By S. Craig, M. Martinez
This booklet represents a major step in bringing jointly quite a few strands of analysis approximately attitudinal ambivalence and public opinion. Essays by means of a distinct crew of political scientists and social psychologists supply a conceptual framework for knowing how ambivalence is at the moment understood and measured, in addition to its relevance to the mass public's ideals approximately our political associations and nationwide id. The theoretical insights, methodological ideas, and empirical analyses will upload considerably to our wisdom in regards to the nature of ambivalence particularly, and the constitution and evolution of political attitudes more often than not.
Read Online or Download Ambivalence and the Structure of Political Opinion PDF
Similar political books
The booklet includes twelve essays by way of Stephen Holmes, Frances M. Kamm, M? ria Ludassy, Steven Lukes, Gyorgy Markus, Andr? s Saj? , G? sp? r Mikl? s Tam? s, Andrew Arato, Timothy Garton Ash, B? l. a. Greskovits, Will Kymlicka, and Aleksander Smolar. The reviews discover a large scope of matters that belong to disciplines starting from ethical philosophy, via idea of human rights, democratic transition, constitutionalism, to political financial system.
- From the Natural Man to the Political Machine: Sovereignty and Power in the Works of Thomas Hobbes
- Deleuze Beyond Badiou
- A Common Human Ground: Universality and Particularity in a Multicultural World
- Political Culture and Post-Communism (St. Antony's)
Extra info for Ambivalence and the Structure of Political Opinion
How do you feel about providing public education to the children of illegal immigrants who are in this country illegally? Are you for or against this? Ambivalence was measured in three distinct ways. First, we relied heavily upon our inferential measure of ambivalence (see Alvarez and Brehm 1995, 2002). Using a variety of maximum likelihood techniques, this measure estimates the implicit variance in the probability of choosing one specific alternative among several possibilities. The idea is to conceive of response variability as the range of plausible responses to a survey question.
X Ϫ 1) log y Ϫ y i i ␤ Xi where yi is the count (dependent) variable, Xi are the variables of the event count model, and ␤ are the coefficients of the event count. The information items asked respondents to indicate (a) which party had the most members in the U. S. House of Representatives; (b) how much of a majority is required for the Senate and House to override a presidential veto; (c) whether the Democratic or Republican Party is more conservative; (d) which branch of government determines whether or not a law is constitutional; (e) how many four-year terms a president can serve; (f ) how many members sit on the U.
In the Bell and Esses study (2002), priming ambivalent participants’ negative or positive thoughts about native persons led to more or less positive attitudes toward native land claims. MacDonald and Zanna (1998) went further by obtaining evidence that hiring decisions about a stigmatized group—feminists in this case—could be affected by rendering accessible either the positive or negative aspect of ambivalence toward that group. The authors suspected that ambivalence toward feminists would take a certain form.