Suchergebnisse

F. I. Greenstein ('The Benevolent Leader Revisited: Children's Images of Political Leaders in Three Democracies,' American Political Science Review, 1975, Dec, 1371-1398) asserted that children still believe United States leaders to be benevolent after Vietnam & Watergate. Greenstein found that grade school children imagining themselves to be presenting information on political subjects to a child from another country gave almost unanimously favorable responses. Analysis of data from 209 boys & 195 girls in grades 4-8 indicates that the cue 'child from another country' may have biased Greenstein's findings, as children tend to feel that critical opinions should not be expressed in discussions with foreigners. Thus, Greenstein's respondents may have had little positive affect toward the presidency. In Item Wording and Other Interaction Effects on the Measurement of Political Orientations, Fred I. Greenstein (Princeton University, NJ) points out that Sullivan & Minns fail to take account of points made in the original article, & that the methodological artifact they describe may or may not have been present. A suitable test is described for the hypothesized artifact. Modified HA.

This paper examines two neglected conditions of the linkage process between public opinion and public policy, in an effort to evaluate an explanation, other than voter apathy and ignorance, of why the linkage appears to be so weak. These conditions are: (1) Opposing candidates for the same elective office must differ in their issue-related attitudes. (2) The winners' subsequent behavior vis-à-vis public policy must be consonant with their pre-election issue-related attitudes.By the use of data collected before the 1966 House election, the amount of choice, or issue-related differences between candidates for the same House seat, is examined in all 435 Congressional districts. Sufficient differences were found in three policy areas—foreign affairs, civil rights, and domestic welfare—to imply that the electorate was given the opportunity to determine the direction of public policy.Adding data collected on the roll-call behavior of the 435 winners allowed us to examine the second condition. Although in some cases there were substantial differences between pre-election attitude and postelection roll-call behavior on the same issue, this is clearly the exception rather than the rule. As a generalization, the second condition appears to be true.

A model of the relationship between attitude involvement and attitude accessibilitywas developed and tested. The model specifies that attitude involvement leads to selective(biased) issue‐related information‐gathering strategies, which in turn produce extreme andunivalent (unambivalent) attitudes. Finally, attitudes associated with univalent and extremeunderlying structures should occasion relatively little decision conflict and thus should be highlyaccessible. Questionnaire response data gathered in a national telephone survey and from twosamples of undergraduates revealed that both attitude extremity and attitude ambivalence onselected political issues mediated the relationship between attitude involvement and attitudeaccessibility. Some findings indicated that selective processing mediated the relationshipbetween attitude involvement and attitude extremity and ambivalence. Discussion focuses on theprocesses linking involvement to accessibility, the factors that moderate theambivalence‐accessibility relationship, and the relevance of the model to media‐based primingeffects and tothe nature of public opinion and the survey response.

While candidates regularly spend much time and effort campaigning on foreign and defense policies, the thrust of prevailing scholarly opinion is that voters possess little information and weak attitudes on these issues, which therefore have negligible impact on their voting behavior. We resolve this anomaly by arguing that public attitudes on foreign and defense policies are available and cognitively accessible, that the public has perceived clear differences between the candidates on these issues in recent elections, and that these issues have affected the public's vote choices. Data indicate that these conclusions are appropriate for foreign affairs issues and domestic issues.

WHILE CANDIDATES REGULARLY SPEND MUCH TIME AND EFFORT CAMPAIGNING ON FOREIGN AND DEFENSE POLICIES, THE THRUST OF PREVAILING SCHOLARLY OPINION IS THAT VOTERS POSSESS LITTLE INFORMATION AND WEAK ATTITUDES ON THESE ISSUES, WHICH THEREFORE HAVE NEGLIGIBLE IMPACT ON THEIR VOTING BEHAVIOR. THIS ESSAY ARGUES THAT PUBLIC ATTITUDES ON FOREIGN AND DEFENSE POLICIES ARE AVAILABLE AND COGNITIVELY ACCESSIBLE, THAT THE PUBLIC HAS PERCEIVED CLEAR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE CANDIDATES ON THESE ISSUES IN RECENT ELECTIONS, AND THAT THESE ISSUES HAVE AFFECTED THE PUBLIC'S VOTE CHOICES. DATA INDICATE THAT THESE CONCLUSIONS ARE APPROPRIATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS ISSUES AND DOMESTIC ISSUES.