Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Der demokratische Musterbürger als Normalfall? Kognitionspsychologische Einblicke in die black box politischer Meinungsbildung

  • Literaturbericht
  • Published:
Politische Vierteljahresschrift Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  • Althaus, Scott L., 2003: Collective Preferences in Democratic Politics. Opinion Surveys and the Will of the People. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, R. Michael/ Brehm, John, 1995: American Ambivalence Towards Abortion Policy: Development of a Heteroskedastic Probit Model of Competing Values, in: American Journal of Political Science 39, 1055–1082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, R. Michael/ Brehm, John, 1997: Are Americans Ambivalent Towards Racial Policies, in: American Journal of Political Science 41, 345–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, R. Michael/ Brehm, John, 1998: Speaking in Two Voices: American Equivocation about the Internal Renvue Service, in: American Journal of Political Science 42, 418–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, R. Michael/ Brehm, John, 2002: Hard Choices, Easy Answers. Values, Information, and American Public Opinion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker, David C./ Hansen, Susan B., 2005: All Things Considered: Systematic Cognitive Processing and Electoral Decision-Making, in: Journal of Politics 67, 319–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartels, Larry M., 2003: Democracy with Attitudes, in: MacKuen, Michael B./ Rabinowitz, George (Hg.), Electoral Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 48–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basinger, Scott J./ Lavine, Howard, 2005: Ambivalence, Information, and Electoral Choice, in: American Political Science Review 99, 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bassili, John N., 1995: On the Reality of Party Identification: Evidence from the Accessibility of Voting Intentions and of Partisan Feelings, in: Political Behavior 17, 339–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bassili, John N./ Krosnick, Jon A., 2000: Do Strength-Related Attitude Properties Determine Suseptibility to Response Effects? New Evidence Using Response Latency, Attitude Extremity, Aggregate Indices, in: Political Psychology 21, 107–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billiet, Jaak/ Swyngedouw, Marc/ Waege, Hans, 2004: Attitude Strength and Response Stability of a Quasi-Balanced Political Alienation Scale in a Panel Study, in: Saris, Willem E./ Sniderman, Paul M. (Hg.), Studies in Public Opinion. Attitudes, Non-attitudes, Measurement Error, and Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 268–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bizer, George Y./ Visser, Penny S./ Berent, Matthew K./ Krosnick, Jon A., 2004: Importance, Knowledge, and Accessibility: Exploring the Dimensionality of Strength-Related Attitude Properties, in: Saris, Willem E./ Sniderman, Paul M. (Hg.), Studies in Public Opinion. Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 215–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, Henry E./ Sniderman, Paul M., 1985: Attitude Attribution: A Group Basis for Political Reasoning, in: American Political Science Review 79, 1061–1078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Angus/ Converse, Philip E./ Miller, Warren E./ Stokes, Donald E., 1960: The American Voter. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Angus/ Gurin, Gerald/ Miller, Warren E., 1954: The Voter Decides. Evanston: Row, Peterson and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conover, Pamela Johnston/ Feldman, Stanley, 1991: Where is the Schema? Critiques, in: American Political Science Review 85, 1364–1369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philip E., 1964: The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics, in: Apter, David E. (Hg.), Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press, 206–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philip E., 1970: Attitudes and Non-Attitudes, in: Tufte, Edward R. (Hg.), The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems. Reading: Addison-Wesley, 168–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philip E., 1990: Popular Representation and the Distribution of Information, in: Ferejohn, John H./ Kuklinski, James H. (Hg.), Information and Democratic Processes. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 369–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falter, Jürgen W./ Gabriel, Oscar W./ Weßels, Bernhard, 2005: Einleitung, in: Falter, Jürgen W./ Gabriel, Oscar W./ Weßels, Bernhard (Hg.), Wahlen und Wähler. Analysen aus Anlass der Bundestagswahl 2002. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 9–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, Leon, 1957: A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, Joseph F., 2000: Two-Timing: Politics and Response Latencies in a Bilingual Survey, in: Political Psychology 21, 2755.-

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel, Oscar W./ Keil, Silke I., 2005: Empirische Wahlforschung in Deutschland: Kritik und Entwicklungsperspektiven, in: Falter, Jürgen W./ Schoen, Harald (Hg.), Handbuch Wahlforschung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 611–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamson, William A., 1992: Talking Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamson, William A./ Modigliani, Andrew, 1989: Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach, in: American Journal of Sociology 95, 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heider, Fritz, 1958: The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Huckfeldt, Robert/ Sprague, John, 2000: Political Consequences of Inconsistency: The Accessibility and Stability of Abortion Attitudes, in: Political Psychology 21, 57–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackman, Simon/ Sniderman, Paul M., 2002: Institutional Organization of Choice Spaces: A Political Conception of Political Psychology, in: Monroe, Kristen Renwick (Hg.), Political Psychology. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 209–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, Jon A., 2002: Is Political Psychology Sufficiently Psychological? Distinguishing Political Psychology from Psychological Political Science, in: Kuklinski, James H. (Hg.), Thinking about Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 187–216.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, Jon A./ McGraw, Kathleen M., 2002: Psychological Political Science Versus Political Psychology True to Its Name: A Plea for Balance, in: Monroe, Kristen Renwick (Hg.), Political Psychology. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 79–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuklinski, James H./ Luskin, Robert C./ Bolland, John, 1991: Where Is the Schema? Going Beyond the ’s’ Word in Political Psychology, in: American Political Science Review 85, 1341–1356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuklinski, James H./ Quirk, Paul J., 2000: Reconsidering the Rational Public: Cognition, Heuristics, and Mass Opinion, in: Lupia, Arthur/ McCubbins, Mathew D./ Popkin, Samuel L. (Hg.), Elements of Reason. Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 153–182.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, Richard R., 2003: Models of Decision-Making, in: Sears, David O./ Huddy, Leonie/ Jervis, Robert (Hg.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 19–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau, Richard R./ Redlawsk, David P., 1997: Voting Correctly, in: American Political Science Review 91, 585–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, Richard R./ Redlawsk, David P., 2001a: Advantages and Disadvantages of Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Making, in: American Journal of Political Science 45, 951–971.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, Richard R./ Redlawsk, David P., 2001b: An Experimental Study of Information Search, Memory, and Decision Making During a Political Campaign, in: Kuklinski, James H. (Hg.), Citizen and Politics. Perspectives from Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 136–159.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lavine, Howard, 2001: The Electoral Consequences of Ambivalence Toward Presidential Candidates, in: American Journal of Political Science 45, 915–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavine, Howard, 2002: On-Line Versus Memory-Based Process Models of Political Evaluation, in: Monroe, Kristen Renwick (Hg.), Political Psychology. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 225–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavine, Howard/ Borgida, Eugene/ Sullivan, John L., 2000: On the Relationship Between Attitude Involvement and Attitude Accessibility: Toward a Cognitive-Motivational Model of Political Information Processing, in: Political Psychology 21, 81–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lippmann, Walter, 1922: Public Opinion. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippmann, Walter, 1925: The Phantom Public. New York: Harcourt, Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, Seymour M./ Rokkan, Stein, 1967: Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments: An Introduction, in: Lipset, Seymour M./ Rokkan, Stein (Hg.), Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. New York: Free Press, 1–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lodge, Milton/ McGraw, Kathleen M., 1991: Where is the Schema? Critiques, in: American Political Science Review 85, 1357–1364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodge, Milton/ McGraw, Kathleen/ Stroh, Patrick, 1989: An Impression-driven Model of Candidate Evaluation, in: American Political Science Review 83, 399–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodge, Milton/ Steenbergen, Marco R./ Brau, Shawn, 1995: The Responsive Voter: Campaign Information and the Dynamics of Candidate Evaluation, in: American Political Science Review 89, 309–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodge, Milton/ Taber, Charles S., 2005: The Automaticity of Affect for Political Leaders, Groups, and Issues: An Experimental Test of the Hot Cognition Hypothesis, in: Political Psychology 26, 455–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodge, Milton/ Taber, Charles, 2000: Three Steps toward a Theory of Motivated Political Reasoning, in: Lupia, Arthur/ McCubbins, Mathew D./ Popkin, Samuel L. (Hg.), Elements of Reason. Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 183–213.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Luskin, Robert C., 2002: Political Psychology, Political Behavior, and Politics: Questions of Aggregation, Causal Distance, and Taste, in: Kuklinski, James H. (Hg.), Thinking about Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 217–250.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, George E./ MacKuen, Michael B., 2001: Emotions and Politics: The Dynamic Functions of Emotionality, in: Kuklinski, James H. (Hg.), Citizen and Politics. Perspectives from Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 41–67.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, George E./ Neuman, W. Russell/ MacKuen, Michael, 2000: Affective Intelligence and Political Judgment. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masters, Roger D., 2001: Cognitive Neuroscience, Emotion, and Leadership, in: Kuklinski, James H. (Hg.), Citizen and Politics. Perspectives from Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 68–102.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, Kathleen M., 2000: Contributions of the Cognitive Approach to Political Psychology, in: Political Psychology 21, 805–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, Kathleen M./ Hasecke, Edward/ Conger, Kimberly, 2003: Ambivalence, Uncertainty, and Processes of Candidate Evaluation, in: Political Psychology 24, 421–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Joanne M./ Krosnick, Jon A., 2000: News Media Impact on the Ingredients of Presidential Evaluations: Politically Knowledgeable Citizens are Guided by a Trusted Source, in: American Journal of Political Science 44, 295–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Joanne M./ Peterson, David A.M., 2004: Theoretical and Empirical Implications of Attitude Strength, in: Journal of Politics 66, 847–867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, James P./ Squires, Nancy K./ Taber, Charles S./ Lodge, Milton, 2003: Activation of Political Attitudes: A Psychophysiological Examination of the Hot Cognition Hypothesis, in: Political Psychology 24, 727–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page, Benjamin I./ Shapiro, Robert Y., 1992: The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’ Policy Preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Redlawsk, David P., 2001: You Must Remember This: A Test of the On-Line Model of Voting, in: Journal of Politics 63, 29–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redlawsk, David P., 2002: Hot Cognition or Cool Consideration? Testing the Effects of Motivated Reasoning on Political Decision Making, in: Journal of Politics 64, 1021–1044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redlawsk, David P., 2004: What Voters Do: Information Search During Election Campaigns, in: Political Psychology 25, 595–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, Shawn, 2002: Reconstructing Political Psychology: Current Obstacle and New Direction, in: Monroe, Kristen Renwick (Hg.), Political Psychology. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 329–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saris, Willem E., 2004: Different Judgment Models for Policy Questions: Competing or Complementary?, in: Saris, Willem E./ Sniderman, Paul M. (Hg.), Studies in Public Opinion. Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 17–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherpenzeel, Annette C./ Saris, Willem E., 1997: The Validity and Reliability of Survey Questions: A Meta-analysis of MTMM Studies, in: Sociological Methods and Research 23, 341–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, Paul M., 1993: The New Look in Public Opinion Research, in: Finifter, Ada (Hg.), Political Science: The State of the Discipline II. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association, 219–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, Paul M., 2000: Taking Sides: A Fixed Choice Theory of Political Reasoning, in: Lupia, Arthur/ McCubbins, Mathew D./ Popkin, Samuel L. (Hg.), Elements of Reason. Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 67–84.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, Paul M./ Brody, Richard A./ Tetlock, Philip E., 1991: Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, Paul M./ Bullock, John, 2004: A Consistency Theory of Public Opinion and Political Choice: The Hypothesis of Menu Dependence, in: Saris, Willem E./ Sniderman, Paul M. (Hg.), Studies in Public Opinion. Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 337–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, Paul M./ Fletcher, Joseph F./ Russell, Peter H./ Tetlock, Philip E., 1996: The Clash of Rights. Liberty, Equality, and Legitimacy in Pluralist Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, Paul M./ Tetlock, Philip E./ Elms, Laurel, 2001: Public Opinion and Democratic Politics: The Problem of Non-attitudes and the Social Construction of Political Judgment, in: Kuklinski, James H. (Hg.), Citizen and Politics. Perspectives from Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 254–288.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Steenbergen, Marco R./ Lodge, Milton, 2003: Process Matters: Cognitive Models of Candidate Evaluation, in: MacKuen, Michael B./ Rabinowitz, George (Hg.), Electoral Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 125–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, John L./ Rahn, Wendy M./ Rudolph, Thomas J., 2002: The Contours of Political Psychology: Situating Research on Political Information Processing, in: Kuklinski, James H. (Hg.), Thinking about Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 23–47.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Taber, Charles S., 2003: Information Processing and Public Opinion, in: Sears, David O./ Huddy, Leonie/ Jervis, Robert (Hg.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 433–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taber, Charles S./ Lodge, Milton/ Glathar, Jill, 2001: The Motivated Construction of Political Judgments, in: Kuklinski, James H. (Hg.), Citizen and Politics. Perspectives from Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 198–226.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, Philip E., 2000: Coping with Trade-Offs: Psychological Constraints and Political Implications, in: Lupia, Arthur/ McCubbins, Mathew D./ Popkin, Samuel L. (Hg.), Elements of Reason. Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 239–263.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, Amos/ Kahneman, Daniel, 1981: The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice, in: Cognitive Psychology 5, 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaller, John R., 1992: The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zaller, John R., 2003: Coming to Grips with V.O. Key’s Concept of Latent Opinion, in: MacKuen, Michael B./ Rabinowitz, George (Hg.), Electoral Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 311–336.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Harald Schoen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schoen, H. Der demokratische Musterbürger als Normalfall? Kognitionspsychologische Einblicke in die black box politischer Meinungsbildung. PVS 47, 89–101 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-006-0006-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-006-0006-1

Search

Navigation