Center studies of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The articles Mitte-Studien from the University of Leipzig and Mitte-Studien from the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung overlap thematically. Help me to better differentiate or merge the articles (→  instructions ) . To do this, take part in the relevant redundancy discussion . Please remove this module only after the redundancy has been completely processed and do not forget to include the relevant entry on the redundancy discussion page{{ Done | 1 = ~~~~}}to mark. X2liro ( discussion ) 10:48, Jan. 7, 2019 (CET)

The Mitte studies of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) are surveys carried out since 2006 on right-wing extremist attitudes in German society. The studies are published every two years and are commissioned and published by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation . Between 2006 and 2012 they were carried out in collaboration with a working group at the University of Leipzig ( Elmar Brähler , Oliver Decker and Johannes Kiess). Since 2014, the studies have been continued together with the Institute for Interdisciplinary Conflict and Violence Research (IKG) at Bielefeld University under the direction of Andreas Zick . As a result of the new cooperation, the central studies of the FES have been merged with the series German states of the IKG and expanded to include the analysis model of group- related enmity . In addition, the editors and authors determine the current focus for each survey. In 2016, for example, a special focus was placed on attitudes towards refugees.

The results of the study were taken up intensively by both science and the media.

The following important information is missing from this article or section:
The currently published study has not yet been incorporated, the "intensive" reception according to the above sentence is not discussed in more depth.
Help Wikipedia by researching and pasting it .

Origin and development

A conference of experts in 2001 dealt with the question of how right-wing extremist attitudes should be measured. At the invitation of Oskar Niedermayer and Richard Stöss , several scientists met in Berlin in 2001 to discuss the measurement of right-wing extremist attitudes. The following definition was worked out:

"Right-wing extremism is a pattern of attitudes, the common characteristics of which are ideas of inequality. In the political field, these express themselves in the affinity to dictatorial forms of government, chauvinistic attitudes and a trivialization or justification of National Socialism. In the social field they are characterized by anti-Semitic, xenophobic and social Darwinist attitudes. "

Following this conference, the participants were also able to agree on items to measure the various components of right-wing extremist thinking. However, it was not possible to conclusively clarify the scale with which the answers should be measured.

A research group led by Elmar Brähler and Oliver Decker subsequently carried out a survey based on the results of the conference. A second survey was carried out by a Berlin research group. Through these surveys, the theoretically developed items could be tested empirically and the questionnaire reduced to the most suitable items.

In 2005, the Friedrich Ebert Foundation created the “Against Right-Wing Extremism” project. Its tasks include a. researching the extent to which right-wing extremism is widespread at the attitudinal level. The results serve as a basis for political education measures. In 2006, for the first time, a study on right-wing extremist attitudes in the German population was carried out by scientists from the University of Leipzig under the direction of Elmar Brähler and Oliver Decker on behalf of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation. Further studies followed every two years. In addition, a qualitative study (“A look into the middle”) was published in May 2008. The Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung's Mitte studies have been published by JHW Dietz Nachf. Bonn since 2012 .

Since 2014, the IKG has been a cooperation partner of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung for its Mitte studies, which continue to be published by Dietz-Verlag in Bonn. The Leipzig research group continues the studies as Leipziger Mitte studies.

The starting point for the survey of right-wing extremist and misanthropic orientations is that these do not only become relevant when they are also manifested in active behavior. Rather, right-wing extremist attitudes prepare or underlie appropriate behavior. The authors of the Mitte studies also point to the influence of the spread of right-wing extremist attitudes on the organized right-wing extremist scene. The more active and prone to violence, the more she has the feeling that her convictions are shared by many people.

survey

From 2006 to 2012, the surveys were conducted as face-to-face interviews. Accordingly, an interviewer was present when filling out the questionnaire. The survey method was changed in 2014. As before for the GMF long-term study by the IKG, the interviews have since been carried out by telephone as " Computer Assisted Telephone Interview " (CATI) by the Duisburg Social Science Survey Center. The representative sample is around 2,000 respondents. The attitudes of people with German citizenship are analyzed, including a proportion with a migration background.

Measurement of right-wing extremist attitudes

The consensus definition bases right-wing extremism on six attitude dimensions. The first dimension, the advocacy of a right-wing dictatorship, describes the demand for a homogeneous, dictatorial society. The second dimension, chauvinism, describes an exaggerated national feeling combined with the goal of resolutely asserting German interests. The devaluation of people because of their non-German origin is measured by the xenophobia dimension. Anti-Semitism refers to the devaluation or stereotyping of Jews. The dimension of social Darwinism describes the advocacy of a right of the stronger derived from nature. The sixth dimension is the trivialization of National Socialism , which not only relativizes it, but also puts it in a positive light.

In the middle studies of the FES, the dimensions are measured by three items each. The answer scale gives the respondents five different answer options: “I totally agree”, “I mostly agree”, “I partly agree / partly disagree”, “I mostly disagree”, “I totally disagree”.

The measurement was not changed during the middle studies of the FES in order to maintain comparability with previous surveys.

Measurement of group-related misanthropy

The group-related enmity syndrome was defined by a working group headed by Wilhelm Heitmeyer :

"If people are marked as unequal due to their chosen or assigned group membership and exposed to hostile mentalities, devaluation and exclusion, then we speak of group-related enmity."

Group- related misanthropy (short: GMF) differentiates between ingroups and outgroups . Ingroups are seen as more valuable than outgroups that are devalued and described as inferior. Heitmeyer points out that not only right-wing extremist attitudes but also the spread of attitudes of group-related enmity for right-wing extremists can legitimize the use of violence.

Group-related enmity is described as a syndrome . This is made up of various elements of inequality which, however, are related. Consent to the various elements of inequality does not usually occur independently of one another. At the beginning of the GMF study series, six elements were assigned to the syndrome. Thirteen elements can now be described as part of the syndrome: racism, sexism, xenophobia and xenophobia, anti-Semitism, hostility towards Muslims, devaluation of Sinti and Roma, devaluation of asylum seekers and refugees, devaluation of homosexual people, devaluation of trans * people, devaluation of homeless people, Devaluation of people with disabilities, devaluation of long-term unemployed people as well as the advocacy of established privileges. All of these elements have been empirically proven to be closely related and thus form a syndrome.

Group-related misanthropy is measured by measuring agreement with the various elements of the syndrome using two items each . A short scale is calculated for each element based on the agreement with these two items. The approval values ​​for the various elements cannot be compared with one another because the items are worded differently. In contrast to the measurement of right-wing extremist attitudes, no overall index is calculated when measuring group-related enmity.

Right-wing populist attitudes

For an anthology on right-wing populism in 2015, the authors calculated for the first time the distribution of right-wing populist attitudes on behalf of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation. To do this, they used the database of the FES-Mitte study 2014. This publication is therefore not a Mitte study in the narrower sense, as it is not based on its own survey; but it fits in with the series of FES center studies.

According to the authors, right-wing populism consists of the devaluation of asylum seekers, Muslims as well as Sinti and Roma and xenophobia as well as law-and-order authoritarianism and distrust of democracy. In the empirical examination of various attitudes theoretically assigned to right-wing populism, these elements turned out to be “coherent, right-wing populist attitudes”. The connection between right-wing populism and anti-Semitism, sexism, homophobia, national pride, approval of violence, willingness to use violence, rejection of the EU and collective anger was also examined. However, the empirical connection between these attitudes and right-wing populism turned out to be not close enough to be able to trace them back to a common factor right-wing populism. These elements were therefore not included in the overall right-wing populism index.

For the 2016 FES-Mitte study, the overall right-wing populism index was determined on the basis of the newly collected representative data.

New right attitudes

In the FES-Mitte study 2016, “new right attitudes” are recorded for the first time. For the ideological set pieces of the " New Right " , two issues in particular play an outstanding role: 1. national reconsideration and 2. the political-strategic demand for “resistance” to current politics. New right attitudes are measured on the basis of the elements anti-establishment stance, call to resistance, imputation of an opinion dictation, Islamic conspiracy and national reconsideration against the EU. These are each queried using two items. The authors see the relevance of a survey on the distribution of new right attitudes in the fact that these are increasingly replacing the “classic” right-wing extremist attitudes in society.

Results

In addition to agreeing to the respective items, the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung's Mitte studies also collect socio-demographic information on the respondents. In this way, comparisons can be made in the spread of right-wing extremist attitudes or group-related enmity, for example between different age and income groups, or the correlation with education, gender and other socio-demographic characteristics such as party preference can be measured.

Agreement with the overall index of right-wing extremist attitudes

2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
total 8.6 7.6 08.2 9, 2.4 2.8
east 6.6 7.9 10.5 15.8 2.5 5.9
west 9.1 7.5 07.6 07.3 2.3 2.3

Overall, the level of right-wing extremist attitudes remained almost the same for all of Germany from 2006 to 2012. In the east, however, there was a significant increase. In 2014 there was a sharp decline in support for the overall index of right-wing extremist attitudes. The survey carried out in parallel by the Leipzig research group also showed a clear drop in approval of the overall index. When assessing the sharp decline in the overall right-wing extremism index, however, according to the authors of the study, it should be taken into account that this is due to the very low level of agreement with the dimensions of social Darwinism and the trivialization of Naziism. Xenophobia and chauvinism, however, are still approved by far more respondents.

Approval for the individual dimensions of right-wing extremist attitudes in 2016

total west east
Advocacy dictatorship 03.6 03.1 04.9
chauvinism 12.5 11.6 14.9
Xenophobia 07.7 07.2 09.6
anti-Semitism 02.4 02.3 03.1
Social darwinism 02.0 01.8 02.4
Downplaying National Socialism 02.0 01.6 04.3

The authors of the FES-Mitte study in 2016 state that one of the key findings is that “the polarization of political opinions among citizens is getting worse - a deep gap has emerged”. This can be seen from the fact that the answer option “partly agree / partly disagree” is chosen less and less, but more and more possibilities of approval or rejection are chosen.

In 2016, the FES-Mitte study also focused on the attitudes of Germans towards refugees. The results show that the majority of refugees are generally positive about admission. Only a fifth of Germans reject this. It also becomes clear that one's own attitude is heavily dependent on the social environment of the people. Those who are surrounded by negative attitudes towards refugees also tend to adopt these more strongly. In addition, around half of the population has reservations about asylum seekers. In terms of approval of group-related enmity, the following results were found for the individual dimensions in 2016:

Consent to group-related misanthropy

total west east
racism 08.7 08.0 08.8
sexism 08.7 08.5 07.1
xenophobia 19th, 0 16.8 28.8
Classic anti-Semitism 05.8 05.3 07.2
Hostility towards Muslims 18.3 16.8 23.9
Devaluation of Sinti and Roma 24.9 22.7 33.6
Devaluation of asylum seekers 49.5 46.9 60.0
Devaluing homosexual people 09.7 09.3 06.7
Devaluation of trans * people 12.5 12.0 11.1
Devaluation of homeless people 18.0 15.4 27.2
Devaluation of people with disabilities 01.8 01.4 03.6
Devaluation of long-term unemployed people 49.3 48.3 51.6
Established privileges 38.8 37.5 47.7

Approval for right-wing populist statements remained almost the same between 2014 and 2016. Depending on the limit value, these attitudes were 40% or 21% common in 2016. In 2016, 28% of those surveyed agreed with the overall index of new right-wing attitudes; 9% had “maximally high approval ratings”.

criticism

With regard to the study from spring 2019, the researchers were accused of misinterpretation by Sigmar Gabriel, among others . The activists of the project “Against Law” would have rated the approval of questions about the enforcement of law and order as “right” views. Gabriel himself stated that the authors had apparently tried to confirm already established opinions, the head of the project rejected his criticism as not justified.

Publications of the series

  • Oliver Decker, Elmar Brähler: From the edge to the center - right-wing extremist attitudes and their influencing factors in Germany . Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 2006, ISBN 978-3-89892-566-2 .
  • Oliver Decker, Katharina Rothe, Marliese Weissmann, Norman Geißler, Elmar Brähler: A look into the middle - On the emergence of right-wing extremist and democratic attitudes in Germany . Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-89892-920-2 .
  • Oliver Decker, Elmar Brähler: Movement in the Middle - Right-Wing Extremist Attitudes in Germany 2008 . Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Berlin 2008, ISBN 978-3-86872-002-0 .
  • Oliver Decker, Marliese Weißmann, Johannes Kiess, Elmar Brähler: The middle in the crisis - right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2010 . Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Berlin 2010, ISBN 978-3-86872-469-1 .
  • Oliver Decker, Johannes Kiess, Elmar Brähler: The middle in transition - right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2012 . Editor: Ralf Melzer for the Friedrich Ebert Foundation. Dietz, Bonn 2012, ISBN 978-3-8012-0429-7 .
  • Andreas Zick, Anna Klein: Fragile Middle - Hostile Conditions . Editor: Ralf Melzer for the Friedrich Ebert Foundation. Dietz, Bonn 2014, ISBN 978-3-8012-0458-7 .
  • Andreas Zick, Beata Küpper: Anger, contempt, devaluation - right-wing populism in Germany . Ed .: Ralf Melzer, Dietmar Molthagen . Dietz, Bonn 2015, ISBN 978-3-8012-0478-5 .
  • Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions . Editor: Ralf Melzer for the Friedrich Ebert Foundation. Dietz, Bonn 2016, ISBN 978-3-8012-0488-4 .
  • Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Wilhelm Berghan: Lost Center - Hostile Conditions . Ed .: Franziska Schröter for the Friedrich Ebert Foundation. Dietz, Bonn 2019, ISBN 978-3-8012-0544-7 .

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Cf. u. a. Sasan Abdi-Herrle: New rights are moving into the center of society. In: Die Zeit, November 21, 2016; Deutschlandfunk: German society is polarizing, November 21, 2016; Britta Kollenbroich: The AfD is moving to the right - its supporters are moving with it. In: SpiegelOnline, November 21, 2016; Michael Meisner: AfD and its supporters are becoming more and more radical. In: Der Tagesspiegel, November 21, 2016.
  2. ↑ Joachim Kreis: To measure right-wing extremist attitudes. Problems and controversies based on two studies. Berlin 2007, p. 5.
  3. ↑ Joachim Kreis: To measure right-wing extremist attitudes. Problems and controversies based on two studies. Berlin 2007, p. 6.
  4. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper: Right-wing extremists and misanthropic attitudes. in: Fabian Virchow, Martin Langebach, Alexander Häusler (eds.): Handbook for right-wing extremism. Edition right-wing extremism, Wiesbaden 2017, pp. 83–114, here p. 83.
  5. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 112.
  6. ↑ Oliver Decker, Elmar Brähler: From the edge to the middle. Right-wing extremist attitudes and their influencing factors in Germany. Berlin 2006, p. 26.
  7. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 23.
  8. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 26.
  9. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 126ff.
  10. ↑ Oliver Decker, Elmar Brähler: From the edge to the middle. Right-wing extremist attitudes and their influencing factors in Germany. Berlin 2006, p. 21.
  11. ^ Wilhelm Heitmeyer: Group- related misanthropy . Social conditions and reactions in the population from 2002 to 2005. In: Wilhelm Heitmeyer (Hrsg.): German conditions, volume 4. Edition Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 2006, pp. 15–38, here p. 21.
  12. ^ Wilhelm Heitmeyer: Group- related misanthropy . The theoretical concept and first empirical results. In: Wilhelm Heitmeyer (Ed.): German Conditions, Volume 1. Edition Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 2003, pp. 15–36, here p. 17.
  13. ^ Wilhelm Heitmeyer: Group-related misanthropy (GMF) in an unsecured decade. In: Wilhelm Heitmeyer (Ed.): German Conditions, Volume 10. Edition Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 2012, pp. 15–41, here p. 16.
  14. ^ Wilhelm Heitmeyer (ed.): German Conditions, Volume 1. Frankfurt am Main 2003, p. 22.
  15. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 37.
  16. ^ A b Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 42.
  17. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 43.
  18. ↑ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper: Anger, contempt, devaluation. Right-wing populism in Germany. Bonn 2015.
  19. ↑ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper: Anger, contempt, devaluation. Right-wing populism in Germany. Bonn 2015, p. 27.
  20. ^ A b Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper: Anger, contempt, devaluation. Right-wing populism in Germany. Bonn 2015, p. 29.
  21. ^ A b Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 150.
  22. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 152.
  23. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 139.
  24. ↑ Andreas Zick, Anna Klein, Eva Groß: Fragile middle - hostile states. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2014. Bonn 2014, p. 45.
  25. ↑ Oliver Decker, Johannes Kiess, Elmar Brähler: The stabilized middle. Right-wing extremist attitude in Germany 2014. Leipzig 2014.
  26. ↑ Andreas Zick, Anna Klein, Eva Groß: Fragile middle - hostile states. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2014. Bonn 2014, p. 46.
  27. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 130.
  28. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 15.
  29. ^ A b Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 86.
  30. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 118.
  31. ^ Andreas Zick, Beate Küpper, Daniela Krause: Split center - hostile conditions. Right-wing extremist attitudes in Germany 2016. Bonn 2016, p. 160.
  32. ↑ Gabriel criticizes the asylum study by the SPD-affiliated foundation very clearly. welt.de, April 29, 2019.
  33. ↑ “You have to ask whether Mr. Gabriel has read the study”. welt.de, April 30, 2019.