Círculos de confiança: uma abordagem relacional ao viés de desejabilidade social em pesquisas políticas
Resumo
As abordagens tradicionais tratam o viés de desejabilidade social (VDS) em pesquisas políticas como um traço individual estável. Este estudo questiona essa premissa por meio do referencial dos “círculos de confiança”, que conceitua o VDS como uma variável contextual dependente da distância relacional entre respondentes e seus interlocutores. A partir de uma pesquisa telefônica nacional realizada no México (n = 1.008), medimos o conforto dos respondentes para expressar opiniões políticas em cinco contextos sociais: parceiros, família, amigos, colegas de trabalho e entrevistadores de pesquisa. Os resultados revelam um padrão inesperado: embora o conforto diminua das relações íntimas (parceiros: 80,5 %; família: 80 %) para contextos sociais mais amplos (amigos: 73 %; colegas: 63 %), os entrevistadores ocupam uma posição diferenciada (78,5 %), com maior conforto do que amigos ou colegas. Essa “vantagem do entrevistador” parece estar vinculada à percepção de neutralidade profissional e ao anonimato. De forma relevante, a confiança institucional nas eleições prediz tanto o conforto com os entrevistadores quanto a autenticidade autorrelatada das respostas, o que sugere que déficits de legitimidade democrática podem enviesar sistematicamente os dados das pesquisas. Esses achados têm implicações metodológicas para o desenho de pesquisas em democracias polarizadas.
- Referencias
- Cómo citar
- Del mismo autor
- Métricas
Bischoping, K., & Schuman, H. (1992). Pens and polls in Nicaragua: An analysis of the 1990 preelection surveys. American Journal of Political Science, 36(2), 331–350. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111480
Blanco, L. R. (2013). The impact of crime on trust in institutions in Mexico. European Journal of Political Economy, 32, 38–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2013.06.004
Chen, S., Körtner, J., Selb, P., & Wiederspohn, J. (2023). Electoral predictors of polling errors. https://doi.org/10.33774/apsa-2023-t1vh8-v2
Claassen, R. L., & Ryan, J. B. (2024). Biased polls: Investigating the pressures survey respondents feel. Acta Politica. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-024-00356-4
De Micheli, D., & Taylor, W. K. (2024). Public trust in Latin America’s courts: Do institutions matter? Government and Opposition, 59(1), 146–167. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2022.6
Delhey, J., Newton, K., & Welzel, C. (2011). How general is trust in “most people”? Solving the radius of trust problem. American Sociological Review, 76(5), 786-807. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122411420817
Edwards, A. L. (1957). The social desirability variable in personality assessment and research. Dryden Press.
Frisbie, S. (2024, March 21). Global elections in 2024 could open a Pandora’s box of political polarization. Morning Consult. https://pro.morningconsult.com/analysis/tracking-political-polarization-2024-global-elections
Fukuyama, F. (2000). Social capital and civil society (IMF Working Paper No. WP/00/74). International Monetary Fund.
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469
Holbrook, A. L., & Krosnick, J. A. (2010). Social desirability bias in voter turnout reports: Tests using the item count technique. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(1), 37–67. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp065
Huckfeldt, R. R., & Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics and social communication: Information and influence in an election campaign. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511664113
Larson, R. B. (2019). Controlling social desirability bias. International Journal of Market Research, 61(5), 534–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470785318805305
Maldonado Hernández, G. de J., & Crow, D. (2013). Are we measuring institutional trust right? Evidence from a Mexican survey experiment (Working paper). http://repositorio-digital.cide.edu/handle/11651/884
Miller, A. S., & Mitamura, T. (2003). Are surveys on trust trustworthy? Social Psychology Quarterly, 66(1), 62–70. https://doi.org/10.2307/3090141
OECD. (2024). OECD survey on drivers of trust in public institutions 2024 results: Mexico. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-survey-on-drivers-of-trust-in-public-institutions-2024-results-country-notes_a8004759-en/mexico_14d321b0-en.html
Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(3), 598–609. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022
-3514.46.3.598
Silber, H., Moy, P., Johnson, T. P., Neumann, R., Stadtmüller, S., & Repke, L. (2022). Survey participation as a function of democratic engagement, trust in institutions, and perceptions of surveys. Social Science Quarterly, 103(7), 1619–1632. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13218
Streb, M. J., Burrell, B., Frederick, B., & Genovese, M. A. (2008). Social desirability effects and support for a female American president. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(1), 76–89. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfm035
United Nations Development Programme. (2024, January 23). In whom do we trust? Less in institutions and more in communities in LAC. https://www.undp.org/latin-america/blog/whom-do-we-trust-less-institutions-and-more-communities-lac
Yuen, S., & Lee, F. L. F. (2025). Echoes of silence: How social influence fosters self-censorship under democratic backsliding. Democratization, 32(5), 1213–1238. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2025.2455127