Book•
The People's Choice: How the Voter Makes Up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign
01 Jan 1968-
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss how the voter makes up his mind in a presidential election in the USA, i.e., how the voters make up their mind in the case of the people's choice.
Abstract: Die von Paul F. Lazarsfeld, Bernard Berelson und Hazel Gaudet 1944 veroffentlichte Studie The people’s choice untersucht den Prasidentschaft swahlkampf in den USA 1940. Analysiert wird: „How the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign”. Die Entstehung individueller Wahlentscheidungen und der Einfluss von Informationen verschiedener Quellen, u. a. der Medien wurden mittels eines fur die Zeit revolutionaren Paneldesigns untersucht. Die Studie begrundet einen Meilenstein in der kommunikationswissenschaftlichen Forschung, da sie den Grundstein fur einen Paradigmenwechsel legt, namlich die Abkehr von der Annahme des Publikums als Masse, die den Einflussen der Massenmedien ausgeliefert ist, hin zu den „limited effects“ der Medien. Ausschlaggebend fur diesen Paradigmenwechsel waren drei in The people’s choice vorgestellte Konzepte, die auch heute noch in der Kommunikationswissenschaft diskutiert werden: Die These der selektiven Zuwendung des Publikums zu Medieninhalten, das Konzept der Meinungsfuhrer und die These vom Zweistufenfluss der Kommunikation. In diesem Beitrag werden der Inhalt des Werkes sowie die Kritik daran mit Fokus auf diese drei Konzepte vorgestellt.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the case study method is defined as an intensive study of a single unit with an aim to generalize across a larger set of units, and it is argued that case studies rely on the same sort of covariational evidence utilized in non-case study research.
Abstract: This paper aims to clarify the meaning, and explain the utility, of the case study method, a method often practiced but little understood. A “case study,” I argue, is best defined as an intensive study of a single unit with an aim to generalize across a larger set of units. Case studies rely on the same sort of covariational evidence utilized in non-case study research. Thus, the case study method is correctly understood as a particular way of defining cases, not a way of analyzing cases or a way of modeling causal relations. I show that this understanding of the subject illuminates some of the persistent ambiguities of case study work, ambiguities that are, to some extent, intrinsic to the enterprise. The travails of the case study within the discipline of political science are also rooted in an insufficient appreciation of the methodological tradeoffs that this method calls forth. This paper presents the familiar contrast between case study and non-case study work as a series of characteristic strengths and weaknesses—affinities—rather than as antagonistic approaches to the empirical world. In the end, the perceived hostility between case study and non-case study research is largely unjustified and, perhaps, deserves to be regarded as a misconception. Indeed, the strongest conclusion to arise from this methodological examination concerns the complementarity of single-unit and cross-unit research designs.
2,752 citations
Cites background from "The People's Choice: How the Voter ..."
...I show that this understanding of the subject illuminates some of the persistent ambiguities of case study work, ambiguities that are, to some extent, intrinsic to the enterprise....
[...]
...At the same time, the discipline continues to produce a vast number of case studies, many of which have entered the pantheon of classic works (Allen 1965; Allison 1971; Dahl 1960; Johnson 1983; Kaufman 1960; Lazarsfeld, Berelson, and Gaudet 1948; Lijphart 1968; Pressman and Wildavsky 1973)....
[...]
TL;DR: A recent special issue of the Journal of Communication is devoted to theoretical explanations of news framing, agenda setting, and priming effects as mentioned in this paper, which examines if and how the three models are related and what potential relationships between them tell theorists and researchers about the effects of mass media.
Abstract: This special issue of Journal of Communication is devoted to theoretical explanations of news framing, agenda setting, and priming effects. It examines if and how the three models are related and what potential relationships between them tell theorists and researchers about the effects of mass media. As an introduction to this effort, this essay provides a very brief review of the three effects and their roots in media-effects research. Based on this overview, we highlight a few key dimensions along which one can compare, framing, agenda setting, and priming. We conclude with a description of the contexts within which the three models operate, and the broader implications that these conceptual distinctions have for the growth of our discipline. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00326.x In 1997, Republican pollster Frank Luntz sent out a 222-page memo called ‘‘Language of the 21st century’’ to select members of the U.S. Congress. Parts of the memo soon spread among staffers, members of Congress, and also journalists. Luntz’s message was simple: ‘‘It’s not what you say, it’s how you say it’’ (Luntz, in press). Drawing on various techniques for real-time message testing and focus grouping, Frank Luntz had researched Republican campaign messages and distilled terms and phrases that resonated with specific interpretive schemas among audiences and therefore helped shift people’s attitudes. In other words, the effect of the messages was not a function of content differences but of differences in the modes of presentation. The ideas outlined in the memo were hardly new, of course, and drew on decades of existing research in sociology (Goffman, 1974), economics (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979), psychology (Kahneman & Tversky, 1984), cognitive linguistics (Lakoff, 2004), and communication (Entman, 1991; Iyengar, 1991). But Frank Luntz was the first professional pollster to systematically use the concept of framing as a campaign tool. The Democratic Party soon followed and George Lakoff published Don’t Think of an
2,365 citations
TL;DR: The authors examined the influence of influential individuals in the formation of public opinion and found that large cascades of influence are driven not by influential individuals but by a critical mass of easily influenced individuals.
Abstract: A central idea in marketing and diffusion research is that influentials—a minority of individuals who influence an exceptional number of their peers—are important to the formation of public opinion. Here we examine this idea, which we call the “influentials hypothesis,” using a series of computer simulations of interpersonal influence processes. Under most conditions that we consider, we find that large cascades of influence are driven not by influentials but by a critical mass of easily influenced individuals. Although our results do not exclude the possibility that influentials can be important, they suggest that the influentials hypothesis requires more careful specification and testing than it has received.
1,842 citations
Cites background from "The People's Choice: How the Voter ..."
...0093-5301/2007/3404-0002$10.00...
[...]
...In the 1940s and 1950s, Paul Lazarsfeld, Elihu Katz, andcolleagues (Katz and Lazarsfeld 1955; Lazarsfeld, Berelson, and Gaudet 1968) formulated a breakthrough theory of public opinion formation that sought to reconcile the role of media influence with the growing realization that, in a variety of…...
[...]
TL;DR: For more than two decades political scientists have discussed rising elite polarization in the United States, but the study of mass polarization did not receive comparable attention until fairly recently as mentioned in this paper, concluding that much of the evidence presented problems of inference that render conclusions problematic.
Abstract: For more than two decades political scientists have discussed rising elite polarization in the United States, but the study of mass polarization did not receive comparable attention until fairly recently. This article surveys the literature on mass polarization. It begins with a discussion of the concept of polarization, then moves to a critical consideration of different kinds of evidence that have been used to study polarization, concluding that much of the evidence presents problems of inference that render conclusions problematic. The most direct evidence—citizens' positions on public policy issues—shows little or no indication of increased mass polarization over the past two to three decades. Party sorting—an increased correlation between policy views and partisan identification—clearly has occurred, although the extent has sometimes been exaggerated. Geographic polarization—the hypothesized tendency of like-minded people to cluster together—remains an open question. To date, there is no conclusive e...
1,233 citations
Cites background from "The People's Choice: How the Voter ..."
...The relevance of these findings to mass polarization becomes clearer when they are translated into the older social science terminology of cross-cutting cleavages and crosspressures (Lazarsfeld et al. 1944, Lipset & Rokkan 1967)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that the optimal strategy for risk-averse candidates will be to promise redistributions first and foremost to their reelection constituency and thereby to maintain existing political coalitions.
Abstract: Spatial models of electoral competition typically simplify the analysis by ignoring the question of internal constituency politics: constituencies are modeled simply as a distribution of ideal points along a set of issue dimensions. Matters related to the stability of divergent electoral coalitions have rarely been addressed. We explicitly take into account how differential rates of support by various groups in a constituency will influence candidates' campaign promises and the likelihood that stable electoral coalitions will be forged. Viewing campaign platforms as promised redistributions of welfare, we argue that the optimal strategy for risk-averse candidates will be to promise redistributions first and foremost to their reelection constituency and thereby to maintain existing political coalitions. We use evidence from the urban services literature to support our propositions.
1,117 citations
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1962
TL;DR: A history of diffusion research can be found in this paper, where the authors present a glossary of developments in the field of Diffusion research and discuss the consequences of these developments.
Abstract: Contents Preface CHAPTER 1. ELEMENTS OF DIFFUSION CHAPTER 2. A HISTORY OF DIFFUSION RESEARCH CHAPTER 3. CONTRIBUTIONS AND CRITICISMS OF DIFFUSION RESEARCH CHAPTER 4. THE GENERATION OF INNOVATIONS CHAPTER 5. THE INNOVATION-DECISION PROCESS CHAPTER 6. ATTRIBUTES OF INNOVATIONS AND THEIR RATE OF ADOPTION CHAPTER 7. INNOVATIVENESS AND ADOPTER CATEGORIES CHAPTER 8. DIFFUSION NETWORKS CHAPTER 9. THE CHANGE AGENT CHAPTER 10. INNOVATION IN ORGANIZATIONS CHAPTER 11. CONSEQUENCES OF INNOVATIONS Glossary Bibliography Name Index Subject Index
38,750 citations
1,820 citations
01 Jan 2008
TL;DR: It is shown here how the media agenda-Setting in the Presidential Election and media perceptions of the election have changed over the years have changed since the 1980s.
Abstract: $ % ˘ ) ˘* ) $ ˘ : ++ ˘ ˘ * ) [˝ ˘] / . =. ˘ // ˜ . – 2003. – ! 3.10. Media Agenda-Setting in the Presidential Election [ ˘] / M. McCombs, Ch. Eyal, D. Graber,D. Weaver. – N.Y., 1981.11. % ˘ [˝ ˘] / . >. >. ˇ ˘%, <. . # ˙ [ .]. –., 2006.12.
1,707 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1954
TL;DR: The famous "Elmira study" as mentioned in this paper examines the factors that make people vote the way they do, including social class, religious background, family loyalties, on-the-job relationships, local pressure groups, mass communication media, and other factors.
Abstract: "Voting" is an examination of the factors that make people vote the way they do. Based on the famous Elmira Study, carried out by a team of skilled social scientists during the 1948 presidential campaign, it shows how voting is affected by social class, religious background, family loyalties, on-the-job relationships, local pressure groups, mass communication media, and other factors. Still highly relevant, "Voting" is one of the most frequently cited books in the field of voting behavior.
1,703 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1960
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss the effects of mass communication on social and psychological effects of media content, and propose a primitive theoretical scheme which is further discussed at various other explicitly labeled places in the book.
Abstract: PrefaceNATURE OF THE BOOK This book attempts to collate and integrate thenfindings of published research, and some provocative conjecture,nregarding certain social and psychological effects of mass communicationMore specifically, the book is concerned with two major areasnof such effect Part I deals with mass communication as an agentnof persuasion and attempts to cite its known capabilities and limitationsnin that regard Part II deals with the effects of specific kindsnof media content which have been alleged to produce socially andnpsychologically important consequences An introductory chapter,nwhich is largely subjective, discusses the current state ofnknowledge of the effects of mass communication in general andnproposes a primitive theoretical scheme which is further discussed at various other explicitly labeled places in the book andnin the conclusion Except for the introduction and conclusion,nthe entire work is primarily a collection of the findings of othersThe book at times draws heavily upon an earlier work by thensame author (Klapper, 1949) The present volume, however, isnby no means a mere up-dating of the earlier one It differs from thenearlier work in its inclusion and discussion of the proposed theoreticalnscheme, in its far greater concern with extra-communicationnconditions which influence the effect of communications, and innthe areas of effect which are discussed Of the five topics discussednin the earlier volume, three have been retained and two of thesenare treated in much greater detail, and two have been omittednThree topics not treated in the earlier volume are here accordedna chapter eachLITERATURE SURVEYEDThe source material for this book consisted mainly of the vastnarray of learned and semi-leamed journals and of relevant booksnTraditional techniques of library research were employed in cullingnthis literature Journals of abstracts, bibliographies, and worksnknown to the author were used as starting points; the works citedncontained bibliographies and references which led to additionalnmaterial; and this snowballing was continued until the returnsnbecame so slight that it was clearly unprofitable to continueThis process led to the identification and investigation of overn1000 studies, essays, and reports More than 270 of these, which contributedndirectly to the present volume, are cited in the bibliographynThe others were found to be either wholly irrelevant tonthe topics of the book, to be so methodologically culpable as to benuseless, or, in some cases, to provide only one more confirmationnof some highly specific finding or point of view that had beennwidely confirmed or better expressed in other cited worksThe primary object of the literature search was to locate allnpublished reports of disciplined social research dealing with effectsno f mass communication in certain specific areas However, several unpublished works have found their way into the text and thenbibliography These include occasional doctoral dissertationsnwhich have attained some recognition outside the departments innwhich they were written, and several reports issued in unpublishednform by academic, commercial, and government agenciesnNo attempt has been made, however, exhaustively to explore suchnsources of unpublished material; the almost limitless volume, thenfrequently privileged status, and, above all, the sheer difficulty ofntracking down and obtaining these little-known works renderednany attempt at exhaustive examination beyond the budgetary andnphysical capabilities of the present study The value to the researchn fraternity of a central clearing house or information centernfor such materials has often been noted; unless and until the conceptnis somehow implemented, knowledge of the materials, andnthus their potential usefulness, will remain severely limitednIt must also be noted that a considerable number of the citednworks are not reports of research at all, but rather present thenconsidered conjecture of reputable and acute thinkers In addition,narticles from popular sources (eg, Parents Magazine) arenoccasionally cited as evidence of popular concern about particularneffects of the mediaFinally, and perhaps most importantly, a considerable numbernof the cited research studies do not deal with mass communicationsnper se, but with laboratory approximations thereof or with somenform of interpersonal communication; they have been included asnsource material because their findings appear to be at least hypotheticallynapplicable to mass communication as welln n n n n n
1,578 citations