Direction Versus Proximity: Amassing Experimental Evidence

In: American politics research, Band 37, Heft 2, S. 227-253

Abstract

Scale limitations, endogeneity problems, and observational equivalence in observational studies render many tests of the proximity and directional models inconclusive. Fortunately, the task of designing experimental tests has proven tractable and the small, but growing, body of experimental evidence sheds new light on directional and proximity motivated behavior. The experiment described in this article was designed to reexamine the role of ideology structuring candidate evaluations in the general population and test the models in two new policy areas: opinion about military spending and opinion about abortion. The results indicate that ideology and opinions about military spending stimulate proximity behavior whereas opinions about abortion stimulate directional behavior. It is also found that abortion-based evaluations are more strongly directional for those who oppose abortion—which is consistent with the notion of policy balancing. The article concludes by considering the possibility that some issues lend themselves to proximity comparisons whereas others lend themselves to directional comparisons and discussing the implications for democratic politics.