Acceso usuarios
Jean-Michel Lecrique, Pierre Lascoumes, Philippe Bezes
Qualitative researches based on focus group offer valuable insights in analyzing moral conflicts. This article suggests they also prove very useful to explore citizens' perceptions of political misbehaviours. Moral expectations regarding politicians' behaviours are ambiguous judgements because of the various criteria that underpin their perceptions of politics. This article is based on the analysis of eight different, socio-culturally homogeneous focus groups. Collected arguments are analysed through a quantitative method examining discursive contents. The existence of a common grid for ranking political misbehaviours is emphasized.
The moderating effects of collective discussion on judgements are also outlined. The article emphasizes variations in judgments, differentiating groups according to their social and occupational experiences. At last, different “repertoires of arguments” are identified relying on different principles.
