Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Demokrasinin Gündelik Kavramsallaştırması: Keşifsel Bir İnceleme

Yıl 2023, Sayı: 22, 1 - 19, 24.05.2023
https://doi.org/10.26650/4boyut.2023.1257609

Öz

Gündelik kavramsallaştırmalar sıradan insanların bazı konularda uzmanların akademik yaklaşımlarından farklı olarak kendilerine özgü anlayışlarını içermekte olup; karmaşık yapıdaki kavramlarla ilgili daha iyi bir anlayış için incelenmesi önem taşımaktadır. Bu çalışmada Türkiye’de yaşayan ve farklı demografik özelliklere sahip bireylerden oluşturan katılımcı grubunun demokrasiyi nasıl kavramsallaştırdığını ve bu kavramsallaştırmalardaki benzerlik ve farklılıkları nitel bir yöntemle keşifsel olarak incelemek amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla yaşları 18-48 arasında değişen (Ort.= 30.27, SS= 6.59), 10’u kadın ve 20’si erkek olmak üzere toplam 30 kişiyle yarı yapılandırılmış derinlemesine görüşmeler yürütülmüştür. Katılımcılara “Demokrasi deyince aklınıza ne geliyor?, Size göre demokrasi ne demektir?” şeklindeki açık uçlu sorular yöneltilmiş ve cevaplar tematik analiz açık kodlama yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Analizler sonucunda elde edilen veriler şu temalar altında toplanmıştır: ‘Liberal değerlerle tanımlanan demokrasi’, ‘yönetim süreçleriyle tanımlanan demokrasi’, ‘kurumsal yapılarla tanımlanan demokrasi’, ‘sosyal-ekonomik faydaları açısından tanımlanan demokrasi’, ‘batıya özgü bir sistem olarak tanımlanan demokrasi’, ‘eleştirilen bir sistem olarak demokrasi’. Elde edilen bu temalara göre demokrasi farklı ve çeşitli boyutlar üzerinden tanımlanmaktadır. Kurumlar ve prosedürler ile özgürlük ve haklar gibi Batıya özgü liberal tanımların yanı sıra sosyal ve ekonomik faydalar gibi demokrasinin sonuçları üzerinden yapılan tanımlar da ortaya çıkmıştır. Aynı zamanda, alan yazındaki çoğu çalışmadan farklı olarak, olumlu-olumsuz ve nötr değerlendirmeleri içeren demokrasi eleştirileriyle yapılan tanımlar da elde edilmiştir. Bu çalışmanın sınırlılıklarından biri verilerin az sayıda soruyla elde edilmiş olmasıdır. Bundan sonraki çalışmalarda demokrasinin farklı boyutlarını içeren daha fazla soruyla görüşmeler yürütülmesi demokrasi kavramsallaştırmasına dair daha kapsamlı bir anlayış için faydalı olacaktır.

Kaynakça

  • Akboğa, S. ve Şahin, O. (2018). Türkiye’de demokrasi algıları: Cinsiyet, etnik ve dini dinamikler. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 57, 1-28. https://dx.doi.org/10.26650/JECS356672 google scholar
  • Aktaş, M. (2015). Demokrasi kavramına eleştirel bir bakış. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(1), 87-105. D0I:10.18506/anemon.92965 google scholar
  • Alacapınar, F. G. (2020). Üniversite öğrencilerinin demokrasi konusundaki değerleri. Pearson Journal, 5(5), 117-131. https://doi.org/10.46872/pj.26 google scholar
  • Andersen, R. H., Schulze, J. L. ve Seppel, K. (2018). Pinning down democracy: A Q-method study of lived democracy. Polity, 50(1), 4-42. D0I:10.1086/695417 google scholar
  • Baviskar, S. ve Malone, M. F. T. (2004). What democracy means to citizens- and why it matters. Revista Europea de EstudiosLatinoamericanosy del Caribe, 76, 3-23. http://doi.org/10.18352/erlacs.9682 google scholar
  • Bogdan, R. C. ve Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (3. Bs.). Boston, Allyn and Bacon. google scholar
  • Bratton, M. (2003). Briefing: Islam, democracy and public opinion in Africa. African Affairs, 102, 493501. D0I:10.1093/afraf/adg049 google scholar
  • Bratton, M. ve Mattes, R. (2001a). Support for democracy in Africa: Intrinsic or instrumental. British Journal of Political Science, 51(3), 447-474. D0I:10.1017/S0007123401000175 google scholar
  • Bratton, M. ve Mattes, R. B. (2001b). How people view democracy: Africans’ surprising universalism. Journal of Democracy, 12, 107-121. google scholar
  • Braun, V. ve Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. D0I:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa google scholar
  • Canache, D. (2012). Citizens’ conceptualizations of democracy: Structural complexity, substantive content, and political significance. Comparative Political Studies, 45(9), 1132-1158. https://doi. org/10.1177/0010414011434009 google scholar
  • Canache, D., Mondak, J. J. ve Seligson, M. A. (2001). Meaning and measurement in cross-national research on satisfaction with democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(4), 506-528. https://doi. org/10.1086/323576 google scholar
  • Cho, Y. (2012). How well ordinary citizens understand democracy: The case of South Korean electorate. Democratization, 21(2), 195-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2012.734808 google scholar
  • Çokluk, Ö., Yılmaz, K. ve Oğuz, E. (2011). Nitel bir görüşme yöntemi: Odak grup görüşmesi. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim, 4(1), 95-107. google scholar
  • Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. google scholar
  • Dahl, Robert A. (2001). Demokrasi üzerine (B. Kadıoğlu, Çev.). Ankara: Phoenix Yayınları. google scholar
  • Dalton, R. J., Shin, D. C. ve Jou, W. (2007). Understanding democracy: Data from unlikely places. Journal of Democracy, 18(4), 142-156. google scholar
  • Dixon, J. C. (2008). A clash of civilizations? Examining liberal-democratic values in Turkey and the European Union 1. The British Journal of Sociology, 59(4), 681-708. google scholar
  • Fuchs, D. ve Roller, E. 2006. “Learned democracy? Support for democracy in Central and Eastern Europe.” International Journal of Sociology, 36(3), 70-96 google scholar
  • Gagnon, J. P. (2018). 2,234 descriptions of democracy: An update to democracy’s ontological pluralism. Democratic Theory, 5(1), 92-113. D0I:10.3167/dt.2018.050107 google scholar
  • Huntington, S. P. (1991). The third wave: Democratization in the late 20th century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. google scholar
  • Huntington, S. P. (2020). The clash of civilizations?. The New Social Theory Reader içinde (s. 305-313). Routledge. google scholar
  • Inglehart, R. (2000). Culture and democracy. E. Harrison ve P. Huntington (Ed.), Culture matters: How values shape human progress içinde (s. 80-97). New York: Basic Books. google scholar
  • Işık, E. ve Semerci, Ç. (2019). Eğitim alanı nitel araştırmalarında veri üçgenlemesi olarak odak grup görüşmesi, bireysel görüşme ve gözlem. Turkish Journal of Educational Studies, 6(3), 53-66. google scholar
  • Karl, T. L. (1990). Dilemmas of democratization in Latin America. Comparative Politics, 23(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.2307/422302 google scholar
  • Keane, J. (2022). Kısa demokrasi tarihi. (A. Nalbant, çev.) Ankara: Say Yayınları. google scholar
  • Kemahlıoğlu, Ö. ve Keyman, F. (2011). Türkiye’de demokrasi algısı. Istanbul: Istanbul Policy Center. google scholar
  • Kim, S. (2010). Exploring naturalistic conceptions of ‘a moral person’for Koreans (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). Teksas Üniversitesi. google scholar
  • Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (2. Bs.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. google scholar
  • Linz, J. J. ve Stepan, A. (1978). The breakdown of democratic regimes: Latin America. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Univesity Press. google scholar
  • Mishra, L. (2016). Focus group discussion in qualitative research. TechnoLearn: An International Journal of Educational Technology, 6(1), 1-5. google scholar
  • Moghaddam, F. M. (2018). The road to actualized democracy: A psychological exploration. B. Wagoner, google scholar
  • I. Bresco de Luna, ve V. Glaveanu (Ed.), The road to actualized democracy: A psychological exploration içinde (s. 3-23). Information Age Publishing, Inc. google scholar
  • Montiel, C. ve Wessells, M. (2001). Democratization, psychology and the construction of cultures of peace. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 7(2), 119-129. https://doi.org/10.1207/ S15327949PAC0702_03 google scholar
  • Moodie, E. (2005). Different meanings of democracy in post-communist Europe (Doktora Tezi). Retrieved from https://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/178/1/moodiethesis1.pdf google scholar
  • Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2. Bs.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. google scholar
  • Norris, P. (Ed.). (1999). Critical citizens: Global support for democratic government. OUP Oxford. google scholar
  • Osterberg-Kaufmann, N. ve Stadelmaier, U. (2020). Measuring meanings of democracy—methods of differentiation. Zeitschrift für VergleichendePolitikwissenschaft, 14, 401-423. DOI:10.1007/s12286-020-00461-6 google scholar
  • Ottemoeller, D. (1998). Popular perceptions of democracy: Elections and attitudes in Uganda. Comparative Political Studies, 31(1), 98-124. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414098031001005 google scholar
  • Regt, S. D. (2013). Arabs want democracy, but what kind?. Advances in Applied Sociology, 3(01), 37-46. DOI: 10.4236/aasoci.2013.31005 google scholar
  • Rose, R., Mishler, W. ve Haerpfer, C. (1998) Democracy and its Alternatives: Understanding PostCommunist Societies. Oxford & London: John Baltimore Press. google scholar
  • Schedler, A. ve Sarsfield, R. (2007). Democrats with adjectives: Linking direct and indirect measures of democratic support. European Journal of Political Research, 46(5), 637-659. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1475-6765.2007.00708.x google scholar
  • Schumpeter, J. (1943). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. London: George Allen and Unwin. google scholar
  • Sternberg, R. J., Conway, B. E., Ketron, J. L. ve Bernstein, M. (1981). People’s conceptions of intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(1), 37- 55. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.1.37 google scholar
  • Şahin, O. (2016). Perceptions of democracy in the world: Do different understandings held by the people shape political systems? (Doktora tezi). Sabancı Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul. google scholar
  • Tessler, M., Jamal, A. ve Robinson, M. (2012). New findings on Arabs and Democracy. Journal of Democracy 23(4), 89-103. google scholar
  • Tilly, C. (2011). Demokrasi. (E. Arıcan, çev.) Phoenix Yayınları, Ankara. google scholar
  • Yıldırım, A., ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (10. Basım). İstanbul: Seçkin Yayıncılık. google scholar

The Naturalistic Conceptualizations of Democracy: An Exploratory Investigation

Yıl 2023, Sayı: 22, 1 - 19, 24.05.2023
https://doi.org/10.26650/4boyut.2023.1257609

Öz

Naturalistic conceptualizations involve lay people’s own understanding about a subject and differ from experts’ academic approaches. Examining these conceptualizations is important for being able to better understand complex concepts. This study uses a qualitative method with the aim of exploratively examining how a participant group consisting of individuals with different demographic characteristics living in Türkiye conceptualize democracy, as well as the similarities and differences in their conceptualizations. The study conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews for this purpose with a total of 30 people between 18-48 years of age (M = 30.27, SD = 6.59; 10 females, 20 males). The interviews asked the participants what comes to mind when they say democracy and what democracy means to them as open-ended questions and analyzed the answers using thematic analyses alongside the open coding method. As a result of the analyses, the data were gathered under the following themes: democracy defined by liberal values, democracy defined by government processes, democracy defined by institutional structures, democracy defined in terms of social-economic benefits, democracy defined as a Western system, and democracy as a criticized system. According to these themes, the participants defined democracy through different various dimensions, with a Western liberal meaning emerging involving institutions, procedures, freedoms, and rights, as well as definitions based on the consequences of democracy, such as social and economic benefits. Unlike most studies in the literature, definitions were at the same time observed to have been made that criticized democracy and included positive, negative, and neutral evaluations. One of the limitations of this study is that the data were obtained from a small number of questions. Having future studies conduct interviews with more questions that involve different dimensions of democracy will be beneficial for a more comprehensive understanding of naturalistic conceptualizations of democracy.

Kaynakça

  • Akboğa, S. ve Şahin, O. (2018). Türkiye’de demokrasi algıları: Cinsiyet, etnik ve dini dinamikler. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 57, 1-28. https://dx.doi.org/10.26650/JECS356672 google scholar
  • Aktaş, M. (2015). Demokrasi kavramına eleştirel bir bakış. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(1), 87-105. D0I:10.18506/anemon.92965 google scholar
  • Alacapınar, F. G. (2020). Üniversite öğrencilerinin demokrasi konusundaki değerleri. Pearson Journal, 5(5), 117-131. https://doi.org/10.46872/pj.26 google scholar
  • Andersen, R. H., Schulze, J. L. ve Seppel, K. (2018). Pinning down democracy: A Q-method study of lived democracy. Polity, 50(1), 4-42. D0I:10.1086/695417 google scholar
  • Baviskar, S. ve Malone, M. F. T. (2004). What democracy means to citizens- and why it matters. Revista Europea de EstudiosLatinoamericanosy del Caribe, 76, 3-23. http://doi.org/10.18352/erlacs.9682 google scholar
  • Bogdan, R. C. ve Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (3. Bs.). Boston, Allyn and Bacon. google scholar
  • Bratton, M. (2003). Briefing: Islam, democracy and public opinion in Africa. African Affairs, 102, 493501. D0I:10.1093/afraf/adg049 google scholar
  • Bratton, M. ve Mattes, R. (2001a). Support for democracy in Africa: Intrinsic or instrumental. British Journal of Political Science, 51(3), 447-474. D0I:10.1017/S0007123401000175 google scholar
  • Bratton, M. ve Mattes, R. B. (2001b). How people view democracy: Africans’ surprising universalism. Journal of Democracy, 12, 107-121. google scholar
  • Braun, V. ve Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. D0I:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa google scholar
  • Canache, D. (2012). Citizens’ conceptualizations of democracy: Structural complexity, substantive content, and political significance. Comparative Political Studies, 45(9), 1132-1158. https://doi. org/10.1177/0010414011434009 google scholar
  • Canache, D., Mondak, J. J. ve Seligson, M. A. (2001). Meaning and measurement in cross-national research on satisfaction with democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(4), 506-528. https://doi. org/10.1086/323576 google scholar
  • Cho, Y. (2012). How well ordinary citizens understand democracy: The case of South Korean electorate. Democratization, 21(2), 195-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2012.734808 google scholar
  • Çokluk, Ö., Yılmaz, K. ve Oğuz, E. (2011). Nitel bir görüşme yöntemi: Odak grup görüşmesi. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim, 4(1), 95-107. google scholar
  • Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. google scholar
  • Dahl, Robert A. (2001). Demokrasi üzerine (B. Kadıoğlu, Çev.). Ankara: Phoenix Yayınları. google scholar
  • Dalton, R. J., Shin, D. C. ve Jou, W. (2007). Understanding democracy: Data from unlikely places. Journal of Democracy, 18(4), 142-156. google scholar
  • Dixon, J. C. (2008). A clash of civilizations? Examining liberal-democratic values in Turkey and the European Union 1. The British Journal of Sociology, 59(4), 681-708. google scholar
  • Fuchs, D. ve Roller, E. 2006. “Learned democracy? Support for democracy in Central and Eastern Europe.” International Journal of Sociology, 36(3), 70-96 google scholar
  • Gagnon, J. P. (2018). 2,234 descriptions of democracy: An update to democracy’s ontological pluralism. Democratic Theory, 5(1), 92-113. D0I:10.3167/dt.2018.050107 google scholar
  • Huntington, S. P. (1991). The third wave: Democratization in the late 20th century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. google scholar
  • Huntington, S. P. (2020). The clash of civilizations?. The New Social Theory Reader içinde (s. 305-313). Routledge. google scholar
  • Inglehart, R. (2000). Culture and democracy. E. Harrison ve P. Huntington (Ed.), Culture matters: How values shape human progress içinde (s. 80-97). New York: Basic Books. google scholar
  • Işık, E. ve Semerci, Ç. (2019). Eğitim alanı nitel araştırmalarında veri üçgenlemesi olarak odak grup görüşmesi, bireysel görüşme ve gözlem. Turkish Journal of Educational Studies, 6(3), 53-66. google scholar
  • Karl, T. L. (1990). Dilemmas of democratization in Latin America. Comparative Politics, 23(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.2307/422302 google scholar
  • Keane, J. (2022). Kısa demokrasi tarihi. (A. Nalbant, çev.) Ankara: Say Yayınları. google scholar
  • Kemahlıoğlu, Ö. ve Keyman, F. (2011). Türkiye’de demokrasi algısı. Istanbul: Istanbul Policy Center. google scholar
  • Kim, S. (2010). Exploring naturalistic conceptions of ‘a moral person’for Koreans (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). Teksas Üniversitesi. google scholar
  • Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (2. Bs.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. google scholar
  • Linz, J. J. ve Stepan, A. (1978). The breakdown of democratic regimes: Latin America. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Univesity Press. google scholar
  • Mishra, L. (2016). Focus group discussion in qualitative research. TechnoLearn: An International Journal of Educational Technology, 6(1), 1-5. google scholar
  • Moghaddam, F. M. (2018). The road to actualized democracy: A psychological exploration. B. Wagoner, google scholar
  • I. Bresco de Luna, ve V. Glaveanu (Ed.), The road to actualized democracy: A psychological exploration içinde (s. 3-23). Information Age Publishing, Inc. google scholar
  • Montiel, C. ve Wessells, M. (2001). Democratization, psychology and the construction of cultures of peace. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 7(2), 119-129. https://doi.org/10.1207/ S15327949PAC0702_03 google scholar
  • Moodie, E. (2005). Different meanings of democracy in post-communist Europe (Doktora Tezi). Retrieved from https://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/178/1/moodiethesis1.pdf google scholar
  • Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2. Bs.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. google scholar
  • Norris, P. (Ed.). (1999). Critical citizens: Global support for democratic government. OUP Oxford. google scholar
  • Osterberg-Kaufmann, N. ve Stadelmaier, U. (2020). Measuring meanings of democracy—methods of differentiation. Zeitschrift für VergleichendePolitikwissenschaft, 14, 401-423. DOI:10.1007/s12286-020-00461-6 google scholar
  • Ottemoeller, D. (1998). Popular perceptions of democracy: Elections and attitudes in Uganda. Comparative Political Studies, 31(1), 98-124. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414098031001005 google scholar
  • Regt, S. D. (2013). Arabs want democracy, but what kind?. Advances in Applied Sociology, 3(01), 37-46. DOI: 10.4236/aasoci.2013.31005 google scholar
  • Rose, R., Mishler, W. ve Haerpfer, C. (1998) Democracy and its Alternatives: Understanding PostCommunist Societies. Oxford & London: John Baltimore Press. google scholar
  • Schedler, A. ve Sarsfield, R. (2007). Democrats with adjectives: Linking direct and indirect measures of democratic support. European Journal of Political Research, 46(5), 637-659. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1475-6765.2007.00708.x google scholar
  • Schumpeter, J. (1943). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. London: George Allen and Unwin. google scholar
  • Sternberg, R. J., Conway, B. E., Ketron, J. L. ve Bernstein, M. (1981). People’s conceptions of intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(1), 37- 55. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.1.37 google scholar
  • Şahin, O. (2016). Perceptions of democracy in the world: Do different understandings held by the people shape political systems? (Doktora tezi). Sabancı Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul. google scholar
  • Tessler, M., Jamal, A. ve Robinson, M. (2012). New findings on Arabs and Democracy. Journal of Democracy 23(4), 89-103. google scholar
  • Tilly, C. (2011). Demokrasi. (E. Arıcan, çev.) Phoenix Yayınları, Ankara. google scholar
  • Yıldırım, A., ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (10. Basım). İstanbul: Seçkin Yayıncılık. google scholar
Toplam 48 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Psikoloji
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Canan Çelikadam 0000-0002-1844-7033

Sevim Cesur 0000-0002-4038-0592

Yayımlanma Tarihi 24 Mayıs 2023
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2023 Sayı: 22

Kaynak Göster

APA Çelikadam, C., & Cesur, S. (2023). Demokrasinin Gündelik Kavramsallaştırması: Keşifsel Bir İnceleme. 4. BOYUT Medya Ve Kültürel Çalışmalar Dergisi(22), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.26650/4boyut.2023.1257609