La evaluación de escalas de conocimiento político entre países: evidencia de América Latina



Un público informado es percibido como esencial para la representación democrática. El trabajo existente sugiere que las características a nivel individual, como la educación, afectan a la información política. Pero factores contextuales como el nivel de democracia y el tipo de sistema electoral también pueden impedir o facilitar la adquisición de conocimiento. Sin embargo, las preguntas de la encuesta a menudo varían de un país a otro, lo que dificulta la identificación del papel de los factores contextuales. Utilizando las encuestas del Barómetro de las Américas para América Latina y el Caribe, este artículo compara métodos de escala alternativos y demuestra que las conclusiones sobre el conocimiento a nivel internacional dependen de la medida utilizada. Los análisis comparan una escala de aditivos en bruto, una escala de aditivos estandarizada, puntajes de factores, puntajes de respuesta al ítem con anclaje y puntajes de respuesta al ítem con puente. La escala aditiva convencional sugiere que muy poco se predice la variación en el conocimiento entre países, mientras que las alternativas muestran que factores como la democracia, las telecomunicaciones, la diversidad etnolingüística y el sistema electoral tienen efectos sustanciales en el conocimiento.

Palabras clave

Conocimiento político; Medición; Encuestas transnacionales; Barómetro de las Américas


Aldrich, J. H. and McKelvey, R. D. (1977). A Method of Scaling with Applications to the 1968 and 1972 Presidential Elections. The American Political Science Review, 71(1):111-130. -

Alesina, A., Devleeschauwer, A., Easterly, W., Kurlat, S., and Wacziarg, R. (2003). Fractionalization. Journal of Economic Growth, 8:155-194. -

Alesina, A. and Ferrara, E. L. (2000). Participation in Heterogeneous Communities. -

The Quarterly Journal of Economics, (w7155):847-904.

Anderson, C. J. and Paskeviciute, A. (2006). How Ethnic and Linguistic Heterogene- ity Influence the Prospects for Civil Society: A Comparative Study of Citizenship Behavior. The Journal of Politics, 68(4):783-802. -

Bafumi, J. and Herron, M. C. (2010). Leapfrog representation and extremism: A study of american voters and their members in congress. The American Political Science Review, 104(3):519-542. -

Barabas, J., Jerit, J., Pollock, W., and Rainey, C. (2014). The Question(s) of Political Knowledge. The American Political Science Review, 108(4):840-855. -

Batista Pereira, F. (2019). Gendered Political Contexts: The Gender Gap in Political Knowledge. The Journal of Politics, 81(4):1480-1493. -

Benz, M. and Stutzer, A. (2004). Are Voters Better Informed When They Have a Larger Say in Politics? Evidence for the European Union and Switzerland. Public Choice, 119(1-2):31-59. -

Berggren, H. M. (2001). Institutional Context and Reduction of the Resource Bias in Political Sophistication. Political Research Quarterly, 54(3):531-552. -

Blais, A. and Gidengil, E. (1993). Things Are Not Always What They Seem: French-English Differences and the Problem of Measurement Equivalence. Cana- dian Journal of Political Science, 26(3):541-555. -

Borjas, G. J. and Sueyoshi, G. T. (1994). A two-stage estimator for probit models with structural group effects. Journal of Econometrics, 64:165-182. -

Bowler, S. and Donovan, T. (2002). Democracy, Institutions and Attitudes about Citizen Influence on Government. British Journal of Political Science, 32(2):371- 390. -

Carey, J. M. and Hix, S. (2011). The Electoral Sweet Spot: Low-Magnitude Propor- tional Electoral Systems. American Journal of Political Science, 55(2):383-397. -

Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. John Wiley and Sons, West Sussex, UK.

Clinton, J., Jackman, S., and Rivers, D. (2004). The Statistical Analysis of Roll Call Data. The American Political Science Review, 98(2):355-370. -

Costello, A. B. and Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best Practices in Exploratory Factor Analysis: Four Recommendations for Getting the Most From Your Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10(7):1-9.

Dassonneville, R. and McAllister, I. (2018). Gender, Political Knowledge, and Descriptive Representation: The Impact of Long-Term Socialization. American Journal of Political Science, 62(2):249-265. -

Davidov, E., Dulmer, H., Cieciuch, J., Kuntz, A., Sedig, D., and Schmidt, P. (2018). Explaining Measurement Nonequivalence Using Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling: The Case of Attitudes Toward Citizenship Rights. Sociological Methods and Research, 47(4):729-760. -

DeBell, M. (2013). Harder Than It Looks: Coding Political Knowledge on the ANES. Political Analysis, 21:393-406. -

Delli Carpini, M. X. and Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Elff, M. (2009). Political Knowledge in Comparative Perspective: The Problem of Cross-National Equivalence of Measurement. Paper presented at the MPSA 2009 Annual National Conference.

Embretson, S. E. and Reise, S. P. (2000). Item Response Theory For Psychologists. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, New Jersey.

Fortin-Rittberger, J. (2016). Cross-National Gender Gaps in Political Knowledge: How Much is Due to Context? Political Research Quarterly, 69(3):391-402. -

Fortin-Rittberger, J. (2019). Political Knowledge: Assessing the Stability of Gen- der Gaps Cross-Nationally. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, edz005:1-20. -

Fraile, M. (2013). Do information-rich contexts reduce knowledge inequalities? The contextual determinants of political knowledge in Europe. Acta Politica, 48(2):119-143. -

Gallagher, M. (1991). Proportionality, Disproportionality, and Electoral Systems. Electoral Studies, 10(1):33-51. -

Gibson, J. L. and Caldeira, G. A. (2009). Knowing the Supreme Court? A Re- consideration of Public Ignorance of the High Court. The Journal of Politics, 71(2):429-441. -

Gordon, S. B. and Segura, G. M. (1997). Cross-National Variation in the Political Sophistication of Individuals: Capability or Choice? The Journal of Politics, 59(1):126-147. -

Gronlund, K. and Milner, H. (2006). The Determinants of Political Knowledge in Comparative Perspective. Scandinavian Political Studies, 29(4):386-406. -

Iyengar, S. (1976). Assessing Linguistic Equivalence in Multilingual Surveys. Com- parative Politics, 8(4):577-589. Iyengar, S., Curran, J., Lund, A. B., Salovaara-Moring, I., Hahn, K. S., and Coen,

S. (2010). Cross-National versus Individual-Level Differences in Political Infor- mation: A Media Systems Perspective. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion, and Parties, 20(3):291-309. -

Iyengar, S., Hahn, K. S., Bonfadelli, H., and Marr, M. (2009). "Dark Areas of Ignorance" Revisited: Comparing International Affairs Knowledge in Switzerland and the United States. Communication Research, 36(3):341-358. -

Jackman, S. (2009). Bayesian Analysis for the Social Sciences. John Wiley and Sons, West Sussex, UK. -

Johnson, V. E. and Albert, J. H. (1999). Ordinal Data Modelling. Springer, New York.

King, G., Keohane, R. O., and Verba, S. (1994). Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton University Press, Princeton. -

Knack, S. and Keefer, P. (1997). Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4):1251-1288. -

Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., and Rich, R. F. (2001). The Political Environment and Citizen Competence. American Journal of Political Science, 45(2):410-424. -

Lau, R. R. and Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and Disadvantages of Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Making. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4):951-971. -

Lewis, J. B. and Linzer, D. A. (2005). Estimating Regression Models in Which the Dependent Variable Is Based on Estimates. Political Analysis, 13:345-364. -

Lipset, S. M. (1959). Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy. The American Political Science Review, 53(1):69-105. -

Lo, J., Proksch, S.-O., and Gschwend, T. (2014). A Common Left-Right Scale for Voters and Parties in Europe. Political Analysis, 22:205-223. -

Luskin, R. C. (1987). Measuring Political Sophistication. American Journal of Political Science, 31(4):856-899. -

Luskin, R. C. and Bullock, J. G. (2011). "Don't Know" Means "Don't Know": DK Responses and the Public's Level of Political Knowledge. The Journal of Politics, 73(1):547-557. -

Milner, H. (2002). Civic Literacy: How Informed Citizens Make Democracy Work. University Press of New England, Hanover and London.

Mondak, J. J. (1999). Reconsidering the Measurement of Political Knowledge. Political Analysis, 8(1):57-82. -

Mondak, J. J. and Anderson, M. R. (2004). The Knowledge Gap: A Reexamination of Gender-Based Differences in Political Knowledge. The Journal of Politics, 66(2):492-512. -

Mondak, J. J. and Canache, D. (2004). Knowledge Variables in Cross-National Social Inquiry. Social Science Quarterly, 85(3):539-558. -

Neuman, W. R. (1981). Differentiation and Integration: Two Dimensions of Political Thinking. American Journal of Sociology, 86(6):1236-1268. -

Pérez, E. O. (2009). Lost in Translation? Item Validity in Bilingual Political Surveys. The Journal of Politics, 71(4):1530-1548. -

Prior, M. and Lupia, A. (2008). Money, Time, and Political Knowledge: Distin- guishing Quick Recall and Political Learning Skills. American Journal of Political Science, 52(1):169-183. -

Przeworski, A. and Teune, H. (1966-1967). Equivalence in Cross-National Research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 30(4):551-568. -

Rainey, C. (2015). Strategic mobilization: Why proportional representation de- creases voter mobilization. Electoral Studies, 37:86-98. -

Robison, J. (2015). Who Knows? Question Format and Political Knowledge. In- ternational Journal of Public Opinion Research, 27(1):1-21. -

Schoonvelde, M. (2013). Media freedom and the institutional underpinnings of political knowledge. Political Science Research and Methods, (FirstView):1-16.

Sniderman, P. M. and Levendusky, M. S. (2007). An institutional theory of political choice. In Dalton, R. J. and Klingemann, H.-D., editors, Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, Chapter 23, pages 437-456. Oxford. -

Tausanovitch, C. and Warshaw, C. (2013). Measuring Constituent Policy Preferences in Congress, State Legislatures, and Cities. The Journal of Politics, 75(2):330-342. -

Toka, G. (2008). Citizen information, election outcomes and good governance. Electoral Studies, 27:31-44. -

Verba, S. (1993). The Uses of Survey Research in the Study of Comparative Politics: Issues and Strategies. Historical Social Research, 18(2):55-103.

Zechmeister, E. J. and Corral, M. (2013). Individual and Contextual Constraints on Ideological Labels in Latin America. Comparative Political Studies, 46(6):675- 701. -

Zeller, R. A. and Carmines, E. G. (1980). Measurement in the social sciences: The link between theory and data. Cambridge University Press.


Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.