Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
160 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Class 10: subjectivity & judgment
|
The analysis and interpretation of poll data entail a high degree of subjectivity and judgment. Subjectivity in this context does not mean deliberate bias or distortion but simply professional judgments about the importance of relevance of information.-Asher 205
|
|
|
Selectivity
|
*can't report all, so you're "selective" (30+ q's too much detail)
*in typical survey, each issue represented by multiple surveys *researcher must make choices in design and interpretation!! |
|
|
Researcher must make choices in design and interpretation!!
|
-which q's are most important?
-how to combine responses to a single questions with multiple gradations -whether/how to combine responses from multiple q's to give an overall impression on a topic (story line) -what subgroups are relevant? |
|
|
Independent Variables
|
*variable that stands alone & isn't changed by other variables
*causes a change in dependent variable, or "comes first" *banners in our crosstabs(go back and look at this!) *Ex's: age, gender, political awareness/knowledge, number of hours spent online, party id |
|
|
Dependent Variables
|
*variable that depends on, or is changed by, other factors
*stubs in our crosstabs----? *Ex's: support for a policy, favorability rating of a candidate, likelihood of buying a product |
|
|
Relationship between Independent and Dependent Variables: Cheater Sentence
|
=Independent Variable causes a change in Dependent Variable and it isn't possible that Dependent Variable could cause a change in Independent Variable
*i.e. "Test Score causes a change in Final Grade and it isn't possible that Final Grade could cause a change in Test Score. |
|
|
IV &DV's
|
*a single variable can be independent or dependent in different circumstances
*sometimes it is not clear which "comes first" (i.e. support a policy because a candidate you support supports that policy? OR... support a candidate because the candidate supports a policy you support?" |
|
|
Class 10--slide 13
|
---
|
|
|
Measures of Central Tendency
|
*most representative figure(s): average (mean, or mode or media), largest/majority figure, and fact that there is no central tendency
(check out class 10 slides) |
|
|
Measures of Dispersion
|
-spread (or lack of spread) of the data
-intensity |
|
|
Relationship between questions
|
-connecting one question to another
-relative responses -building a case/argument -variations by subgroup/exceptions to the pattern... |
|
|
Margin of Error*
|
-larger the sample, smaller the margin of error (but not a linear relationship!)
-beyond 2,000 or 3,000 limited returns -often given as a single +/- figure for a whole poll. -in reality, that m.o.e. figure is for results that are: 1-at or near 50% 2-based on whole sample 3-based on 95% confidence interval -in general, farther away from 50%, smaller the margin of error (check out slides, and practice for learning...) |
|
|
Statistical Significance
|
-use side B of cheat sheet
-for trend data: big simplification can use for differences in lists, guideline more than a true assessment, real comparison more complicated -within a question: good for eyeballing, -list of issues; divorce, gay marriage |
|
|
Substantive Significance
|
-statistical significance doesn't always mean substantive significance
|
|
|
Class 8
|
Polling Presentation: The US & World---Jason Boxt
|
|
|
Sources of political beliefs
|
-kinder: fragmented, narrow, and diverse & pluralistic roots of political beliefs-->Personality, Inferences from History, G---, Self-Interest, Values (PIGSV!)
|
|
|
What does self interest mean/not mean
|
-does mean: increase opportunity to get what you want (for yourself & family)
-doesn't mean: full information or rationality, information and knowledge matter, short term vs. long term (im confused!) -self interest only slightly impacts how people think about politics (i.e. race policies, bussing in 1974 to schools--widely shared norms, racial hostility) |
|
|
Authors for post-midterm
|
*Brader-Responsive Chord (How political ads motivate and persuade voters by appealing to emotions)
*Begley:Red Brain, Blue Brain *Kinder:Exploring the Racial Divide *Kinder & Sanders: * |
|
|
Green & Cowden
|
*self-interest affects behavior
*"Self-interest makes a much stronger showing when the dv is political behavior rather than public opinion." *think about mortgage deductions as something where your values and self-interests collide |
|
|
Bartels' Estate Tax
|
*he uses this as an ex. of peoples' policy preference being disconnected from not just self-interest, but also ideology and information
???? |
|
|
Self-Interest: When Does it Count?
|
*substantial benefits or harms
*benefits or harms well-publicized *benefits and harms clear and certain *claim is seen as legitimate and fair *Ex's: cigarette tax |
|
|
Self Interest Highlights
|
*much less influence on p.o than you would think
*often trumped by values or other factors *info or (lack of info) plays a role *does impact in cases where benefits or harms are substantial, known, clear, and justifiable |
|
|
Brader-Role of Emotion
|
*gap between practice and knowledge in political communication
*scholarly work suggests reason and emotion not necessarily in competition *Emotion can motivate reason (affective intelligence) |
|
|
Emotional Appeals (Brader)
|
*communications intended to elicit an emotional response
*2 categories: fear & enthusiasm |
|
|
Brader's Study
|
*Brader tests predictions about ad effects based on what we know about emotion
*two parallel experiments conducted during an actual election: 1)evaluates enthusiasm based on emotional cues, enhancing positive messages 2)evaluates impact of fear or threat cues added to negative messages *Brader operationalizes "emotional appeal" as being ground in 2 easily manipulated nonverbal formal elements: 1.music/audio and 2.---- |
|
|
Brader study: changes in 3 types of political behavior (MVP)
|
1-motivation to get involved
2-vigilance (recall or attentiveness to the ad) 3-persuasion |
|
|
Enthusiasm Appeals
|
characteristics: warm images, uplifting music
effect: motivational, inspires viewer to get involved & act on existing loyalties Ex: Morning in America (1984-Reagan) |
|
|
Fear Appeals
|
characteristics: evokes visceral (deep) fears, ominous music
effect: provokes viewer to seek out new information &reconsider choices, redirects attention of viewer, persuades unbelievers Greatest persuasive power&effect: Diminishing opponents' base of support! Ex: Lyndon Johnson 1964 Daisy Girl Ad |
|
|
Brader Findings
|
*Political ads can change the way citizens get involved and make choices simply by using---
*emotions can be central to whether and how campaign ads work *Brader argues that emotional appeals can promote "democratically desirable" behavior *Questions?? (look back at slides..) |
|
|
Enthusiasm Summary
|
*greatly improved motivation--both interest & intention to vote
*no/negative impact on vigilance *persuasion activated existing loyalties *increases fidelity to prior preferences |
|
|
Fear Summary
|
*no significant change in motivation
*stimulates vigilance *facilitates persuasion--perhaps change in candidate choice? *effective in triggering reevaluation |
|
|
Class 11
|
Media Effects on Public Opinion
|
|
|
Zaller's Model of Opinion Formation
|
*rejects "file drawer" model of po
*R.A.S. model which shows: 1)How citizens learn about matters/issues that are for most part beyond their direct experience 2)how they convert that info into "opinion statements" |
|
|
Zaller's R.A.S. (Receive, Accept, Sample) Model!
|
1. Receive new information (reception axiom)
2. Decide whether to accept it (resistance axiom) 3. Sample from information that is salient at the moment to answer a survey question (accessibility & response axioms) *This is NOT a literal, conscious process |
|
|
What are Zaller's 4 axioms?
|
3R's and Acc
Reception, Resistance, Response, and Accessibility (check out her slide about opinion formation in class 11) |
|
|
Micro implications (RAS model)
|
individual opinion shaped by salient considerations
|
|
|
Macro implications (RAS model)
|
mass opinion is shaped by political communication, which is mostly elite discourse and media coverage
*content of elite discourse influences which considerations comes to mind, and thus, what mass opinion is! |
|
|
Mainstream Effects (of elite communication on mass attitudes)
|
*When political elites agree on an issue, people receive one message and tend to agree with this position (esp. those with greater political awareness)
*Ex: Nixon Ad |
|
|
Polarization Effects (of elite communication on mass attitudes)
|
*When political elites disagree on an issue, public opinion tends to be polarized (esp. those with greater political awareness, whose attitudes will coincide with existing predispositions, especially when the elite disagreement falls along party or ideological lines
*Ex: The Vietnam War--1964 vs. 1970 |
|
|
Before Iyengar & Kinder: Hypodermic Model
|
*Early-mid 1900s
*Media can control citizens *Assumes media is extremely powerful *citizens are not sophisticated enough to ward off media messages *solid evidence never found for this model (in academia) |
|
|
Before Iyengar & Kinder: Minimal Effects Model
|
*Mid 1900s
*media have minimal effects because citizens have pre-existing attitudes and predisposition filter media *Lazarfeld et. al. 1940 election (Reinforcement effects-reinforces existing decisions among those who've picked a candidate, activation effects-if undecided, made you pay attention, though generally to things that represented you p.o.v., conversion effects-found little evidence of this) *2-step flow of communication: media-->opinion leaders-->others |
|
|
Current Model: Subtle Effects Model
|
*For a long time no one studied media effects, then...agenda setting, priming, came along
*McCombs & Shaw research about 1968 presidential election--found: media coverage of campaign, what voters said (in surveys) were key issues *Concluded that media set the agenda by establishing which campaign issues are considered important in the minds of voters Issue--Causation vs. Correlation |
|
|
News that Matters: Iyengar & Kinder (1987)
|
*highly influential
*previous works suggested TV news failed to inform and persuade, too visual and too brief to convey info *But, authors argue, "TV news is news that matters." |
|
|
TV News Matters
|
*shapes the American public's conception of political life in pervasive ways
*2 key questions: 1) Do the problems that receive prominent attention on television news become the problems the viewing public regards as the nation's most important? (Agenda setting!) and... 2)By calling attention to some matters while ignoring others, does tv news influence the standards by which viewers judge gov.'ts, presidents, policies, and candidates for office? (priming!)--does the news "prime" audiences to use certain standards for evaluation? |
|
|
More on news that matters
|
---
|
|
|
Sequential experiments
|
*participants viewed 30min newscast every day over course of a week
*researchers altered newscasts so they varied in amount and nature of coverage *participants didn't watch evening news at home during experiment *Did what they watch impact what they viewed as most pressing national problems? |
|
|
Overview of Sequential Experiment
|
*completed a questionnaire before/after viewing week, which rated national problems 4 ways: importance of problem, personal concern, extent to which each problem deserved gov.'t attention, frequency with which they talked about it
|
|
|
Assemblage experiments
|
*Procedure:
|
|
|
Results of Agenda-Setting
|
---
|
|
|
Results of Priming
|
---
|
|
|
Questions possibly on final
|
*How convincing is Iyengar and Kinder's work?
*Do Zaller's theory and Iyengar and Kinder's finding reinforce each other? Contradict each other? How so? |
|
|
Class 12
|
Public Opinion, Campaigns and Elections
|
|
|
Zaller's model: Communication from elites & mass media is the major thing that impacts...
|
...mass opinion!
Setup: tri-level, 2-5% political sophisticates, 75% mass middle (not uniform) and 25% clueless |
|
|
Zaller's thoughts on Elite communication on mass atttitudes
|
*as awareness increases, so does adherence to the "party line"---that is the political messages coming from elites
*echoes Converse's view of belief systems in mass public, and RAS model explains this |
|
|
Cohen (1963): Media Effects
|
"The mass media may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but the media is stunningly successful in telling their audience what to think about."---->which leads us to framing!
|
|
|
Framing
|
Gamson's definition: A media frame is "a central organizing idea of story line that provides meaning to an unfolding strip of events...The frame suggests what the controversy is about, the essence of the issue."
(Entman-GWU prof-also has definition) |
|
|
Framing Effects
|
*Frames have consequences for opinion by highlighting certain explanations or certain aspects of a policy can lead individuals to predictable conclusions about the policy.
*Ex's: affirmative action (diversity as a social good), juvenile delinquency(bad parenting), and abortion rights (women's rights) |
|
|
Framing & Campaigns
|
*Framing campaigns as being about strategy and the "horse race" vs. Issue positions.--->this activates cynicism & less useful learning
|
|
|
Even more about Framing!
|
*inevitable in news coverage, political communication, consumption...and polls
*reporters need to make an event understandable, to give viewers or readers a way to understand events *politicians want their frames to be used *people have their own frames *in surveys--context/details necessary info |
|
|
Dilliplane Hypotheses
|
*Impacts of media with more--and more partisan--choices on deliberative democracy
*Q: Does news environment challenge deliberative democracy? *Dual Hypotheses: 1) Greater exposure to like-minded TV news programs energizes people re: campaign activity, time of vote decision, turnout 2)Greater exposure to TV news programs of the opposite political persuasion enervates people re: campaign activity, time of vote decision, turnout |
|
|
Deliberative Democracy
|
a form of democracy in which deliberation is central to legitimate lawmaking. It adopts elements of both consensus decision-making and majority rule. Deliberative democracy differs from traditional democratic theory in that authentic deliberation, not mere voting, is the primary source of a law's legitimacy
|
|
|
Dilliplane DV's & IV's
|
*Dependent Variables: political participation, time of vote decision, turnout
*Independent Variables: regularly watched 45 news programs, coding based on a separate survey |
|
|
Dilliplane Methodology I
|
*Panel Survey Data: same ppl interview 5 times
*advantage: real change (no contaminated variation) *disadvantages: expense, external validity, can't prove causation |
|
|
Dilliplane Methodology II
|
*Online surveys
*Advantages: fast, cheap, interactive, reflects how a lot of people receive & share info *Disadvantages: most not probability sample(opt-in instead), harder to control participation, internet use and access not uniform *Both pro/con: remove the interviewer *He recruited people, and supplied them with computer, tv, web access (who didn't have it) |
|
|
Dilliplane Methodology II
|
*Limited to partisan
*TV News *Can't prove cause |
|
|
Dilliplane Results
|
*People tend to watch more like-minded than conflicting news. Highest proportion is neutral
*Greater exposure to like-minded TV news programs energizes people *Greater exposure to TV news programs of the opposite political persuasion enervates(weakens) people *Campaign activities, timing of vote decision, turnout <---none of these effects are huge... |
|
|
Dilliplane Implications
|
*Positive
*Enervating effects of conflicting news didn't decrease voter turnout *Impact of neutral news may contribute to partisans hearing different views, and there's some evidence it mobilizes them *Partisans being enthusiastic about like-minded news: 1)Good for participatory democracy 2) Less likely to have reaped the benefits of exposure to diverse views |
|
|
More q's
|
*Do you think agenda-setting, priming, and framing still happen?
*If so, do they work differently in the current news environment with many more news sources and more partisan news sources? |
|
|
Surveys (and other kinds of public opinion research) are omnipresent in...
|
...elections!
*Polls done/sponsored by the media to supplement (form the basis of) their campaign and election coverage *horse race coverage-cynicism *Polls done by parties, groups, and candidates *inform campaigns, promotion |
|
|
Do Preelection Poll Results impact Election Results?
|
*Jury is still out...
*Some believe in bandwagon, underdog, etc. *Some effect, but small *Indirect effects: fundraising, media coverage, campaign volunteers |
|
|
Do Campaigns Affect General Elections?
|
*3 views: Journalists-yes!, campaign/advertising ppl-yes!, political scientist-maybe not so much
|
|
|
So Why Do political scientists think campaigns might not affect general elections?
|
*Lazarfeld Election of 1940: explored how campaigns affect, little impact,movement based on interpersonal conversation,not media
|
|
|
So Why Do political scientists think campaigns might not affect general elections?
|
*Forecasting models: mostly successful, cons-not always accurrate, campaigns use of the fundamentals matters, maybe they matter...but campaign/economy cancel each other out
*Effects at the margins-among true undecided and swing voters in close elections *Patterson: game schema-->policy schema=cynicism |
|
|
Do campaigns(or media coverage of them)affect primary campaigns and elections?
|
*Primary coverage focuses even more heavily on horse race
*Campaign matters a lot, impact vote choices: lots of candidates(complicated meda environment), can't rely on party id, citizens are less anchored |
|
|
Bartels says campaigns can affect presidential primaries!
|
*He did an extensive examination of the 1984 Democratic Primary
*3 essential elements in understanding how people make choices: 1)uncertainty, 2)political predisposition 3)expectations |
|
|
A closer look at Bartels evidence of uncertainty vs. familiarity
|
*Uncertainty vs. Familiarity-uncertainty+media attention=familiarity
*Three types of candidate: 1)celebrated and well-known (romney) 2)lost (shoutout to cain) 3) emergent (gingrich--holla!) |
|
|
A closer look at Bartels evidence of political predispositions
|
*when uncertainty down, importance of predispositions ^ up!
|
|
|
A closer look at Bartels evidence of Expectations
|
*likelihood that this candidate will win the nomination
*media vs. individual expectations: media expect-->indiv. expect. *know simply that winner gets more coverage, surprises count (FL recount in 2004) *can feed on itself |
|
|
A closer look at Bartels evidence of expectations & uncertainty
|
*Expectations can still be impacted by predispositions even with greater certainty.
|
|
|
Class 13
|
Public Opinion & Policy
|
|
|
How is public opinion research omnipresent in campaigns?
|
*Surveys (and other kinds of po research) are omnipresent in elections
*Polls done/sponsored by: media, parties, interest groups, candidates |
|
|
Bartels 1988 presidential primaries and the dynamics of public choice
|
*uncertainty is v, importance of predisposition ^.
*uncertainty is v, importance of expectations ^. *Expectations <-->Predispositions |
|
|
"The open interplay of opinion and policy is the distinguishing mark of popular rule."
|
V.O. Key Jr.--Public Opinion and American Democracy
|
|
|
Public Opinion and Policymaking: Two Issues
|
1. Normative
2. Empirical Public Opinion, Glynn, "Considerable evidence that although the public doesn't always rule, it is often able to move--or maintain--government policies in desired directions." |
|
|
PO and Policymaking: Evidence from Scholars
|
*Evidence from a variety of studies show that policy does tend to reflect majority public opinion
*Monroe-consistency *Page and Shapiro-congruence |
|
|
Policymaking & PO--is the relationship increasingly dynamic and responsive?
|
*Most evidence says yes
*Some says no, perhaps due to polarization |
|
|
To what extend should policy makers follow public preference?
|
* It depends.
*i.e. Delegates/Trustees, Democratic Competence *Americans themselves are divided about this---does this make a difference? *What if the public is "misinformed"? |
|
|
Two Issues Summary
|
1. Normative-the debate continues
2. Empirical-Public Opinion does Impact Policy |
|
|
Stimson's view of Public Opinion
|
"We have seen a public opinion that responds smoothly and predictable to public events. And what is predictable is also appropriate."---Is stimson right? Professor Loge says no, po isn't predictable
|
|
|
Stimson-Politics at the Margin
|
*PO moves based on changes among a small minority of the public---"the margin"
*A small, but key portion of public accounts for the fact that public opinion is responsive *Opinion moves intelligently in response to most important facts |
|
|
Stimson: 3 types of citizens
|
*The passionate-1/3
*The scorekeepers-1/3 *The uninvolved-1/3 |
|
|
Scorekeepers
|
*reasonable attentive
*non-ideological *outcome>means *persuadable *The movement is in this group. Scorekeepers account for virtually all the change |
|
|
Change at "the margin" reflects the behavior of the part of the electorate that...
|
*Paying enough attention to respond
*Not so involved as to be committed always to one side |
|
|
Seven domestic policy domains related to size and power of government (def on final!)
*The Crew |
1. Taxes
2. Health Care 3. Education 4. Cities 5. Race 6. Environment 7. Welfare |
|
|
Stimson: Cyclical
|
*Cycle: "American public opinion systematically moves contrary to the direction of the party in the White House."
*Why: Push to the middle |
|
|
Stimson: Issue Bundles, Alignment, and Evolution
|
*Issues tend to "go together" and line up on the lib/cons spectrum
*But some bundles don't make sense or fit on the spectrum--i.e. Union rights and support for gay marriage, small gov.'t and tax cuts, etc. *When major cross-cutting issues emerge, period of evolution (or realignment)--Ex's: race, women's rights |
|
|
Stimson: "Why is it so many conservatives want bigger government?"
|
*Many Americans are symbolically conservative put operationally liberal. Conflicted conservatives--
*Why? Conservative has positive connotations and liberal has negative connotations *So? Republicans (Conservatives) should stay symbolic and Democrats (liberals) should get specific |
|
|
Class 9
|
Group Identification
|
|
|
Pluralistic Roots of Political Beliefs
PIGSVE* |
1. Personality
2. Inference from History 3. Group Identification 4. Self interest (more important to behavior) 5. Values/principles--enduring standards 6. Emotion (can be manipulated) |
|
|
How might social groups matter?
|
"Even people who aren't members of a group may be influenced by the position the group takes in politics. Groups become reference points for formation of attitudes and decisions about behavior."-The American Voter
|
|
|
How/when might social groups matter?
|
1. Beyond membership, identification
*Identify more strongly than other groups you may belong to 2. Proximity between group and world of politics *Groups trying to establish norms and standards for individuals to think about politics may conflict with values |
|
|
What social groups might matter?
(CRER)* |
1. Class
2. Race 3. Ethnicity 4. Religion |
|
|
Class (social groups)
|
*Income? Wealth? Occupation?
*Some theoretical and empirical support for this claim *Political Theory: Marx ---Elections as the democratic expression of class struggle ---Some limited empirical support on issues regarding redistribution of wealth However; class identity, not income interest and/or knowledge about politics comparatively modest declining *Why the weakness? *Class-self interest *"Classless society" |
|
|
Race
|
*always real attitudes, not nonattitudes
*Kinder and Sanders *Gov.'t ensures equal opportunity between blacks and whites *Role of Fed in providing assistance to blacks *Affirmative action (i.e. hiring and promotion) |
|
|
Kinders and Sanders on Race
|
*Differences also exist on matters of "implicit racial policy"
*Few more things to note: "A divide without peer", race of interviewer matters, no difference among elites/influentials |
|
|
Race--Why?(Kinder and Sanders)
|
*Different scripts/frame
*Different values: equality vs. limited gov.'t and individualism *Different for blacks and whites ---Black opinions are compact, uniform(even with increasing affluence) & white opinions are divided |
|
|
RACE is the salient feature (Dawson)
|
reasons:
*Ascriptive feature of race still determines life chances *Segregation reinforced community *Ready-made standard for comparison |
|
|
White Public Opinion
|
*Variety
*Kinder & Sanders--"Racial Resentment" index or scale *Sea change: old-fashioned racism to racial resentment *Historical argument |
|
|
In Group/Out Group
|
*Group solidarity racial in group (index of closeness 0 to 1)
*Attitudes to out group (racial resentment scale) *In group-Blacks more likely to choose own race in terms of closeness metric *Out group-large differences on racial resentment, whites more affected by this |
|
|
Does a Black President=
|
*post-racial society?
*better racial relations? *increased racial divisiveness? |
|
|
Is the Obama Presidency Post-Racial? (Tesler & Sears)
|
*Hypothesis: Partisan politics could become increasingly organized by racial and ethnocentric attitudes during Obama's presidency
*More likely that Obama (like black mayors) has been judged by record in office than race |
|
|
Tesler & Sears
|
*First year in office, Obama didn't take on racial issues
*still, many Republicans & whites thought his policies favored blacks *That thought could be a...consideration? --->That is, a race-infused informational environment once he took office *Ex's: Gates & the beer summit, jimmy carter's comment after "you lie"-->"I think much of the animosity towards Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man." (Carter) |
|
|
Findings from Tesler & Sears
|
*Race has been a factor in Obama's presidency
*Obama's early presidential job approval ratings were influenced considerably more by racial attitudes than was the case for previous presidents *No evidence of deracialization *"We may well be headed into another one of America's periodic hyper-racial eras." |
|
|
Tesler & Sears Vocab
|
1. Racialization
2. Racial Resentment 3. Racial Predisposition 4. Accessibility |
|
|
Ethnicity
|
*Hispanics largest minority group
*Immigration has the biggest issues, language also a little... *In-group id not as strong as blacks' *immigration issues divide among hispanics *less scholarship |
|
|
Religion
|
*Two gaps: religious affiliation & religious attendance
*strong predictor of vote (and social issues) |
|
|
Class 14
|
Last Class: Public Opinion & Policy--->What does It all mean?
|
|
|
Stimson
|
"Public Opinion is predictable and orderly."
|
|
|
Political Socialization Definition
|
*The process by which children and adults learn political attitudes, beliefs and behaviors that are accepted in their culture.
*Process by which people acquire relatively enduring orientations toward politics in general and toward their own particular political system |
|
|
Political Socialization Agents
|
*Parents/Family-powerful,but not as powerful as originally thought...
*Political Events *Life-cycle *Schools *Peers *Group ID |
|
|
Media Effects: 3rd Person Effect
|
*Davidson-WWII story
*People will tend to overestimate the influence that mass comm. have on the attitudes and behavior of others *Indirect effects, 2-step process *Phenomenon: Candidate Viability & Censorship |
|
|
Main Themes from Pre-Midterm:
Why Study Public Opinion? |
*5 interrelated reasons:
1. In Democratic States, Policy should rest on PO 2. Respect for PO is a safeguard against democracy 3. PO provides clues about culture 4. Po must at times be mobilized 5. PO dictates the bounds of foreign policy 6. Allows citizens to understand what other Americans believe! |
|
|
Pre-Midterm: Enduring Problems of Public Opinion
|
1. Lack of Competence
2. Lack of Resources 3. Tyranny of Majority 4. Domination by Elites 5. Susceptibility to Persuasion |
|
|
Pre-Midterm: Who Is/Are the Public?
|
*Lippman--bi-level--
1. actors 2. spectators *Zaller--tri-level-- 1. Political sophisticates (2-5%) 2. Mass middle (75%) 3. People who can't name VP(35%) *Converse (about ideology) 1. active use of ideological terms (2.5%) 2. near ideologues (10%) 3. everyone else ideological innocent (88%) *Stimson (each group 1/3) 1. Passionate 2. Scorekeepers 3. Uninvolved |
|
|
Zaller: 4 Underlying ideas form basis of Zaller's theory
|
1. Citizens vary in attention and exposure
2. Knowledge is a critical part of reaction formation 3. Citizens don't have fixed attitudes on every issue, rather they construct "opinion statements" on the fly 4. "Salience" is key to polling responses--to the construction of opinion statements (3 & 4 non-attitudes) |
|
|
Zaller-2 issues
|
1. Most people don't have solid opinions
2. Polling is a very imperfect way to get at what opinions they do have |
|
|
Problems with polling
|
1. Response instability over time
2. Response effects 3. Question wording effects |
|
|
Summary (of classes 1 &2)
|
*PO (and the study of PO) is important in a democracy--consent of the governed
*Defining "the public" is easier said than done. It is more accurate to speak of public(s) due to differences in level of attention, interest (overall and to specific issues) *Defining (and measuring) "public opinion" is also easier said than done in terms of what does and should count as public opinion. Can't ever really separate methodology from findings. |
|
|
5 questions journalists/citizens should ask about survey??
|
1.Who paid for the poll?
2. Why was it done? 3. Who did the poll? 4. How was the poll conducted? 5. How many people were interviewed? |
|
|
Class 3&4(Methods of Measuring Public Opinion)
|
*Experiments-Iyenger and Kinder, Lau and Redlawsk
*Content Analysis of Media Coverage *Focus Groups *Surveys |
|
|
Focus Groups
|
*"carefully planned discussions designed to obtain perceptions on a defined are of interest, in a permissive, non-threatening environment"
*loose discussion allows for unexpected, potentially valuable findings |
|
|
Surveys
|
*Probability Sample vs. Non-Probability Sample
*Landlines, Cell&Landline, IVR, Internet, Hybrid *response rates, margin of error |
|
|
Correlation & Causation
|
Correlation-A and B tend to rise and fall together
Causation-A change in "A" causes a change in B. |
|
|
Independent vs. Dependent Variables
|
----????----
|
|
|
Measurement: Reliability & Validity
|
Reliability-would it be repeatable? Would you get the same answer over and over?
Validity-Are you measuring what you want to be measuring? |
|
|
Qualitative vs. Quantitative Methods
|
Qualitative- 1)focus groups, in-depth interviews, 2) inductive process used to formulate theory, 3)text-based
Quantitative-1)surveys, structured interviews, 2)deductive process used to test theories 3)number-based |
|
|
Class 5
|
formation of public opinion
|
|
|
Zaller's File Drawer
|
*he rejects the "file drawer" model of public opinion
*Z's RAS (receive, accept, sample) model breaks down into 2 phenomenon: 1) How citizens learn about matter that are for the most part beyond our direct experience. 2)How citizens convert this information into opinion statements |
|
|
Predispositions (Zaller)
|
*stable, individual level traits(values, attitudes), that may affect individuals' reaction (acceptance, rejection) of political communication
|
|
|
Considerations (Zaller)
|
*any reason that might induce an individual to decide a political issue one way or the other
*carried in elite discourse |
|
|
Persuasive
|
*type of political message
*arguments or images providing a reason for taking a position or point of view; if accepted by an individual they become considerations |
|
|
Cueing
|
*type of political message
*contextual info about the ideological or partisan implications of a persuasive message. *Enables citizens to perceive the relationship between the persuasive message they receive and their political predispositions |
|
|
4 Axioms
|
1. Reception
2. Resistance 3. Response 4. Accessibility |
|
|
1. What do Americans know about politics? 2. What influences them?
|
1. Not much!
2. Education-single best predictor of knowledge, age, affluence, attention & interest |
|
|
Does Knowledge Matter? (2 competing schools of thought about democratic competence)
|
1) Most citizens lack sufficient knowledge to make meaningful choices about policy that represent their true interests
2) Others argue that using information shortcuts, citizens can approximate the requisite levels of knowledge needed to make choices that do represent their interests |
|
|
Heuristics
|
*mental shortcuts used for processing and understanding info-can be used to decide who to vote for or whether to support or oppose a policy
*Ex's: party id, ideology, endorsement by specific groups, viability, candidate appearance |
|
|
How can an uninformed electorate function efficiently?
|
*Collective Opinion Model (Heuristics on Macro Scale)
---crowd more rational than individuals ---assumes that error in individual opinions is random and thus smoothes out in the aggregate |
|
|
Heuristics (why they work!)
|
*Americans don't know a whole lot about politics!
*Research suggest that heuristics help people make appropriate political decisions individually & collectively *although, some theorists question the extent to which heuristics can help.... |
|
|
Ideology
|
*overarching set of beliefs regarding the proper role of government in society, in regulating the economy, and in individuals' lives
|
|
|
So does Ideology play a role?
|
*The Ghost in the Machine
*In "Diversity and Complexity in Public Opinion, Kinder attacks the central questions: 1) What drives public opinion? 2) what if any role does ideology play? |
|
|
Kinder on Ideology
|
*ideological literature is "laced with controversy and contradictions
*he analyzes converse's research to gain better understanding, revises some of it, and proposes a new verdict |
|
|
Converse: Ideological Innocence
|
*a great majority of people DO NOT: 1) adhere to set of beliefs/ideology 2) have a clear grasp of what ideology is
*2-5% ideological term users, 10% near ideologues, 88% ideological innocents |
|
|
Constraint & Converse
|
*the degree to which a particular belief is predictive of another belief
*Farther up the proverbial pyramid, the more tightly constrained *Little relationship between the belief systems of elite and masses in their spheres of influence |
|
|
Look at Converse's Pyramid
|
class 5
|
|
|
Counter Claims to Converse
|
*Nie, Verba and Petrocik-found increase in ideology (1964)
*Conover and Feldman-found relationship between i.d. as liberal or conservative and people's issue positions, but not strong relationship (1981) *Lane-most convincing and persistent critic; says people do have ideologies/opinions. Examines process of political reasoning, different definition of ideology, closer to values (i.e. equality, freedom) |
|
|
Where does Kinder End Up?
|
*Most Americans are ideological innocents--no sophisticated ideological framework
*but they do have political opinions (from across the political spectrum, some true opinions, others nonattitudes) *fragmented, narrow and diverse *pluralistics roots of political beliefs |
|
|
Values & Principles
|
*general and enduring standards
*abstract beliefs about the way the world works/ about right & wrong *there is evidence that values and principles drive policy opinions, though again, not always & not strongly *Equality, Freedom, Individualism Democracy, Capitalism, Limited Gov.'t, Moral Traditionalism |
|
|
Self-Interest
|
*much less influence on public opinion than you would think
*is often trumped by values or other factors *information (or lack of information) plays a role *does impact in cases where benefits or harms are substantial, known, clear and justifiable |
|
|
Emotion
|
*emotional appeals-communications intended to elicit an emotional response for some or all who receive them
*2 major categories of emotional appeals: fear & enthusiasm *cued emotional recall-reporting feelings *changes in 3 types of political behavior: 1) motivation to get involved, 2)vigilance, 3) persuasion |
|
|
Brader Findings Summary
|
Different effects (enthusiasm vs. fear)
Enthusiasm: motivaiton, no impact on vigilance, persuasion activated existing loyalties (good for increasing fidelity to prior preferences) Fear: no change in motivation, stimulates vigilance, facilitates persuasion (effective in triggering reevaluation) |
