| Item Text | Actively tested |
|---|---|
a) You feel that you understand the most important political issues of this country.Item Text:Recommendations:
No changes recommended.
Findings:14 respondents “strongly agree“ or “somewhat agree“ with this statement, while only two respondents
(ID 01, 07) “strongly disagree” or “somewhat disagree”.
Those who agree with the statement believe they are sufficiently informed on most important political matters to be able, for example, to discuss them competently:
Both respondents who disagree with the item (ID 01, 07) explain that they have no interest in political matters and often find them to be too complex to talk about. The respondents were also asked how they understood the answer option „weder noch” (“neither agree nor disagree”). Seven respondents think it is a sort of evasive option for those respondents who don’t care about the topic, do not have an opinion on it or cannot decide. Hence, they view it as a kind of “don’t know”-category. The remaining respondents interpret “weder noch” as “teils/teils” (“partially agree/partially disagree”), that is, as the answer option that those respondents would pick who partially agree and disagree with the statement. Two respondents (ID 05, 06) explicitly state that they would prefer the phrasing “teils/teils”, because “weder noch” would not fit in this context: “Weder noch is not correct here. Maybe partially understand? It is partially correct or I partially agree, something like that would be nice here. I know what ‘weder noch’ is supposed to mean, but it just does not sound right here.” (ID 06). Question Topic:
Politics/ Attitudes, appraisals, & ideologies
Construct:Attitudes towards the political elite
|
Yes |
|
|
No |
c) Most politicians do not care about the people.Item Text:Recommendations:
Due to the finding that the phrase „sich um das Volk kümmern” (“care
about the people“) is interpreted differently by different respondents, we
recommend to modify the item:
"Most politicians are indifferent to the people’s opinion." [„Den meisten Politikerinnen und Politikern ist die Meinung des Volkes gleichgültig.“] Findings:Six respondents “strongly agree” or “somewhat agree”, while five respondents “somewhat disagree”
with this item. Three respondents “neither disagree nor agree” (ID 03, 08, 11) and two respondents (ID
01, 13) answer “don’t know”.
Respondent 01 explains her answer of “don’t know” with her lack of interest in politics and because she doesn’t know any politicians personally – and therefore cannot judge them. For this very same reason she also answers “don’t know” on item d). Respondent 13 would answer this item differently depending on whether the item is about politicians on the communal or federal level. As this is not specified in the item, she cannot answer this item (as well as item d)). One of the three respondents who „neither agrees nor disagrees“ (ID 08) highlights the same argument and states that they cannot answer the item as they do not know any politicians personally. Therefore, this respondent uses the answer category of “neither agree nor disagree” as a “don’t know” answer (see findings item a). The other two respondents (ID 03, 11) partially agree and partially disagree with the statement (“At first they say they will raise the retirement pensions, and shortly after that you have to work longer. They care and then don’t care after all.”, ID 11) Those six respondents who agree with the statement explain that they are wary of politicians, as they primarily think of their own interests and do not take into account the will of the people outside of electoral campaigns:
Question Topic:
Politics/ Attitudes, appraisals, & ideologies
Construct:Attitudes towards the political elite
|
Yes |
|
|
No |
e) Politicians are the main problem in Germany.Item Text:Recommendations:
No changes recommended.
Findings:Two problems emerge:
1. Respondent 01 (“somewhat agree”) misunderstands the question by assuming it means that politicians are needed in order to represent the people in taking care of the main problems.. 2. Respondent 07 (“neither agree nor disagree”) claims not to know what the main problem in Germany is and therefore is actually not able to answer the question. (“I don’t know what the main problem in Germany is, I wouldn’t be able to settle on one.”) Still, the respondent chooses the middle answer category instead of not answering the question (see also findings item a) and c)). The remaining 14 respondents either state (1) that they do believe politicians to be the main problem in Germany, as they ignore the will of the people (ID 04, 09), (2) that they do not believe politicians to be the main problem in Germany as there are different, more problematic issues such as the refugee crisis (ID 02, 04, 05, 06, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16) or (3) that they cannot pass a blanket judgement as there are politicians who show misconduct, while others try to do the right thing (ID 03, 08, 10) Question Topic:
Politics/ Attitudes, appraisals, & ideologies
Construct:Attitudes towards the political elite
|
Yes |
f) Having a strong leader in government is good for Germany even if the leader bends the rules to get things done.Item Text:Recommendations:
Due to the finding that the wording „auch wenn diese sich nicht so genau
an Regeln hält um Dinge vorwärts zu bringen“ („bend the rules to get things
done”) leaves room for interpretation and is understood as „violating the
laws“ by some respondents, we recommend to modify the item:
„Having a strong leader in government is good for Germany, even if the leader now and then decides things single-handedly to get things done." ["Eine starke Führungspersönlichkeit in der Regierung zu haben ist gut für Deutschland, auch wenn diese ab und zu Dinge im Alleingang entscheidet, um sie voran zu bringen."] Findings:Six respondents “strongly agree“ (ID 10, 11) or “somewhat agree” (ID 01, 04, 07, 16) with this statement,
while five respondents “somewhat disagree” (ID 02, 05) or “strongly disagree” (ID 03, 12, 15).
Four respondents answer with “neither agree nor disagree” (ID 06, 08, 09, 14), while one respondent
“doesn’t know” (ID 13).
It is obvious that all respondents favor a strong leader in government („Someone with a clear-cut profile, who isn’t afraid to go against the current, even if there is resistance from their own party.”, ID 12). Some respondents (e.g. ID 07, 11) think of specific politicians, such as Angela Merkel, Helmut Schmidt or Lothar Späth, when hearing the term „strong leader“. Respondent 13, who answered “don’t know” also agrees on the importance of a strong leader, however faces a “moral dilemma” due to the second part of the sentence “even if the leader bends the rules to get things done”. Those respondents who agree with the statement explain that the end justifies the means:
Finally, the respondents were asked to name specific examples, where a strong leader bent the rules to get things done. Merkel’s refugee policy was frequently listed (ID 01, 02, 07, 08, 11). Some respondents thought of non-compliance with current laws (ID 06, 10, 12, 13, 14), while others drew comparisons to dictators (Kim Yong Un, Adolf Hitler) or “autocrats” (Erdogan, Putin) who draw up legislation to their whim (ID 03, 05, 12). It must be noted that the phrase “bend the rules to get things done” allows for a large scope of interpretation. While some respondents think of rather severe misdemeanors (i.e. breaking the law), others think of trivial offences (such as non-coordinated action with the general party opinion). In the letter case, the respondents tend to agree with the statement, whereas the respondents disagree in the former case. Question Topic:
Politics/ Attitudes, appraisals, & ideologies
Construct:Attitudes towards the political elite
|
Yes |
|
|
No |
|
|
No |
i) Poor people should have a greater voice in politics.Item Text:Recommendations:
In order to avoid that respondents think of a preferential treatment for the
poor (i.e. a „poor people quota“) when answering this question, we recommend
to modify the item:
"The interests of poor people should better be represented in politics." [Die Interessen von armen Menschen sollten in der Politik stärker vertreten werden.“] Findings:Three respondents (ID 09, 10, 11) “somewhat agree“ or “strongly agree“ with this statement, twelve
respondents “somewhat disagree” or “strongly disagree” and one respondent (ID 08) “neither agrees
nor disagrees”.
Those who agree with the statement argue that a) those affected, e.g. pensioners, should have a greater voice when it comes to pension reforms (ID 09), b) there should be more referendums in general so that poor people can have as much of an impact as wealthy lobbyists (ID 10), and c), that the government should concentrate more on taking into account the concerns of the poor (ID 11). Respondent 08, who „neither agrees nor disagrees“ thought of actively holding a political office when answering the question and sees no significant difference in the access opportunities to politics between the rich and the poor: „I don’t completely understand the question. Are there differences in how easy it is for the poor and the rich to enter politics? Sure, the rich may have more opportunities just because of their better education. But other than that, I think that if someone wants to start a career in politics, in Germany, he or she can do so even without being wealthy.” (ID 08). Those respondents who disagree with the statement explain that poor people are also often poorly educated and therefore do have the necessary knowledge to decide on political matters competently (ID 03, 12, 15). Others think that neither poverty, nor any other criterion, should lead to preferential treatment (ID 01, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 13, 14, 16):
Question Topic:
Politics/ Attitudes, appraisals, & ideologies
Construct:Attitudes towards the political elite
|
Yes |
