Search results

This article investigates the claim that individual political participation is affected by the tendency of politically significant others to participate, particularly if that other is a spouse. Models of reported turnout, validated turnout, and campaign activity are developed that explicitly model the relationship between pairs of political discussants. These models are estimated using a unique data set collected in South Bend, Indiana during the 1984 presidential election that includes direct information for both respondents and individuals named as political discussants. The results show that the likelihood of participation increases as discussants become more likely to participate. Spouses are found to be particularly important types of discussants in the case of turnout, but not when campaign activity is the measure of participation.

Expanding previous studies of social influence in politics, proposed is a system of simultaneous equations that explicitly models the process of influence on abortion attitudes among pairs of political discussants. Application to 1984 presidential election data from South Bend, IN, suggests that the way the influence process works may depend on the type of attitude being examined. 4 Tables, 37 References. Adapted from the source document.

Rabinowitz and Macdonald (Am Polit Sci Rev 83(1):93-121, 1989) have advanced a directional theory of electoral choice that stands as an alternative to the proximity models that have dominated thinking in this area for a number of years. In this paper, we assess the utility of directional theory in another area of political behavior: the evaluation and influence of politically significant others in an individual's social environment. Using two datasets collected during presidential election campaigns in 1984 and 1996, we find that respondents are more likely to evaluate their political discussants highly and be influenced by discussant vote choice if they agree in a directional rather than proximity manner. In looking at agreement on party identification, ideology, and issue positions, the directional model prevailed in 11 of 17 estimations, with neither explanation acquiring empirical support in the other six. In no instance did the proximity model prevail as an explanation of how political discussants relate to each other. We conclude by discussing the consequences of these results for political behavior and practical electoral politics. Adapted from the source document.