'Faculty of Political Science, University of Zagreb'
Doi
Abstract
Autori se u naknadnom komentaru osvrću na teorijske i metodološke nedostatke svoje ranije objavljene studije o dobi i biračkom ponašanju u Hrvatskoj. Na teorijskoj razini ističu nedovoljnu razrađenost konceptualnog okvira i izostanak smještanja studije u odnosu na druga relevantna istraživanja koja se bave političkom socijalizacijom, političkom identifikacijom i društveno-političkim rascjepima. Na metodološkoj razini ističu probleme nedovoljne transparentnosti u prezentaciji rezultata testova multikolinearnosti i faktorske analize te u koncipiranju međuodnosa, operacionalizaciji i mjerenju varijabli poput dobi, obrazovanja, autoritarnosti, konzervativizma i populizma. Skromno zaključujući kako njihov rad ipak pridonosi napretku razumijevanja odnosa dobi i biračkoga ponašanja, autori pozivaju na buduća longitudinalna istraživanja koja bi mogla više reći o eventualnoj promjeni u intenzitetu utjecaja rascjepa na dobne kohorte. Njihov znanstveni autodafe kojim priznaju nedovoljnu komparativnu utemeljenost prethodnog istraživanja, konceptualnu i empirijsku, sažet je u pluralizaciji odabrane naslovne metafore kojom se ti izgubljeni akademski dječaci vraćaju putu akademske zrelosti pa dijete u vremenu postaje djecom u vremenuIn their later commentary, the authors refer to the theoretical and methodological shortcomings of their previously published study on age and voting behavior in Croatia. At the theoretical level, they point out the insufficient elaboration of the conceptual framework and the lack of proper placement of the study in relation to other relevant research dealing with political socialization, political identification, and socio-political cleavages. At the methodological level, they emphasize the problems of insufficient transparency in the presentation of the results of multi-collinearity tests and factor analysis, and in the clear conceptualization of mutual relationship, operationalization, and measurement of the variables such as age, education, authoritarianism, conservatism and populism. Concluding modestly that their work nevertheless contributes to the progress of understanding the relationship between age and voting behavior, the authors call for future longitudinal research that could convey more about the eventual change in the intensity of influence of cleavages on the age cohorts. Their scientific auto-da-fé, in which they confess insufficient comparative grounding of their prior study, both conceptual and empirical, is summed up in the pluralization of the chosen title metaphor. In this way, these academic lost boys return to the path of academic maturity, and a child in time becomes children in time
