Author:
Wineroither David M.,Metz Rudolf
Abstract
AbstractThis report surveys four approaches that are pivotal to the study of preference formation: (a) the range, validity, and theoretical foundations of explanations of political preferences at the individual and mass levels, (b) the exploration of key objects of preference formation attached to the democratic political process (i.e., voting in competitive elections), (c) the top-down vs. bottom-up character of preference formation as addressed in leader–follower studies, and (d) gene–environment interaction and the explanatory weight of genetic predisposition against the cumulative weight of social experiences.In recent years, our understanding of sites and processes of (individual) political-preference formation has substantially improved. First, this applies to a greater variety of objects that provide fresh insight into the functioning and stability of contemporary democracy. Second, we observe the reaffirmation of pivotal theories and key concepts in adapted form against widespread challenge. This applies to the role played by social stratification, group awareness, and individual-level economic considerations. Most of these findings converge in recognising economics-based explanations. Third, research into gene–environment interplay rapidly increases the number of testable hypotheses and promises to benefit a wide range of approaches already taken and advanced in the study of political-preference formation.
Funder
Centre for Social Sciences
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Sociology and Political Science
Reference140 articles.
1. Abendroth, Wolfgang. 1964. Innerparteiliche und Innerverbandliche Demokratie als Voraussetzung der Politischen Demokratie. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 5(3):307–338.
2. Adams, James, Samuel Merrill, and Bernard Grofman. 2005. A unified theory of party competition: a cross-national analysis integrating spatial and behavioral factors. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
3. Adorno, T.W., Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel Levinson, and R. Nevitt Sanford. 1982. The authoritarian personality. In Studies in prejudice, ed. Max Horkheimer, Samuel H. Flowerman, 12. New York: W.W. Norton.
4. Agadjanian, Alexander. 2020. When do partisans stop following the leader? Political Communication https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1772418.
5. Alabastro, Alexis, David E. Rast, Andrew Lac, Michael A. Hogg, and William D. Crano. 2013. Intergroup bias and perceived similarity: effects of successes and failures on support for in- and outgroup political leaders. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 16(1):58–67.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献