Abstract
To determine the meaning(s) of the concepts “Republican,” “Democrat,” and “Independent,” the most frequently cited attributes of each party label were scaled in terms of their semantic centrality. An analysis of the magnitude scale values demonstrates that the labels “Republican” and “Democrat” have unique cognitive properties which easily discriminate one label from another. The most characteristic and discriminating properties refer to (1) voting, (2) electioneering, and (3) other forms of electoral behavior. Although these two labels have many strong properties over which there is considerable agreement, such consensus is lacking for the fewer and weaker properties which characterize and discriminate the label “Independent.” Whereas “Republican” and “Democrat” are sharply delineated, semantic inversions of one another, the concept “Independent” is ambiguously defined and only weakly distinguishable from other concepts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bishop, G. F., Oldendick R. W., and Tuchfarber, A. J. (1978). “Effects of question wording on political attitude consistency.”Public Opinion Quarterly 42: 81–91.
Burnham, W. D. (1970).Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics. New York: W. W. Norton.
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W., and Stokes, D. (1960).The American Voter. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Collins, A. M., and Loftus, E. F. (1975). “A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing,”Psychological Review 82: 407–428.
—— and Quillian, M. R. (1969). “Retrieval time from semantic memory.”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 8: 240–247.
Converse, P. E. (1966). “The concept of a normal vote.” In A. Campbell et al. (eds.),Elections and the Political Order. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Keith, B., Magleby, D., Nelson, C., Orr, E., Westlye, M., and Wolfinger, R. E. (1977). “The myth of the independent voter.” Paper delivered at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C., September 1977.
Lakoff, G. (1972). “Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts.” Paper delivered at the eighth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. Linguistics Department, University of Chicago.
Lodge, M., and Tursky, B. (1979). “Comparisons between category and magnitude scaling of political opinion employing SRC/CPS items.”American Political Science Review 73: 50–66.
--, and Tursky, B. (1981). “Workshop on the magnitude scaling of political opinion in survey research.”American Journal of Political Science, fourthcoming.
Lodge, M., Cross, D., Tursky, B., & Tanenhaus, J. (1975). “The psychophysical scaling and validation of a political support scale.”American Journal of Political Science 19: 611–649.
——, Tanenhaus, J., Cross, D., Tursky, B., Foley, M. A., & Foley, H. (1976a). “The calibration and cross-modal validation of ratio scales of political opinion in survey research.”Social Science Research 5: 325–347.
——, Cross, D., Tursky, B., Tanenhaus, J., & Reeder, R. (1976b). “The psychophysical scaling of political support in the ‘real world.’”Political Methodology 2: 159–182.
Loftus, G. R., and Loftus, E. F. (1976).Human Memory: The Processing of Information. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Nie, N. H., Verba, S., and Petrocik, J. R. (1976).The Changing American Voter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Nisbett, R. E., and Wilson, T. D. (1977). “Telling more than we know: Verbal reports on mental processes.”Psychological Review 84: 231–259.
Rips, L. J., Shoben, E. J., and Smith, E. E. (1973). “Semantic distance and the verification of semantic relations.”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13: 1–20.
Rosch, E. (1975). “Cognitive representations of semantic categories.”Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 104: 192–233.
——, and Mervis, C. G. (1975). “Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories.”Cognitive Psychology 7: 573–605.
——, Simpson, C., and Miller, R. S. (1976). “Structural basis of typicality effect.”Journal of Experimental Psychology 2: 491–502.
Smith, E. E., Shoben, E. J., and Rips, L. J. (1974). “Comparison processes in semantic memory.”Psychological Review 81: 214–241.
Stevens, S. S. (1966). “Ametric for the social consensus.”Science 151:530–541.
—— (1975).Psychophysics: Introduction to its Perceptual, Neural, and Social Prospects. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Sullivan, J. L., Pierson, J. E., and Marcus, G. E. (1978). “Ideological constraint in the mass public: A methodological critique and some new findings.”American Journal of Political Science 22: 233–249.
Tanenhaus, J. (1979). “Separating objects of specific and diffuse support: Experiments on presidents and the presidency.” Laboratory for Behavioral Research, Department of Political science, SUNY-Stony Brook. Report No. 15.
--, and Foley, M. A. (1979). “‘The words of things entangle and confuse’: Response effects and the ambiguous concept.” Manuscript of the Departments of Psychology and Political Science, SUNY-Stony Brook.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bastedo, R.W., Lodge, M. The meaning of party labels. Polit Behav 2, 287–308 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990483
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990483