Sentimentos partidários e antipetismo: condicionantes e covariantes
Open accessAbstract
Resumo O artigo investiga, a partir dos dados do Estudo Eleitoral Brasileiro, os sentimentos partidários dos eleitores brasileiros em 2014 e suas relações com dimensões atitudinais e comportamentais. Ênfase especial é dada ao antipetismo, ou seja, ao sentimento negativo que parcela crescente do eleitorado vem manifestando em relação ao PT. Além de analisar a evolução dessas disposições entre 2002 e 2014, o artigo procura identificar o perfil sociodemográfico dos eleitores antipetistas e o impacto dessas disposições negativas sobre variáveis atitudinais (estatismo, igualdade e democracia) e sobre o voto. Os resultados apontam para o decréscimo generalizado dos sentimentos positivos em relação aos partidos, com destaque para o PT. Também indicam efeitos reduzidos do antipetismo sobre atitudes políticas, mas sua forte influência sobre padrões de comportamento eleitoral.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Antipetismo is not primarily grounded in ideological beliefs.
“not to be primarily grounded in ideological beliefs (Ribeiro, Carreirão, and Borba 2016; Samuels and Zucco 2018).”
From Them’ without ‘us’: Negative identities and affective polarization in Brazil (2022) · cites this paper as Ribeiro, Carreirão, and Borba 2016
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Them’ without ‘us’: Negative identities and affective polarization in Brazil
Areal, J. (2022) · Political Research Exchange · doi:10.1080/2474736x.2022.2117635 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ribeiro, E., Universidade Estadual de Maringá, B., Carreirão, Y., Borba, J., Universidade Federal do Paraná, B., Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, B., & Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina., B.
- Affiliations
- Universidade Estadual de Maringá (BR)
- Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (BR)
- Venue
- Opinião Pública
- Publisher
- FapUNIFESP (SciELO)
- Published
- 2016-12
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 603-637
- ISSN
- 0104-6276 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2572959951
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 10.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- pt
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Opinião Pública (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Dynamics in Latin America
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Politics and Society in Latin America
- Keywords
- party identification, Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT), Brazilian voters, 2014 Brazilian elections, political attitudes, voting behavior, statism, democratic attitudes
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
