writers who have set certain limits to rationality, and from the outside, since there have been a lot of criticisms that are the usual criticisms of rational choice theory, and if you go in that direction, you neglect the impact of structures, contexts, or cultural dimensions.  


La critique interne est intéressante puisqu’elle a menée à créer le concept de rationalité limitée qui fut créée pour montrer le fait que l’acteur peu à la fois agir rationnellement, mais dans le cadre d’un certain contexte qui pose des limites à l’intérieur duquel la rationalité peut fonctionner. Le concept de rationalité limité a été repris par des auteurs qui ont proposé le concept de reasoning voter qui est un électeur qui réfléchit dans le cadre d’un contexte donné. Cela présuppose aussi que l’électeur évalue les coûts et bénéfices dans une situation où l’information n’est pas complètement transparente et disponible.
The internal criticism is interesting because it led to the concept of limited rationality, which was created to show the fact that the actor can act rationally, but within a certain context that sets limits within which rationality can function. The concept of limited rationality has been taken up by authors who have proposed the concept of reasoning vote which is a voter who thinks within a given context. It also presupposes that the voter assesses the costs and benefits in a situation where information is not completely transparent and available.
L’idée du reasoning voter est un concept qui essaie de faire le pont entre psychologie politique et théorie du choix rationnel aussi en tenant compte des facteurs psychologiques qui peuvent rendre l’électeur pas complément rationnel, mais quand même raisonnable. L’électeur est amené à faire des raccourcis qui sont des processus heuristiques.


= Développements méthodologiques =
The idea of reasoning voting is a concept that tries to bridge the gap between political psychology and rational choice theory by taking into account psychological factors that may make the voter not rational but still reasonable. The voter is led to take shortcuts that are heuristic processes.
Si on revient sur l’ancien institutionnalisme, finalement, on ne s’intéressait pas aux préoccupations empiriques. Les premiers débuts d’analyses empiriques et donc de réflexion méthodologique entendue comme un instrument et un ensemble d’outils qui nous permettent de faire un lien entre une pensée théorique et une réalité empirique, ont lieu au début du XXème, peu avant que ne se développe aux États-Unis le behaviorisme, en France avec la géographie électorale qui travaillait sur des données agrégées qui sont des données qui caractérisent une unité politico-administrative donnée. Les behaviouristes ont tout de suite vu qu’avec ce type d’approche et ce type de données, on ne peut pas étudier les comportements individuels puisque ce sont des données qui se situent au niveau d’une unité et non pas au niveau de l’individu. Pour les behavioristes, il faut trouver une manière d’étudier les comportements individuels par une collecte de données individuelles, c’est pourquoi ils ont développé l’enquête par sondage qui est encore un instrument utilisé aujourd’hui. Le sondage se fait sur la base d’un échantillonnage aléatoire qu’il est possible de généraliser et qui est représentatif. Paul Lazarsfeld, dans les années 1940, a pour la première fois appliqué l’instrument du sondage afin d’étudier le comportement électoral. On va parle de l’approche de Michigan, et c’est justement à l’Université de Michigan que les premiers sondages systématiques sur le plan national ont été développés à partir des années 1950. À partir de 1978, ils ont établi les études électorales nationales qui furent institutionnalisées et développées dans d’autres pays. C’est un instrument précieux afin d’étudier les comportements politiques dans une perspective qu’on appelait autrefois la micropolitique. À partir des années 1980, il est possible de signaler des nouveautés importantes avec l’utilisation systématique des ordinateurs qui a multiplié les possibilités d’analyses, mais aussi avec l’organisation sociale de l’accès aux données. L’idée est qu’à certains moments, il est possible de pouvoir faire en sorte que tous les chercheurs puissent avoir accès aux données. Cela répond à un souci de science en tant qu’effort collectif, mais cela répond également à un souci méthodologique de réplicabilité de résultats des recherches. Enfin, la sophistication croissante des techniques d’analyse a mené à la possibilité des analyses multiniveaux qui existent depuis la fin des années 1970 et le début des années 1980, mais, en science politique, c’est quelque chose de relativement récent. On parle d’analyses qui puissent intégrer à la fois des données individuelles et des données contextuelles.


= Niveaux d’analyse =
=Methodological developments=
Plusieurs niveaux rentrent en ligne de compte dans l’analyse des comportements politiques avec les analyses « micro » donc individuelles qui sera pour une grande partie du cours notre variable dépendante et les analyses « macro » comme, par exemple, le fait que la participation électorale dépende du contexte institutionnel et intervenant dans l’explication qui sont des facteurs qui ne relèvent pas de l’individu, mais qui sont soit l’agrégation de comportements individuels que l’on regarde de façon agrégée soit de propriétés qui dépendent directement du contexte.  
If we go back to the old institutionalism, in the end we were not interested in empirical concerns. The first beginnings of empirical analysis, and therefore of methodological reflection understood as an instrument and a set of tools that allow us to make a link between theoretical thought and empirical reality, took place at the beginning of the 20th century, shortly before the development of behaviorism in the United States, and in France with electoral geography, which worked on aggregate data that are data that characterize a given political-administrative unit. Behaviourists immediately saw that with this type of approach and this type of data, we cannot study individual behaviour, since the data are at the level of a unit and not at the level of the individual. For behaviourists, it is necessary to find a way to study individual behaviour by collecting individual data, which is why they developed the sample survey, which is still an instrument used today. The survey is based on random sampling that can be generalised and is representative. Paul Lazarsfeld, in the 1940s, first applied the sampling instrument to study electoral behaviour. We're going to talk about the Michigan approach, and it was precisely at the University of Michigan that the first systematic national surveys were developed beginning in the 1950s. Starting in 1978, they established national electoral studies that were institutionalized and developed in other countries. It is a valuable tool to study political behaviour from a perspective that was once called micropolitics. From the 1980s onwards, it is possible to point out important innovations with the systematic use of computers, which increased the possibilities of analysis, but also with the social organization of access to data. The idea is that, at certain times, it is possible to ensure that all researchers have access to the data. This responds to a concern for science as a collective effort, but it also responds to a methodological concern for the replicability of research results. Finally, the increasing sophistication of analytical techniques has led to the possibility of multi-level analyses, which have existed since the late 1970s and early 1980s, but in political science this is a relatively recent development. These are analyses that can integrate both individual and contextual data.


{| border="1" cellpadding="20" cellspacing="0" align="center"
=Levels of analysis=
Several levels are taken into account in the analysis of political behaviour, with "micro" analyses, i.e. individual analyses, which will be our dependent variable for a large part of the course, and "macro" analyses such as, for example, the fact that electoral participation depends on the institutional context and intervenes in the explanation, which are factors that do not depend on the individual, but which are either the aggregation of individual behaviours that we look at in an aggregated way or properties that depend directly on the context.
 
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="20" border="1" align="center"
!Micro
!Micro
!Macro
!Macro
|-
|-
| - acteur ;<div>Individus ;<div>choix individuels ;<div>préférences individuelles.
| - actor ;<div>- individuals ;<div>- individual choices ;<div>- individual preferences.
| - système ;<div>- institutions ;<div>- changement structurel ;<div>- changement culturel.
| - system ;<div>- institutions ;<div>- structural change ;<div>- cultural change.
|}
|}


La grande question est de savoir comment les lier au-delà du fait qu’aujourd’hui il y a des outils méthodologiques statistiques qui permettent de lier des mesures individuelles et contextuelles dans une seule analyse. Cette réflexion est au cœur de la réflexion en science sociale et en tout cas en sociologie et en science politique. Les théoriciens de la sociologie se sont souvent préoccupés de comment faire le lien entre le niveau individuel et le niveau macro institutionnel dans d’autres cas.  
The big question is how to link them beyond the fact that today there are statistical methodological tools that allow individual and contextual measures to be linked in a single analysis. This reflection is at the heart of thinking in social science and in any case in sociology and political science. Sociological theorists have often been concerned with how to link the individual level to the macro institutional level in other cases.  


== Lien micro-macro : Coleman ==
==Micro-macro link: Coleman==
James Coleman a élaboré un modèle très simple qui consiste à donner une image de comment le macro et le micro sont liés. Dans le modèle du lien micro macro, ce qu’on veut expliquer est le changement politique et social. La tâche du sociologue est d’expliquer les grands changements sociaux et politiques. Ces changements découlent à leur tour de grandes transformations structurelles et culturelles. Il y a l’idée d’un lien entre ce qu’on veut expliquer, à savoir les changements politiques et sociaux aujourd’hui, et les grandes transformations qui ont eu lieu dans l’histoire de l’Europe ou d’un pays.
James Coleman has developed a very simple model of how macro and micro are linked. In the micro-macro linkage model, what we want to explain is political and social change. The sociologist's task is to explain major social and political changes. These changes, in turn, are the result of major structural and cultural transformations. There is the idea of a link between what we want to explain, namely political and social changes today, and the major transformations that have taken place in the history of Europe or of a country.


[[Fichier:comportement politique lien micro macro Coleman 1.png|center|vignette|]]
[[Fichier:comportement politique lien micro macro Coleman 1.png|center|vignette|]]


Pour Coleman, qui était un grand institutionnalisme méthodologique, le lien de grandes transformations sociales, structurelles et culturelles et le changement politique et social ne peut pas être fait directement, mais il peut être seulement fait en passant par des choix et des comportements individuels. C’est une approche qui vient de Max Weber. L’idée est que ces transformations culturelles expliquent ensuite des changements au niveau des positions et des attitudes individuelles. Ces préférences individuelles expliquent ensuite la mobilisation individuelle et c’est par l’agrégation des différents comportements individuels que l’on peut expliquer in fine les changements culturels et sociaux. Toute la tradition behavioriste est restée au niveau micro, mais pour Coleman, il faut faire un lien avec le niveau macro politique. Pour Coleman, ce lien ne peut être fait directement, mais par un détour. On ne peut pas expliquer le changement social et politique en restant au niveau du contexte, agrégé et des variables globales. L’idée wébérienne est que pour expliquer les transformations sociales, il faut passer par des variables individuelles qui offrent des mécanismes.
For Coleman, who was a great methodological institutionist, the link between major social, structural and cultural transformations and political and social change cannot be made directly, but can only be made through individual choices and behaviour. This is an approach that comes from Max Weber. The idea is that these cultural transformations then explain changes in individual positions and attitudes. These individual preferences then explain individual mobilization, and it is through the aggregation of different individual behaviors that we can ultimately explain cultural and social changes. The whole behaviourist tradition has remained at the micro level, but for Coleman, a link must be made with the macro political level. For Coleman, this link cannot be made directly, but through a detour. Social and political change cannot be explained by staying at the level of context, aggregate and global variables. The Weberian idea is that in order to explain social change, one has to go through individual variables that provide mechanisms.
 
== Lien micro-macro : Rokkan ==
Rokkan a également postulé des liens micro et macro. Pour Rokkan, il est possible de concevoir un lien direct micro et macro :
- micro – micro : étude de la relation entre les caractéristiques individuelles, les rôles, les cognitions et les motivations, d’un côté, et les dispositions politiques et décisions, de l’autre ;
- macro – micro : étude des effets des variations et des changements dans les contextes structurels sur les décisions politiques ainsi que sur la force et la direction des relations micro-micro ;
- micro – macro : étude des effets des attitudes et décisions des citoyens sur les politiques, stratégies et tactiques des partis ainsi que sur l’opération des systèmes de contrainte structurelle sur le processus décisionnel ;
- macro – macro : étude des fonctions des contraintes structurelles dans le maintien, la légitimation et la stabilisation du système politique en général.


Il faut garder en tête qu’il y a le niveau micro et macro qu’il faut distinguer et qu’il faut essayer de faire un lien entre ces niveaux.
==Micro-macro link: Rokkan==
Rokkan has also applied for micro and macro links. For Rokkan, it is possible to design a direct micro and macro link:
*micro - micro: the study of the relationship between individual characteristics, roles, cognitions and motivations, on the one hand, and political dispositions and decisions, on the other;
*macro - micro: the study of the effects of variations and changes in structural contexts on policy decisions and the strength and direction of micro-micro relationships;
*micro-macro: the study of the effects of citizens' attitudes and decisions on party policies, strategies and tactics and on the operation of structural constraint systems on the decision-making process;
*macro - macro: study of the functions of structural constraints in maintaining, legitimizing and stabilizing the political system in general.


= Erreur écologique =
It must be kept in mind that there is the micro and macro level that must be distinguished and that we must try to make a link between these levels.
L’erreur écologique est une erreur que l’on commet lorsqu’on tire des conclusions qui concernent le niveau individuel à partir de données agrégées qui concernent le niveau macro. Ce sont des conclusions hâtives que l’on fait lorsqu’on veut expliquer un comportement individuel lorsqu’on n’a que des données agrégées. Un exemple d’erreur écologique serait de dire que si on observe une corrélation, s’il y a une association entre une proportion de catholiques dans un canton suisse et la proportion de votes pour le PDC, à partir de là, on ne peut pas conclure que les valeurs religieuses poussent les gens à voter PDC. Il peut très bien y avoir des électeurs catholiques qui ne votent pas pour le PDC. On conclut simplement par une corrélation, on ne le voit pas.  


Dans cet exemple, il y a trois villes. L’hypothèse est que le revenu pousse les gens à voter plutôt à droite.
=Ecological Error=
Ecological error is a mistake that is made when drawing conclusions that concern the individual level from aggregate data that concern the macro level. It is a mistake that one makes when one wants to explain individual behaviour when one has only aggregate data. An example of an ecological error would be to say that if we observe a correlation, if there is an association between a proportion of Catholics in a Swiss canton and the proportion of votes for DCP, then from there we cannot conclude that religious values drive people to vote for DCP. There may very well be Catholic voters who do not vote for the CDP. You simply conclude by a correlation, you don't see it.  


[[Fichier:comportement politique erreur écologique 1.png|center|vignette|]]
In this example, there are three cities. The hypothesis is that income pushes people to vote more to the right.[[Fichier:comportement politique erreur écologique 1.png|center|vignette|]]


Si on va regarder les niveaux individuels, cette corrélation pourrait être de -.33, c’est une corrélation faible et négative. On arrive à ce résultat en regardant à l’intérieur de chaque ville pour qui les individus ont voté.
If we look at the individual levels, the correlation could be -.33, it's a weak and negative correlation. This result is arrived at by looking within each city for which individuals voted.


[[Fichier:comportement politique erreur écologique 2.png|center|vignette|]]
[[Fichier:comportement politique erreur écologique 2.png|center|vignette|]]


On va regarder pour qui les électeurs ont voté.
Let's see who the voters voted for.


[[Fichier:comportement politique erreur écologique 3.png|center|vignette|]]
[[Fichier:comportement politique erreur écologique 3.png|center|vignette|]]


= Annexes =
=Annexes=


= References =
=References=
<references/>
<references />


[[Category:science-politique]]
[[Category:science-politique]]

Version actuelle datée du 11 mai 2020 à 09:42


We will situate the study of political behaviour in history and discuss some methodological elements. Ideally, a distinction should be made between the historical constitution of the study of electoral behaviour and that of non-electoral behaviour, since these two fields have historically spoken very little to each other. How has the study of electoral behaviour developed and constituted?

The emergence of the subject raises questions about how the subject emerged in European thought. The emergence of the behaviourist approach is the starting point for the empirical study of political behaviour. We will deal with the emergence of the autonomous citizen, i.e. the "intentional" citizen who introduces the theories of rational choice with, in particular, the economic theories of the vote. Finally, we will discuss the development of analytical techniques that have contributed to making the study of political behaviour one of the most important disciplines of political science with main instruments such as polling.

Emergence of the study of political behaviour[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

The study of political behaviour must be seen in a long history where the subject is the individual, going back to the Renaissance when the subject began to be put at the centre of the universe. In a long-term perspective, it is thanks to this first step that it was possible centuries later to develop the science of behaviour and more particularly the study of political behaviour. We must bear in mind the historical roots in the Renaissance and later in the Age of Enlightenment which worked to put the subject at the centre of reflection. In a more political and institutional perspective, we must consider how the constitution of the nation-state contributed to the centralization of the individual, of putting the individual at the centre and of reflection around the individual. With the democratic revolutions in Europe, this has contributed to placing the individual at the centre, particularly with the emergence and constitution of the idea of citizenship. For the study of electoral behaviour, the idea that there is a citizen is fundamental.

The development of a scientific discipline also stems from and inherits broader transformations in the history of mentalities and even in the culture of a given continent or country. All these elements that have placed the individual at the centre have been translated into the emergence in the 20th century of an approach that was dominant and born in the United States from the 1920s and 1930s and which saw its rise in the 1940s, namely behaviourism. It is a term used in several different disciplines, particularly in psychology, and is not necessarily very close to behaviorism as known in political science.

Characteristics of old institutionalism[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

To understand behaviorism, we need to understand what the starting point and the state of political science was when behaviorism emerged. Political science was a political science that can be traced back to the old institutionalism. In particular, it was a political science that had a number of characteristics at the beginning of the 20th century:

  • legalism: it was a political science close to law and constitutional law. There is relatively little distinction between the study of law and political science as we know it today. The emphasis was on the law and the central role of the legal framework for governments.
  • structuralism: this is a term that has been used across several disciplines with different connotations. The idea here is that structures very largely determine individual behaviour. Structures are seen as characteristics of the political institutional system. This is why we also speak of institutionalist science. If we were ever interested in behaviour, this or these behaviours were highly structured, even over-determined by institutions. No attention was paid to behaviour.
  • holism: this is a notion that was invented by Émile Durkheim, which consists of considering the whole of things and staying at the level of this whole. Holism is understood more as a tendency to compare political systems as a whole rather than individual institutions taken singularly.
  • historicism: the historical foundation of the analysis of old institutionalism proposes a developmentalist conception of institutions, that is to say, institutions that succeed one another. The development of these institutions must be considered in their historical development. normative analysis: what interested the former institutionalists at the beginning of the 20th century was to pose normative notions with notions of right, good or desirable that would be values that could judge what a good institution is.

It was in reaction to this political science that behaviourists launched this movement, which has had an enormous influence, particularly on the analysis of political behaviour.

Behaviourism[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

Behaviourism is a science that studies behaviour, so we are not only interested in institutions and how they function, we are no longer interested in the normative legal framework given by institutions, we are no longer interested in structures, but we are interested in the study of individual behaviour. We can only speak of behaviour if we attribute it to individuals.

The characteristics of behaviourism are still found today in the analysis of political behaviour. It is a matter of explaining behaviour on the basis of causal hypotheses with the idea of explaining something by describing the behaviour meaning that one wants to test these hypotheses by testing them empirically. This is a crucial point because the old institutionalism was not interested in the empirical dimension, it did not rely on empirical evidence. For behaviourists, it is a matter of explaining the behaviour of individuals through causal hypotheses and testing them empirically. From this, certain methodological instruments are derived, including the survey instrument.

At the same time, behaviourists had the ambition to try to develop general models and theories. These were not obviously laws as in 19th century sociology, which wanted to establish universal laws. From now on, we are trying to understand why a population behaves in such a way or to develop theories that can be adapted to different contexts.

Merits Criticisms and Limitations
- to place the individual and his behaviour at the centre of scientific reflection and research in political science ;
- to enable the development of scientific and systematic analytical techniques for the study of political behaviour.
- imperialism of methodology: the risk is to put the method not at the service of the theory, but before the theory ;
- concealment of values: the concern to move away from the old institutionalism has sometimes led to a complete neglect of the fact that values also play a role, not only as values that could influence behaviour, but also according to the values of the researcher ;
- theoretical deficit.

Rational Choice Theory[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

Some theories of the explanatory model of voting are largely based on rational choice theory. It is a theory that applies to different areas in a cross-cutting manner.

Among the characteristics of rational choice theory, we must first distinguish methodological individualism, which in some sociological debates is opposed to sociological holism. In this sense, the explanation of social phenomena has to be made in terms of rational calculations made by self-centred individuals thinking according to their own interests. The second element derives from the first is that interactions are made on the basis of social exchange modelled on economic action, i.e. exchanges are made on the cost-benefit model that actors make. Rational choice theory has influenced not only the study of voting, but also the theory of social movements. In rational choice theories, rationality is seen as the result of psychological conditioning or individuals acting as if they were completely rational.

Merits Criticisms and Limitations
- placed the individual at the centre of the analysis ;
- gave autonomy and decision-making power to the individual.
- problem of collective action: it is difficult to explain by purely rational theories why there are collective actions ;
- problem of social norms: it is difficult to explain the emergence of social norms by a purely rationalist theory ;
- problem of social structure.

Characteristics of behaviourist and rationalist approaches[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

What brings these two approaches together is a strong preoccupation with theory and methodology, at least in terms of ambition, with a desire to eliminate any normative element from the reflection and study of any political behaviour. The aim is not to judge good behaviour, but to observe and explain it. Methodological individualism is that the basic unit must be the individual shared by these two approaches, which also emphasize inputs by analyzing behaviours and the inputs that result from them.

From the 1980s and 1990s, there was a return of institutions in the analysis of behaviours through a new institutionalism that distanced itself from the old institutionalism in particular by evacuating the normative dimension, by an emphasis that is placed not only on the legal framework, but also on informal procedures that constitute a context that can determine or channel political behaviour.

"Reasoning voter"[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

The rationalist rather than behaviourist revolution has given rise to the idea that the citizen has a decision-making power that also gives rise to the figure of the rational voter, to the point where any decision to behave politically is the result of a rational choice, i.e. an evolution of the costs and benefits that the actor himself would have in one case rather than another. The idea of the rational voter, which has taken the assumptions of rational choice theory to the extreme, has been criticized both from within and without. From the inside, since there are rationalist writers who have set certain limits to rationality, and from the outside, since there have been a lot of criticisms that are the usual criticisms of rational choice theory, and if you go in that direction, you neglect the impact of structures, contexts, or cultural dimensions.

The internal criticism is interesting because it led to the concept of limited rationality, which was created to show the fact that the actor can act rationally, but within a certain context that sets limits within which rationality can function. The concept of limited rationality has been taken up by authors who have proposed the concept of reasoning vote which is a voter who thinks within a given context. It also presupposes that the voter assesses the costs and benefits in a situation where information is not completely transparent and available.

The idea of reasoning voting is a concept that tries to bridge the gap between political psychology and rational choice theory by taking into account psychological factors that may make the voter not rational but still reasonable. The voter is led to take shortcuts that are heuristic processes.

Methodological developments[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

If we go back to the old institutionalism, in the end we were not interested in empirical concerns. The first beginnings of empirical analysis, and therefore of methodological reflection understood as an instrument and a set of tools that allow us to make a link between theoretical thought and empirical reality, took place at the beginning of the 20th century, shortly before the development of behaviorism in the United States, and in France with electoral geography, which worked on aggregate data that are data that characterize a given political-administrative unit. Behaviourists immediately saw that with this type of approach and this type of data, we cannot study individual behaviour, since the data are at the level of a unit and not at the level of the individual. For behaviourists, it is necessary to find a way to study individual behaviour by collecting individual data, which is why they developed the sample survey, which is still an instrument used today. The survey is based on random sampling that can be generalised and is representative. Paul Lazarsfeld, in the 1940s, first applied the sampling instrument to study electoral behaviour. We're going to talk about the Michigan approach, and it was precisely at the University of Michigan that the first systematic national surveys were developed beginning in the 1950s. Starting in 1978, they established national electoral studies that were institutionalized and developed in other countries. It is a valuable tool to study political behaviour from a perspective that was once called micropolitics. From the 1980s onwards, it is possible to point out important innovations with the systematic use of computers, which increased the possibilities of analysis, but also with the social organization of access to data. The idea is that, at certain times, it is possible to ensure that all researchers have access to the data. This responds to a concern for science as a collective effort, but it also responds to a methodological concern for the replicability of research results. Finally, the increasing sophistication of analytical techniques has led to the possibility of multi-level analyses, which have existed since the late 1970s and early 1980s, but in political science this is a relatively recent development. These are analyses that can integrate both individual and contextual data.

Levels of analysis[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

Several levels are taken into account in the analysis of political behaviour, with "micro" analyses, i.e. individual analyses, which will be our dependent variable for a large part of the course, and "macro" analyses such as, for example, the fact that electoral participation depends on the institutional context and intervenes in the explanation, which are factors that do not depend on the individual, but which are either the aggregation of individual behaviours that we look at in an aggregated way or properties that depend directly on the context.

Micro Macro
- actor ;
- individuals ;
- individual choices ;
- individual preferences.
- system ;
- institutions ;
- structural change ;
- cultural change.

The big question is how to link them beyond the fact that today there are statistical methodological tools that allow individual and contextual measures to be linked in a single analysis. This reflection is at the heart of thinking in social science and in any case in sociology and political science. Sociological theorists have often been concerned with how to link the individual level to the macro institutional level in other cases.

Micro-macro link: Coleman[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

James Coleman has developed a very simple model of how macro and micro are linked. In the micro-macro linkage model, what we want to explain is political and social change. The sociologist's task is to explain major social and political changes. These changes, in turn, are the result of major structural and cultural transformations. There is the idea of a link between what we want to explain, namely political and social changes today, and the major transformations that have taken place in the history of Europe or of a country.

Comportement politique lien micro macro Coleman 1.png

For Coleman, who was a great methodological institutionist, the link between major social, structural and cultural transformations and political and social change cannot be made directly, but can only be made through individual choices and behaviour. This is an approach that comes from Max Weber. The idea is that these cultural transformations then explain changes in individual positions and attitudes. These individual preferences then explain individual mobilization, and it is through the aggregation of different individual behaviors that we can ultimately explain cultural and social changes. The whole behaviourist tradition has remained at the micro level, but for Coleman, a link must be made with the macro political level. For Coleman, this link cannot be made directly, but through a detour. Social and political change cannot be explained by staying at the level of context, aggregate and global variables. The Weberian idea is that in order to explain social change, one has to go through individual variables that provide mechanisms.

Micro-macro link: Rokkan[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

Rokkan has also applied for micro and macro links. For Rokkan, it is possible to design a direct micro and macro link:

  • micro - micro: the study of the relationship between individual characteristics, roles, cognitions and motivations, on the one hand, and political dispositions and decisions, on the other;
  • macro - micro: the study of the effects of variations and changes in structural contexts on policy decisions and the strength and direction of micro-micro relationships;
  • micro-macro: the study of the effects of citizens' attitudes and decisions on party policies, strategies and tactics and on the operation of structural constraint systems on the decision-making process;
  • macro - macro: study of the functions of structural constraints in maintaining, legitimizing and stabilizing the political system in general.

It must be kept in mind that there is the micro and macro level that must be distinguished and that we must try to make a link between these levels.

Ecological Error[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

Ecological error is a mistake that is made when drawing conclusions that concern the individual level from aggregate data that concern the macro level. It is a mistake that one makes when one wants to explain individual behaviour when one has only aggregate data. An example of an ecological error would be to say that if we observe a correlation, if there is an association between a proportion of Catholics in a Swiss canton and the proportion of votes for DCP, then from there we cannot conclude that religious values drive people to vote for DCP. There may very well be Catholic voters who do not vote for the CDP. You simply conclude by a correlation, you don't see it.

In this example, there are three cities. The hypothesis is that income pushes people to vote more to the right.

Comportement politique erreur écologique 1.png

If we look at the individual levels, the correlation could be -.33, it's a weak and negative correlation. This result is arrived at by looking within each city for which individuals voted.

Comportement politique erreur écologique 2.png

Let's see who the voters voted for.

Comportement politique erreur écologique 3.png

Annexes[modifier | modifier le wikicode]

References[modifier | modifier le wikicode]