Skip to main content
Log in

Candidates and issues in the 1980 campaign: The ideological connection

  • Published:
Political Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The notion that ideological perceptions in the mass public are shaped to some extent by elites and political candidates is widespread in the public opinion literature. However, there has been a lack of empirical research directly demonstrating the links between elites and the masses whose thinking they supposedly cue and structure. This paper attempts to show, through magnitude scale data collected over time in the 1980 campaign, the significant impact of political candidates in altering ideological perceptions of political stimuli. The chief “carrier” of ideology in 1980 is shown to be Ronald Reagan, whose strong issue stands and ideological label influenced perceptions of specific issues' ideological content. The findings are discussed in terms of both measurement problems in the ideology literature and more general theories of elite and environmental influences on mass political thought.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abramson, Paul R. (1981). “Comment on Smith.”American Political Science Review 75: 146–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abramson, Paul R. (1982).Political Attitudes in America. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asher, Herbert (1976).Presidential Elections and American Politics. Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Angus, P. Converse, W. Miller, and D. Stokes (1960).The American Voter. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philip E. (1975). “Public Opinion and Voting Behavior.” In Fred Greenstein and Nelson Polsby (eds.),Handbook of Political Science (Vol. 4). Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, O. D. (1969). “Some Linear Models for Two-Wave, Two-Variable Panel Analysis.”Psychological Bulletin 72: 177–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, J. O., and R. E. Anderson (1969). “Ideology in the Public's Conception of the 1964 Election.”Public Opinion Quarterly 33: 380–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagner, Paul R., and John C. Pierce (1982). “Correlative Characteristics of Levels of Conceptualization in the American Public, 1956–76.”Journal of Politics 44: 779–809.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise, David R. (1969). “Casual Inference from Panel Data.” In E. Borgatta (ed.),Sociological Methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klingemann, Hans D., and William E. Wright (1973). “Modes of Conceptualization and the Organization of Issue Beliefs in Mass Publics.” Paper presented at the World Congress of the International Political Association, Montreal, Canada.

  • Lodge, Milton (1981).Magnitude Scaling: Quantitative Measurement of Opinions. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, Series No. 07-025. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lodge, Milton, and Bernard Tursky (1981). “On the Magnitude Scaling of Political Opinion in Survey Research.”American Journal of Political Science 25: 376–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Arthur, and Warren E. Miller (1976). “Ideology in the 1972 Election: Myth or Reality — A Rejoinder.”American Political Science Review 70: 832–849.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie, Norman H., and K. Anderson (1974). “Mass Belief Systems Revisited: Political Change and Attitude Structure.”Journal of Politics 36: 540–591.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie, Norman H., Sidney Verba, and John Petrocik (1976).The Changing American Voter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie, Norman H., Sidney Verba, and John Petrocik (1981). “Reply.”American Political Science Review 75: 149–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemi, Richard G., and Herbert F. Weisberg (1976).Controversies in American Voting Behavior. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrocik, John (1980). “Contextual Sources of Voting Behavior.” In J. Pierce and J. Sullivan (eds.),The Electorate Reconsidered. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, John C., Kathleen M. Beatty, and Paul R. Hagner (1982).The Dynamics of American Public Opinion. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Eric R.A.N. (1980). “False Measures of Ideological Sophistication.”American Political Science Review 74: 685–696.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Finkel, S., Norpoth, H. Candidates and issues in the 1980 campaign: The ideological connection. Polit Behav 6, 61–77 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988229

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988229

Keywords

Navigation