Suchergebnisse

ObjectivePrevious research has found that southern state legislators demonstrate more progressive ambition than their nonsouthern counterparts. This presents an interesting puzzle with regard to why this difference exists. In this article, we apply the Five‐Factor Model (conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness, and extraversion) to investigate whether regional personality differences exist that can help explain why southern legislators exhibit greater levels of progressive ambition than nonsouthern legislators.MethodsData from a national survey of state legislator are analyzed using ordinal regression.ResultsOur findings show that higher levels of extraversion and openness among the legislators are directly related to greater levels of political ambition. More specifically, southern legislators appear to possess disproportionately higher levels of extraversion and openness than their nonsouthern counterparts. This helps explain the greater levels of progressive ambition they express.ConclusionsIn addition to providing insight into progressive ambition, the results reinforce the notion of southern distinctiveness among state legislatures.

A variety of studies have examined the manner in which motivation effects the decisions made, and the activities engaged in, by politicians. However, one area that seems to have been ignored has been whether there are regional differences among state legislators as it relates to ambition and what, if any, effect it has on the preferences of Southern and non-Southern legislators. Utilizing data from a survey administered to state legislators from all 50 states, we are able to demonstrate that legislators from Southern states exhibit significantly higher levels of progressive ambition than those from non-Southern states, and that this increased level of ambition exerts a significant impact on the types of activities Southern legislators would prefer to spend their time engaging in.

The impact of personality traits on people's attitudes and behaviors is widely recognized, yet systematic attention to personality in large‐N research on elected officials has been rare. Among psychologists, five‐factor frameworks that focus on openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and emotional stability have gained tremendous prominence in the past two decades. Applications of these frameworks to the study of mass political behavior have been highly fruitful, but corresponding applications in the study of legislators have been rare. In an effort to assess the utility of a Big Five approach in the study of legislative politics, this article addresses three questions: whether elected officials will be willing to provide personality self‐assessments, whether any data they do provide will exhibit meaningful variance, and whether the Big Five trait dimensions will correspond with patterns in respondents' attitudes and behaviors. These questions are addressed using data from members of the state legislatures in Arizona, Connecticut, and Maine. Results provide considerable grounds for optimism regarding the likely utility of more extensive applications of the Big Five in research on elected officials.

In this new edited volume, Charles S. Bullock III collects original contributions from top political scientists to evaluate Sarah Palin and the Tea Party's role in the 2010 midterm elections. Key States, High Stakes focuses on states where Republicans had the chance to pick up Senate seats, as well as examining GOP Senate primaries if they involved a Palin or a Tea Party nominee facing an establishment favorite. Bullock concludes the anthology with a chapter on the legacy of the Tea Party and of Sarah Palin on American po