Political Behavior

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 316–332 | Cite as

The sources of liberal-conservative thinking: Education and conceptualization

  • William G. Jacoby


In this study, I examine two sources of liberal-conservative thinking within the American electorate: Education and level of conceptualization. This analysis differs from previous work in at least two important ways. First, I test the impacts of education and conceptualization simultaneously. Second, I focus on the degree to which people actively use the liberal-conservative continuum to organize their perceptions of the parties and candidates. Empirical analysis of data from the 1984 CPS National Election Study confirms that education and conceptualization have roughly equivalent effects on ideological structuring in political perceptions. I discuss the implications of this finding for the study of mass belief systems and information processing within the American public.


Information Processing Empirical Analysis Belief System National Election Election Study 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bennett, W. Lance (1977). The growth of knowledge in mass belief system studies: an epistemological critique.American Journal of Political Science 21: 465–500.Google Scholar
  2. Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E. (1960).The American Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Conover, Pamela J., and Feldman, Stanley (1981). The origins and meaning of liberal/conservative self-identifications.American Journal of Political Science 25: 617–645.Google Scholar
  4. Converse, Philip E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In David E. Apter (ed.),Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  5. Converse, Philip E. (1975). Public opinion and voting behavior. In Fred I. Greenstein and Nelson W. Polsby (eds.),The Handbook of Political Science, Vol. 4. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  6. Fazio, R. H., and Williams, Carol J. (1986). Attitude accessibility as a moderator of the attitude-perception and attitude-behavior relations: an investigation of the 1984 presidential election.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51: 505–514.Google Scholar
  7. Field, John Osgood, and Anderson, Ronald E. (1969). Ideology in the public's conceptualization of the 1964 election.Public Opinion Quarterly 33: 380–398.Google Scholar
  8. Fiske, Susan T., and Taylor, Shelley E. (1984).Social Cognition. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  9. Fleishman, John A. (1986). Trends in self-identified ideology from 1972 to 1982: no support for the salience hypothesis.American Journal of Political Science 30: 517–541.Google Scholar
  10. Hagner, Paul R., and Pierce, John C. (1982). Correlative characteristics of the levels of conceptualization in the American Public: 1956–1976.Journal of Politics 44: 779–807.Google Scholar
  11. Hagner, Paul R., Pierce, John C. and Knight, Kathleen (1985). Codebook for levels of conceptualization coding, 1956–1984. Ann Arbor, Mich.: ICPSR.Google Scholar
  12. Hamill, Ruth, and Lodge, Milton (1986). Cognitive consequences of political sophistication. In Richard R. Lau and David O. Sears, (eds.),Political Cognition. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. Hamill, Ruth C., Lodge, Milton, and Blake, Frederick (1985). The breadth, depth, and utility of class, partisan, and ideological schemata.American Journal of Political Science 29: 850–870.Google Scholar
  14. Hastie, Reid (1981). Schematic principles in human memory. In E. T. Higgins, C. P. Herman, and M. P. Zanna (eds.),Social Cognition: The Ontario Symposium (Volume I). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  15. Holm, John D., and Robinson, John P. (1978). Ideological identification and the American voter.Public Opinion Quarterly 42: 235–246.Google Scholar
  16. Hymes, Robert (1986). Political attitudes as social categories: a new look at selective memory.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51: 233–241.Google Scholar
  17. Jacoby, William G. (1986). Levels of conceptualization and reliance on the liberal-conservative continuum.Journal of Politics 48: 423–432.Google Scholar
  18. Judd, C. M., and Kulik, J. A. (1980). Schematic effects of social attitudes on information processing and recall.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38: 569–578.Google Scholar
  19. Knight, Kathleen (1985). Ideology in the 1980 election: ideological sophistication does matter.Journal of Politics 47: 828–853.Google Scholar
  20. Kuklinski, James H., Metlay, Daniel S., and Kay, W. D. (1982). Citizen knowledge and choices on the complex issue of nuclear energy.American Journal of Political Science 26: 615–642.Google Scholar
  21. Lau, Richard R. (1986). Political schemata, candidate evaluations, and voting behavior. In Richard R. Lau and David O. Sears, eds.Political Cognition. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  22. Levitin, Teresa E., and Miller, Warren E. (1979). Ideological interpretations of presidential elections.American Political Science Review 73: 751–771.Google Scholar
  23. Lodge, Milton G., and Hamill, Ruth (1986). A partisan schema for political information processing.American Political Science Review 80: 505–520.Google Scholar
  24. Luskin, Robert C. (1987). Measuring ideological sophistication.American Journal of Political Science 31: 856–899.Google Scholar
  25. Luttbeg, Norman R., and Gant, Michael M. (1985). The failure of liberal-conservative ideology as a cognitive structure.Public Opinion Quarterly 49: 80–93.Google Scholar
  26. Neuman, W. Russell (1986).The Paradox of Mass Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Nie, Norman H., Verba, Sidney, and Petrocik, John (1979).The Changing American Voter, enlarged ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Sears, David O., Lau, Richard R., Tyler, Tom R., and Allen, Harris M., Jr. (1980). Self-interest vs. symbolic politics in policy attitudes and presidential voting.American Political Science Review 74: 670–684.Google Scholar
  29. Smith, Eric R. A. N. (1980). Levels of conceptualization: false measures of ideological sophistication.”American Political Science Review 74: 685–696.Google Scholar
  30. Smith, Eliot R., and Lerner, Miriam (1986). Development of automatism of social judgments.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50: 246–259.Google Scholar
  31. Sniderman, Paul M., Brody, Richard A., and Kuklinski, James H. (1984). Policy reasoning and political values: the problem of racial equality.American Journal of Political Science 28: 75–94.Google Scholar
  32. Stimson, James A. (1975). Belief systems: constraint, complexity, and the 1972 election.American Journal of Political Science 19: 393–418.Google Scholar
  33. Taylor, S. E., and Crocker, J. (1981). Schematic bases of social information processing. In E. T. Higgins, C. P. Herman, and M. P. Zanna (eds.),Social Cognition: The Ontario Symposium, Vol. I. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences.American Psychologist 35: 151–175.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Agathon Press, Inc. 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • William G. Jacoby
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceThe Ohio State UniversityColumbus

Personalised recommendations