Institute of Sociology NASU

DETERMINANTS OF CITIZENS’ ATTITUDE TO THE ACTIVITIES OF THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE (1994–2020)

stmm. 2021 (1): 25-41

DOI https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2021.01.025

OLEKSANDR REZNIK, Doctor of Sciences in Sociology, Senior Research Fellow, Head of the Department of Social and Political Processes, Institute of Sociology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (12 Shovkovychna St., Kyiv, 01021)

oleksanderreznik@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5201-8489

The article analyzes the determinants of citizens’ assessment of the activity of the Presidents of Ukraine during 1994–2020. The institution of the Presidency in the mass consciousness of Ukrainians is a reflection of social stratification. Social groups, formed mainly by different identities, evaluate the President's activities through the prism of their own economic situation, ideological identification, ethno-cultural affiliations, ethno-political aspirations and geopolitical orientations. The attitudes of Ukrainians to the head of state are related to electoral cycles, when the most positive assessments of activity are observed in the first year after the election. Using the method of multiple linear regression, it was found that the socio-economic determinant of the financial situation of the family was less tied to the electoral cycles: regardless of the term of office of the President , wealthy citizens evaluate his activities more positively while the poor ones evaluate it more negatively. In the mid-1990s, the attitudes towards the President of Ukraine were also differentiated by a region of residence and a language of communication in the family. However, after 2004 the factor of language communication in the family has reduced its influence on the assessment of the President's actions in favor of the question of the expediency of the Russian language official status. The factor of regional polarization restored its influence during 2003–2013. At the same time, since the end of the 1990s, the factor of geopolitical orientations of citizens has been gaining influence and has become one of the key ones in the following years. The assessment of the activities of Viktor Yushchenko, Viktor Yanukovych and Petro Poroshenko is characterized by clear geopolitical orientations. Instead, the attitudes to the activities of President Volodymyr Zelenskyi in the second year of his term are characterized by a negative attitude of respondents with both left and right ideological views.

Full article: ukr | rus

Keywords: citizens’ assessment of the activity of the President of Ukraine, ideological determinants, socio-cultural determinants, structural determinants

References

1. Bekeshkina, I.E. (2000). Trust and performance evaluation as indicators of political success. [In Ukrainian]. In: V.Vorona, A.Ruchka (Eds.), Ukrainian Society: Monitoring — 2000. Information and analytical materials (pp. 141–151). Kyiv: Institute of Sociology of the NAS of Ukraine. [= Бекешкіна 2000]
2. Davies, J.C. (1962). Toward a theory of revolution. American Sociological Review, 27 (1), 5–19.
3. Dembitskyi, S.S. (2012). Factors of the public satisfaction with the presidency in Ukraine (2000–2012). [In Ukrainian]. Ukrainskyi sotsium, 3(42), 31–42. [= Дембіцький 2012]
4. Gurr, T.R. (1970). Why Men Rebel. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5. Jost, J.T. (2019). A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58 (2), 263–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12297
6. Kuzio, T. (2001) Transition in post-communist states: Triple or quadruple? Politics, 21 (3), 168–177. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9256.00148
7. Lipset, S.M., Rokkan, S. (1985). Cleavage structures, party systems, and voter alignments. In: S.M. Lipset (Ed.), Consensus and Conflict: Essays in Political Sociology (pp. 113–185). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90400-9_68
8. Malysh, L. (2014). Attitude to power is the dominant public mood. [In Russian]. In: Ye. Golovakha, N. Kostenko, S. Makeev (Eds.), Society without trust (pp. 166–194). Kyiv: Institute of Sociology, NAS of Ukraine. [= Малыш 2014]
9. Marx, K., Engels, F. (1984). Selected Works: in 3 vols. Vol. 1. [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Politvydav Ukrainy. [= Маркс, Енгельс 1984]
10. Melis, G. (2016). Attitudes to authority: life-course stability, intergenerational transmission, and socio-psychological mechanisms in the British Cohort Study 1970. Doctoral Thesis. The University of Manchester.
11. Razumkov Center (2019). Ukraine after the elections: public expectations, political priorities, development prospects. [In Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Zapovit. [= Центр Разумкова 2019]
12. Ruchka, A. (2012). Political and ideological self-identification of the population in present-day Ukraine. [In Ukrainian]. In: V. Ворона, М. Shulga (Eds.), Ukrainian Society 1992–2012. Current state and dynamics of changes. Sociological monitoring (pp. 29–40). Institute of Sociology, NAS of Ukraine. [= Ручка 2012]
13. Vyshniak, O. (2010). Trust in political institutions: concepts, indicators and trends in change. [In Ukrainian]. In: V. Vorona, M. Shulga (Eds.), Ukrainian Society 1992–2010. Sociological monitoring (pp. 24–39). Kyiv: Institute of Sociology, NAS of Ukraine. [= Вишняк 2010]
14. Weatherford, M.S. (1987). How Does Government Performance Influence Political Support? Political Behavior, 9 (1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00987276
15. Weatherford, M.S. (1992). Measuring political legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 86 (1), 149–168.
16. Yap, O.F. (2018). Politics or the economy? Weak economic performance and political support in East and Southeast Asia. Economic and Political Studies, 6 (1), 11–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/20954816.2018.1426356

Reseived 28.12.2020