Showing papers in "Political Behavior in 1990"

Explaining political sophistication

Abstract: Debates over the political sophistication of mass publics smolder on. The more fundamental question, however, is why people become as politically sophisticated or unsophisticated as they do. This paper develops a nonlinear simultaneous equation model to weigh explanations of three general sorts: the politicalinformation to which people are exposed, theirability to assimilate and organize such information, and theirmotivation to do so. The estimates suggest that interest and intelligence, representing motivation and ability, have major effects, but that education and media exposure, the big informational variables, do not. I consider the reasons and sketch some implications for the sophistication of mass publics, for the study of sophistication and other “variables of extent,” and for democratic theory.

Political efficacy and trust: A report on the NES pilot study items

Abstract: Political efficacy and trust—among the most frequently used survey measures of general political attitudes—are often maligned for their lack of reliability and validity. This paper reports results from the National Election Studies 1987 pilot study, which included more than thirty-five efficacy and trust items. Five attitudinal dimensions were hypothesized; four emerged clearly. One scale, internal efficacy, is especially robust; a four- to six-item scale represents a considerable improvement on existing NES measures. External efficacy is distinguished from political trust, at least when the former is measured in terms of the fairness of political procedures and outcomes rather than in terms of elite responsiveness to popular demands. Though less decisive, there also is support for dividing trust into incumbent- and regime-based components. The failure to find a similar incumbent- and regime-based distinction for external efficacy is in accord with theoretical perspectives.

Framing responsibility for political issues: The case of poverty

Abstract: How people think about poverty is shown to be dependent on how the issue is framed. When news media presentations frame poverty as a general outcome, responsibility for poverty is assigned to society-at-large; when news presentations frame poverty as a particular instance of a poor person, responsibility is assigned to the individual. Similar framing effects are documented in the 1986 General Social Survey where the amount of public assistance deemed appropriate for a poor family varies with the description of the family. In concluding, the implications of framing for the study of public opinion are considered.

Government policy and citizen passion: A study of issue publics in contemporary America

Abstract: This article describes the findings of a program of research exploring the cognitive and behavioral consequences of passionate concern about government policy issues. American citizens vary a great deal in terms of the personal importance they attach to their attitudes on particular policy issues. Citizens whose policy attitudes are especially important to them are likely to think frequently about those attitudes, to perceive competing candidates as being relatively polarized on the issue, and to form presidential candidate preferences on the basis of those attitudes. Also, policy attitudes that citizens consider personally important are highly resistant to change and are therefore especially stable over long periods of time. The American public appears to be structured into many small issue publics, each composed of citizens who are passionately concerned about a single issue. Most Americans fall into very few issue publics, the particular ones being determined by each individual's unique self-interests, social identifications, and cherished values. The implications of these findings for the workings of democracies are discussed.

ON-LINE PROCESSING IN CANDIDATE EVALUATION: The Effects of Issue Order, Issue Importance, and Sophistication

Abstract: This article reports the results of a study that replicates and extends the impression-driven model of candidate evaluation reported in Lodge, McGraw, and Stroh (1989). This model holds that evaluations are formed and updated on-line as information is encountered, and that as a result, citizens need not rely on specific information available from memory to form their candidate evaluations. In the present work we explore whether the order in which information is encountered, as well as whether information that is personally important, influences the weight accorded to evidence in on-line processing. In addition, differences in information-processing strategies due to political sophistication are examined. The results indicate that important information receives more weight than unimportant information. In addition, the evidence suggests that political sophisticates are more efficient on-line processors than are less sophisticated individuals. The implications of these results for models of candidate evaluation are discussed.

Perceived legitimacy of supreme court decisions: three functions of source credibility

Abstract: Public reaction to a Supreme Court decision hinges, in part, on the level of diffuse support enjoyed by the Court prior to announcement of the ruling. Previous investigators have exchanged adamant claims concerning the legitimacy-conferring ability of the Supreme Court, yet these studies have consistently ignored theoretical explanations of the psychological determinants of a receiver's response to an authoritative edict. Examined from the context of a cognitive view of persuasion, the credibility of the Supreme Court as a message source should not be expected to have a simple positive effect on opinion. Instead, unique effects may result from the interaction of source credibility and other components of the process of persuasion. This paper reports the results of a series of experiments that demonstrate that the credibility of the Supreme Court can serve three unique persuasive functions: Source credibility can cue a simple positive response, prompt increased cognitive effort, and serve as evidence in support of a persuasive claim.

DETERMINANTS OF POLITICAL JUDGMENTS: The Joint Influence of Normative and Heuristic Rules of Inference

Abstract: Prior research on political judgment has been polarized, with one group emphasizing normative models of political inference and the other emphasizing heuristic models of political inference. In accordance with recent findings in psychology, this article is rooted in the assumption that both normative and heuristic criteria simultaneously influence political judgments. Furthermore, differences in the relative extent to which these two processes serve to determine political judgments are hypothesized to depend on the nature of the judgment task. Two kinds of political judgments are considered: judgments reflecting beliefs about the candidates' stands on the issues and judgments reflecting global evaluations of the candidates. The reported results confirm that (1) voters rely on both normative- and heuristic-based considerations when forming these judgments, and (2) the relative extent to which these criteria influence these judgments depends on the complexity of the judgment task.

Black-box models of candidate evaluation

Abstract: All contemporary models of candidate evaluation are memory-based models in that they treat the direction and strength of evaluation as a function of the mix of positively and negatively valued (valenced) information retrieved from memory. Yet, oddly enough, despite the assumption that memory mediates judgment, none of the major models looks at the processes involved in what information voters recall and how that evidence was integrated into a summary evaluation. In this sense then, political science models of vote choice are black-box models: They are silent about how voters actually go about interpreting information and integrating the “evidence” into a summary evaluation of the candidates. In this article we critique the major political science models, call attention to the implicit assumptions they make about what “evidence” is assumed to be in memory, and conclude with an argument for introducing process into our explanations of vote choice.

Symbolic racism in candidate evaluation: an experiment

Abstract: The authors explored the symbolic racism construct to determine whether discrimination in the evaluation of political candidates can be attributed to a combination of traditional values and antiblack affect as suggested by Sears. Using an experimental design where candidate race was manipulated in three conditions, they found that differential racial attributions do operate in the evaluation of political candidates. Contrary to expectations, however, no antiblack affect was found to be at work in the evaluation of the black candidate. Findings are discussed in the framework of contemporary assumptions of research on racial reasoning.

FACT OR ARTIFACT REVISITED: Survey Instrument Effects and Pocketbook Politics

Abstract: Sears and Lau (1983) presented evidence that apparent self-interest effects can be, and have been, generated in political surveys by question order artifacts. This evidence was based in part on a tabulation of published reports of self-interest effects in the NES series, specifically on the political effects of personal financial situation. From another analysis of the NES data, Lewis-Beck (1985) concluded, to the contrary, that personal finances have in fact had a consistent effect on voting preferences, without significant contamination from such artifacts. We here argue that his analysis inappropriately defines the conditions for possible contamination. We first lay out a theory of when such contamination effects might occur. We then repeat our analysis, taking into consideration both his observations and our own reappraisal of our procedures. We obtain results consistent with our original position, although the results are confounded by different types of questions appearing disproportionately in contaminated and uncontaminated conditions. However, the 1984 election appears to be a special case, in which self-interest effects were strong and relatively uncontaminated. We then report a split ballot experiment that is not confounded by item content, and find results consistent with our original position. However this methodological debate may be resolved, on the larger question of whether people's economic self-interest has major political implications, the evidence seems clear. In cases not contaminated by item order, which we would take to be the most appropriate test of self-interest effects, personal finances have on the average had only a small effect on political responses.

Determinants of coattail voting

Abstract: Recent studies have demonstrated the continuing importance of presidential coattails for U.S. House elections, but little is known regarding what factors increase or decrease the individual tendency toward coattail voting. Several possible determinants of coattail voting are examined in this paper. Analysis of data from the 1984 South Bend Study reveals that the magnitude of presidential coattails is affected by the strength of evaluations of the presidential candidates, the voter's sensitivity to the local political scene, and the political climate of the voter's neighborhood. Interest in the 1984 campaign was not found to influence coattail voting.

Political information, social environments, and deviants

Abstract: This research explores whether an individual's information about politics is influenced by the political environment in which the person is located. It seeks to determine whether and how the political environment influences one's attention to and retention of political information.

Parallel event sequences in international crises

Abstract: This study presents a theory of foreign policy decision-making based on event structures that would account for the ability of foreign policy experts to make short-term predictions in the presence of incomplete information and noise. An algorithm is devised that constructs subsequences of events that occur in international crises coded in the Behavioral Correlates of War (BCOW) data set. Four subsets of BCOW crises are considered: nonwar crises, pre-World War I wars, post-World War I wars, and a mixture of nonwar and war crises. About six common subsequences are found in each of the sets; these cover about 35% of the events in the crisis sequences after the sequences have been filtered on the basis of novelty. The subsequences differ substantially between the subsets of crises and exhibit a degree of internal consistency. The subsequences also can be used to differentiate between nonwar and war crises by using the fit of each subsequence to construct a vector characterizing the crisis, then clustering on the basis of those vectors.

Partisan issue preferences and partisan change

Abstract: This paper addresses the relationship between changes in issue preferences and changes in partisanship, and examines the possibility that different types of issues may be associated with different dimensions of partisanship. A discriminant function analysis using the 1972–74–76 CPS Panel reveals that Democrats, Independents, and Republicans are very different from one another in terms of partisan issue preferences on a New Deal and a racial issue. The association between issue preferences and changes in strength among partisans is less stable, but the Democratic identification seems to be more closely aligned with the New Deal and racial issues than the Republican identification. Leaners appear to be more partisan in their issue preferences than weak identifiers are.

Case-based reasoning, legal reasoning, and the study of politics

Abstract: Case-based reasoning (CBR) is an active area of research within artificial intelligence that emphasizes the function of memory in problem-solving. It proceeds from the premise that people cope with new problems or situations by reusing the strategies that have proved effective in similar situations in the past. Rather than deduction or the application of rules, the basic inferential process is that of recognition. Because the reasoning characteristic of politics is largely of this type, we suggest that the concepts and formalisms developed within this branch of artificial intelligence can be usefully applied to the study of political institutions and political behavior. But we argue, critically, that if CBR is to be applied to politics, it must be generalized to accommodate multiple agents who act repeatedly in multiple tasks. We outline what these extensions to CBR would involve, using the history of liability in tort law as a worked example.

Ideas and action: A cognitive model of the Senate Agriculture Committee

Abstract: But while the research is being done, what provisions should be incorporated in the Clean Air Act of 1977 (or the Acts of 1978 through 2000, for that matter)? For research won't give us clear answers then either. What constitutes procedural rationality in such circumstances?