Abstract
This research examines the manner in which ideological identifications covary with candidate choice. Ideological ID is not purely an independent variable for evaluating candidates; evaluations of the candidates affect both individual identification and candidate placements. Prospective voters try to create a consistent cognitive system of candidate preference, ideological ID, and ideological placement of their candidate. Results demonstrate that candidate preference has a strong effect on less salient attitudes.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
References
Brody, Richard A., and Page, Benjamin I. (1972). Comment: The assessment of policy voting.APSR 66 (June): 450–458.
Conover, P. J. (1980). The perception of political figures: an application of attribution theory. In Pierce and Sullivan (eds.),The Electorate Reconsidered, pp. 91–909, Beverly Hills: Sage.
Field, J. O., and Anderson, R. E. (1969). Ideology in the public's conceptualization of the 1964 election.Public Opinion Quarterly 33:380–398.
Fiske, Susan, and Linville, Patricka (1980). What does the schema concept buy us?”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 6 (December): 543–557.
Heise, David R. (1969). Separating reliability and stability in test-retest correlation,American Sociological Review 34:93–101.
Howell, Susan (1982). Projection, persuasion or confusion in 1980. Manuscript available at University of New Orleans.
Howell, Susan (1980). The behavioral component of changing partisanship.APQ 8:279–302.
Jackson, J. (1975). Issues, party choices and presidential votes.AJPS 19:161–185.
Markus, Gregory B. (1982). Political attitudes during an election year: a report on the 1980 NES Panel Study.APSR (September): 538–560.
Markus, Gregory B., and Converse, Philip E. (1979). A dynamic simultaneous equation model of electoral choice.APSR (December): 1055–1070.
Meier, Kenneth, and Campbell, James E. (1979). Issue voting: an empirical examination of individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions.APQ (January): 21–50.
Page, Benjamin I., and Jones, Calvin C. (1979). Reciprocal effects of policy preferences, party loyalties and the vote.APSR (December): 1071–1089.
Rumelhart, David, and Ortony, Andrew (1977). The representation of knowledge in memory. In R. C. Anderson, R. J. Shapiro, and W. E. Montague (eds.),Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge, pp. 99–135. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Smith, E. R. (1980). The levels of conceptualization: false measures of ideological sophistication.APSR 74:685–696.
Taylor, S. E., and Crocker, J. (1981). Schematic base of social information processing. In E. Torry Higgins, C. P. Herman, and M. P. Zanna (eds.),Social Cognition: The Ontario Symposium, Vol. V, pp. 89–134. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Howell, S.E. Chasing an elusive concept: Ideological identifications and candidate choice. Polit Behav 7, 325–334 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987209
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987209
Keywords
- Cognitive System
- Individual Identification
- Candidate Preference
- Political Psychology
- Elusive Concept