This preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: 1. The Evidence that leads Phil Converse to conclude that most Americans have low levels of ideological constraint. Ideology: system of interconnected beliefs about poli Ideological Constraints: opinions about one issue are strongly related to opinions about another issue Correlation: (-1) perfect negative relationship [one goes up the other goes down]; 0 no relationship at all; (+1) perfect positive relationship (both goes same direction) predict with 100% accuracy Correlation +/- 0.3 is weak; between +/- 0.3- +/- 0.7 moderate; greater than +/- 0.7 is strong Average correlation 0.23- finding indicates low level of ideological constrain in the American Public Potential Flaws: maybe people hold their own different ideologies, Converse claims low over time stability (0.39) indicated otherwise Converse: small portion of population holds real attitudes, the rest hold nonattitudes (dont pay attention to politics) Most political scientists agree with Converse, but they disagree with the nonattitudes conclusion 2. How political interest and knowledge affect a persons level of ideological constraint As people gain more political knowledge and interest they become more ideological- you learn what is supposed to go with what Lower interest 0.13, higher interest 0.33 (general population), our class was 0.34, people who go to conventions 0.7, congress 0.9 (levels of interest in politics) Members of congress (0.9) are ideologically constrained 3. How we should interpret data on Americans self-reported political ideology Symbolic lib/con: how you self identify Operational lib/con: positions on specific issues Symbolic/self identify- large number of people dont know (25%); true number of ppl who dont know is higher; 25% of people are middle of the road moderates; people tend to stay away from extremes; 31% total self identify as con; 19% self identify as lib 4. The difference between being a symbolic liberal (or conservative) versus an operational liberal or conservative, and how that matters to American politics Symbolic lib/con: how you self identify Operational lib/con: positions on specific issues Symbolic/self identify- large number of people dont know (25%); true number of ppl who dont know is higher; 25% of people are middle of the road moderates; people tend to stay away from extremes; 31% total self identify as con; 19% self identify as lib Operational example- increase spending on more programs than cut are classified as operational liberals (reverse is true for operational con) Operational lib and sym lib 24%; Op lib and sym con 22%; Op con and sym lib 2%; Op con and sym con 8% (not 100% because some people split easily on issues and couldnt be classified) Possible confusion about mismatched symbolic and operational because people dont know the political meanings Helps explains things like how spending costs are often proposed but never...
View Full Document