Suchergebnisse

Over 50 years of research into American political ideology have left scholars with a contested paradigm. One side argues that the mass public is distinctly nonideological. The other side argues that ideological thinking is not beyond the public. The way forward for research in political ideology does not lie in rehashing this debate but in advancing two new areas of work. The first considers the role that values and principles play in determining the political and ideological thinking of individuals. The second questions the current conception and measurement standards of political ideology. This research argues that ideology among the American mass public is formed by positions along two related but separate dimensions. In this article, we summarize the major arguments of and criticisms of current ideology research. Then we discuss recent research on principles and values and the measurement of ideology.

This paper compares two solution concepts for majority rule decision-making in multi-dimensional settings: the uncovered set and the strong point. Our goal is to determine which of these solution concepts is the appropriate generalization of the median voter theorem to more complex (and more realistic) multi-dimensional majority-rule settings. By making this comparison, we also contribute to the debate about the degree of sophisticated decision-making exhibited by experimental subjects and their real-world counterparts. Using data from eleven previously-published majority rule experiments and analytic techniques drawn from geography, our analysis confirms expectations that the uncovered set provides accurate predictions of majority-rule decision-making; and, moreover, that the strong point provides little added insight, either as a solution concept on its own, or as a predictor of where outcomes lie inside the uncovered set.