Affiliation:
1. Brigham Young University , Provo, UT , USA
Abstract
Abstract
Political constraint and issue consistency are key variables in the study of public opinion, but the existing literature contains many parallel but contradictory accounts of the sources and predictors of ideological constraint. Some posit that constraint is essentially a function of a person’s partisan commitment, others suggest it is rooted in participation in politics, while others see a wide range of correlates summarized as “sophistication.” Still others deny that constraint exists in the mass public altogether. Contrary to these accounts, we argue that issue consistency exists within the American public and is best predicted by political knowledge, which should be thought of as separate from those other predictors. In fact, after accounting for political knowledge, other variables like partisanship, participation, and demographic variables have little independent relationship to ideological constraint. The data show that political knowledge is about as strong a predictor of issue consistency as is one’s self-placed ideology – a widely used proxy for constraint. These results help us understand how citizens think about politics and which groups of people most closely resemble elites in the structure of their opinions. Our findings show that previously hypothesized predictors of constraint – particularly partisanship and participation – are mainly related to ideological constraint through a person’s level of political knowledge.
Subject
General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science
Reference45 articles.
1. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2012. The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, American Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
2. Abramowitz, Alan I. 2013. The Polarized Public? Why American Government Is So Dysfunctional. New York, NY: Pearson.
3. Achen, Christopher H., and Larry M. Bartels. 2016. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4. Ahler, Douglas J., and David E. Broockman. 2016. “Does Elite Polarization Imply Poor Representation? A New Perspective on the “Disconnect” Between Politicians and Voters.” Working Paper: https://people.stanford.edu/dbroock/sites/default/files/ahler_broockman_ideological_innocence.pdf.
5. Ansolabehere, Stephen, Jonathan Rodden, and James M. Snyder. 2008. “The Strength of Issues: Using Multiple Measures to Gauge Preference Stability, Ideological Constraint, and Issue Voting.” American Political Science Review 102 (2): 215–232.
Cited by
8 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