Suchergebnisse

What is public opinion? How can we best study it? This work presents a ""process model"" that answers these questions by defining public opinion in a way that also identifies an approach to studying it. The model serves as a framework into which the findings of empirical research are integrated, producing a comprehensive understanding of public opinion that encompasses the congeries of middle-range theories that have emerged from empirical research. The three-dimensional process model--and the way it is explicated--satisfies the diverse and sometimes divergent needs and interests of politica

Contents -- List of Tables -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Design and Conduct of the Research -- 3. Sampling -- 4. Turnout -- 5. Determining Candidate Preference -- 6. Saliency, Cognition, and Commitment -- 7. Stability and Lability of Voting Preferences -- 8. Characteristics of Polling Organizations -- 9. A Multivariate Analysis -- 10. Conclusions -- Questionnaire: Survey of Standard Methodology Employed in Pre-Election Polls -- References -- Index

'The Electronic Election: Perspectives on the 1996 Campaign Communication,' edited by Lynda Lee Kaid and Dianne G. Bystrom, is reviewed.

The professionalization of sociological survey research & the researcher's obligations as a professional are discussed. It is maintained that professional ethics are not completely safeguarded by the strict adherence to performance criteria, & professional ethics do not necessarily preserve moral codes. Researchers have professional obligation to clients, others affected by research, the profession, & society. Professional ethics mandate that researchers inform clients about the implications of adopting a particular research approach. When the interests of clients & other individuals affected by the research conflict, researchers must attempt to resolve such contention. Regarding the obligation to the profession, researchers must adhere to the implicit professional-society "contract" at all times. Society deserves to be informed about researchers' approaches, procedure, & findings. It is concluded that researchers, as professionals, are obligated to provide as much information as possible to all concerned interests. 1 Reference. Adapted from the source document.

Survey researchers are frequently frustrated & irritated by the difficulties they encounter when the results of their surveys are introduced as legal evidence. The sources of these difficulties are traced to contrasting scientific & legal interest in "truth" & methods for establishing truth. These contrasts explain why the scientific worth of a survey is, by itself, insufficient to establish its relevance & value as evidence in an individual case. Consequently, despite the widespread use of survey data in litigation, the admissibility of & evidentiary weight given to surveys remains problematic. Survey researchers must be as sensitive to legal precedent & rules of evidence as they are to scientific method when designing surveys for their data to be accepted by a court. HA

United States; based on conference paper. Contents: Scientific and legal "truths"; The hearsay rule and the adversary system; Surveys and trademark litigation.

Over the past fifty years, attitude surveys have won general acceptance as means of describing public moods & beliefs. However, the degree to which such surveys can be taken to predict behavior is not clear. Certain attitudinal items, in fact, allow prediction of voting turnout in different groups, making the prediction of voting behavior possible from attitudinal data. These results do not, however, offer any means of explaining such phenomena as declining turnout rates. The Watergate events do not account for this, since turnout has been declining steadily outside the South since 1960. The increasing number of voting-age Americans who do not identify with a political party, which has also risen over that period, offers one area in which such explanation may be sought; such an explanation may be found in the impact of televised campaigning on party structure. 2 Tables. W. H. Stoddard.