Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Government policy and citizen passion: A study of issue publics in contemporary America

  • Published:
Political Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article describes the findings of a program of research exploring the cognitive and behavioral consequences of passionate concern about government policy issues. American citizens vary a great deal in terms of the personal importance they attach to their attitudes on particular policy issues. Citizens whose policy attitudes are especially important to them are likely to think frequently about those attitudes, to perceive competing candidates as being relatively polarized on the issue, and to form presidential candidate preferences on the basis of those attitudes. Also, policy attitudes that citizens consider personally important are highly resistant to change and are therefore especially stable over long periods of time. The American public appears to be structured into many small issue publics, each composed of citizens who are passionately concerned about a single issue. Most Americans fall into very few issue publics, the particular ones being determined by each individual's unique self-interests, social identifications, and cherished values. The implications of these findings for the workings of democracies are discussed.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alderman, J. D. (1985). Reagan won on the issues, not just his personality. InThe '84 Vote, C. Smith (ed.). New York: ABC, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almond, G. A. (1950).The American People and Foreign Policy. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alwin, D. F. (1974). Approaches to the interpretation of relationships in the multitrait-multimethod matrix. InSociological Methodology 1973–1974, H. L. Costner (ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apsler, R., and Sears, D. O. (1968). Warning, personal involvement, and attitude change.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 9: 162–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, L. B., and McLeod, J. M. (1976). Political consequences of agenda-setting.Mass Communication Review 3: 8–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradburn, N. M., and Caplovitz, D. (1965).Reports on Happiness: A Pilot Study of Behavior Related to Mental Health. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brent, E. E., and Granberg, D. (1982). Subjective agreement and the presidential candidates of 1976 and 1980.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42: 393–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brickner, M. A., Harkins, S. G., and Ostrom, T. M. (1986). Effects of personal involvement: Thought-provoking implications for social loafing.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51: 763–769.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D. (1971).The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cacioppo, J. T., and Petty, R. E. (1981). Effects of extent of thought on the pleasantness ratings of P-O-X triads: Evidence for three judgmental tendencies in evaluating social situations.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40: 1000–1009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. A., and Stokes, D. E. (1960).The American Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmines, E., and Stimson, J. (1980). The two faces of issue voting.American Political Science Review 74: 78–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. B., Levy, A., Herman, P., Kozlowski, L., and Petty, R. E. (1976). Elastic shifts of opinion: Determinants of direction and durability.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 34: 663–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comstock, G., Chaffee, S., Katzman, N., McCombs, M., and Roberts, D. (1978).Television and Human Behavior. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conover, P. J. (1981). Political cues and the perception of candidates.American Politics Quarterly 9: 427–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, J. M. (1977). Predicting no opinion in the polls.Public Opinion Quarterly 40: 515–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in the mass public. InIdeology and Discontent, D. E. Apter (ed.). New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, P. E. (1970). Attitudes and non-attitudes: Continuation of a dialogue. InThe Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems, E. R. Tufte (ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crano, W. D. (1983). Assumed consensus of attitudes: The effect of vested interest.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 9: 597–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A. (1956).A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, O. A., Hinich, M. J., and Ordeshook, P. C. (1970). An expository development of a mathematical model of the electoral process.American Political Science Review 64: 426–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downs, A. (1957).An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, T. N. (1942). A study of certain factors involved in changes of opinion.Journal of Social Psychology 16: 63–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faulkenberry, G. D., and Mason, R. (1978). Characteristics of nonopinion and no opinion response groups.Public Opinion Quarterly 42: 533–543.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, S., and Conover, P. J. (1983). Candidates, issues and voters: The role of inference in political perception.Journal of Politics 45: 810–839.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferber, R. (1966). Item nonresponse in a consumer survey.Public Opinion Quarterly 30: 399–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes.Human Relations 7: 117–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1957).A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fine, B. J. (1957). Conclusion-drawing, communicator credibility, and anxiety as factors in opinion change.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 54: 369–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, J. D., and Busch, L. (1975). What we now know about “I don't knows.”Public Opinion Quarterly 39: 207–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, J. L. (1964). Involvement, discrepancy, and change.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 69: 290–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallup, G. (1981).The Gallup Report, no. 191. Princeton, NJ: Gallup Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, A. S. (1969). Social determinism and rationality as bases of party identification.American Political Science Review 63: 5–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heider, F. (1958).The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, D. A., Rivers, R. D., and Vasilotos, N. (1982). The dynamics of political support for American presidents among occupational and partisan groups.American Journal of Political Science 26: 312–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, E. T., and King, G. (1981). Accessibility of social constructs: Information-processing consequences of individuals and contextual variability. InPersonality, Cognition and Social Interaction, N. Cantor and J. Kihlstrom (eds.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hovland, C. I., Campbell, E. H., and Brock, T. C. (1957). The effects of “Commitment” on opinion change following communication. InThe Order of Presentation in Persuasion, C. I. Hovland, W. Mandell, E. H. Campbell, T. C. Brocks, A. S. Luchins, A. R. Cohen, W. J. McGuire, I. L. Janis, R. L. Feierabend, and N. H. Anderson. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyman, H. H. and Sheatsley, P. B. (1947). Some reasons why information campaigns fail.Public Opinion Quarterly 11: 412–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackman, M. R. (1977). Prejudice, tolerance, and attitudes toward ethnic groups.Social Science Research 6: 145–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J. E. (1973). The importance of issues and issue importance in presidential elections. Harvard University, Typescript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judd, C. M., and Johnson, J. T. (1981). Attitudes, polarization, and diagnosticity: Exploring the effects of affect.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 41: 26–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judd, C. M., and Krosnick, J. A. (1989). The structural bases of consistency among political attitudes: The effects of political expertise and attitude importance. InAttitude Structure and Function, A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler, and A. G. Greenwald (eds.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, D. (1960). The functional approach to the study of attitudes.Public Opinion Quarterly 24: 163–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, S. (1983).Interpreting Elections. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Key, V. O. (1961).Public Opinion and American Democracy. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Key, V. O. (1966).The Responsible Electorate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinder, D. R., and Sears, D. O. (1985). Public opinion and political action. InHandbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 2, G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum Associates, pp. 659–741.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, J. W. (1981).Congressmen's Voting Decisions. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, E. (1984).Gender Politics: From Consciousness to Mass Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knower, F. H. (1936). Experimental studies of changes in attitude—III: Some incidence of attitude changes.Journal of Applied Psychology 20: 114–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krech, D., and Crutchfeld, R. S. (1948).Theory and Problems of Social Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A. (1986). Policy voting in American presidential elections: An application of psychological theory to American politics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A. (1988a). The role of attitude importance in social evaluation: A study of policy preferences, presidential candidate evaluations, and voting behavior.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55: 196–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A. (1988b). Attitude importance and attitude change.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 24: 240–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A. (1989). Attitude importance and attitude accessibility.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15: 297–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A., and Schuman, H. (1988). Attitude intensity, importance and certainty and susceptibility to response effects.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54: 940–952.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A., Boninger, D. S., Berent, M. K., and Carnot, C. G. (1988). The origins of attitude importance. Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.

  • Lemon, N. (1973).Attitudes and Their Measurement. London: Batsford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1951).Field Theory in Social Science. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippmann, W. (1922).Public Opinion. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippmann, W. (1925).The Phantom Public. New York: Harcourt, Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luker, K. (1984).Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, D. B. (1978). Issue importance and group choice shifts: A persuasive arguments approach.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36: 1118–1127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, G. T. (1967).Protest and Prejudice: A Study of Belief in the Black Community. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, W. J. (1960). A syllogistic analysis of cognitive relationships. InAttitude Organization and Change, M. J. Rosenberg, C. I. Hovland, W. J. McGuire, R. P. Abelson, and J. W. Brehm. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, A. H., Miller, W. E., Raine, A. S. and Brown, T. A. (1976). A majority party in disarray: Policy polarization in the 1972 election.American Political Science Review 70: 753–778.

    Google Scholar 

  • Modigliani, A., and Gamson, W. A. (1979). Thinking about politics.Political Behavior 1: 5–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W. R. (1985).The Paradox of Mass Publics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Electorate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newcomb, T. M. (1956). The prediction of interpersonal attraction.American Psychologist 11: 575–586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newcomb, T. M. (1961).The Acquaintance Process. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newcomb, T. M., Turner, R. H., and Converse, P. E. (1965).Social Psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., and Wilson, T. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.Psychological Review 84: 231–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, T. M., and Brock, T. C. (1968). A cognitive model of attitudinal involvement. InTheories of Cognitive Consistency: A Sourcebook, R. P. Abelson et al. (eds.). Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, T. M., and Brock, T. C. (1969). Cognitive bonding to central values and resistance to a communicating change in policy orientation.Journal of Experimental Research in Personality 4: 42–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, B. I. (1976). The theory of political ambiguity.American Political Science Review 70: 742–752.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, B. I. (1978).Choices and Echoes in Presidential Elections: Rational Man and Electoral Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennock, J. R. (1979).Democratic Political Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., and Cacioppo, J. T. (1986).Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polsby, N. W., and Wildavsky, A. (1984).Presidential Elections. New York: Scribner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pomper, G. M. (1972). From confusion to clarity: Issues and American voters, 1956–1968.American Political Science Review 66: 415–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pomper, G. M. (1975).Voters' Choice. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pomper, G. M., Baker, R. K., Jacob, C. E., Keeter, S., McWilliams, W. C. and Plotkin, H. A. (1985).The Election of 1984: Reports and Interpretations. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popkin, S., Gorman, J. W., Phillips, C., and Smith, J. A. (1976). Comment: What have you done for me lately? Toward an investment theory of voting.American Political Science Review 70: 779–805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhine, R. J., and Severance, L. J. (1970). Ego-involvement, discrepancy, source credibility, and attitude change.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 16: 175–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rokeach, M. (1968).Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rokeach, M. (1973).The Nature of Human Values. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenau, J. N. (1961).Public Opinion and Foreign Policy. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, M. J. (1956). Cognitive structure and attitudinal affect.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 53: 367–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuman, H., and Presser, S. (1981).Questions and Answers: Experiments on Question Form, Wording, and Context in Attitude Surveys. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. A. (1968). Attitude measurement. InThe Handbook of Social Psychology, 2nd ed., Vol. 2, G. Lindzey and A. Aronson (eds.), Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepsle, K. A. (1972). The strategy of ambiguity: Uncertainty and electoral competition.American Political Science Review 66: 555–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, C. W. (1980). Social values, attitudes, and the involvement of the self. InNebraska Symposium on Motivation 1979: Beliefs, Attitudes and Values, M. M. Page (ed.) Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, pp. 1–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, C. W., Sherif, M., and Nebergall, R. E. (1965).Attitude and Attitude Change. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M., and Cantril, H. (1947).The Psychology of Ego-involvements. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M., and Hovland, C. I. (1953). Judgmental phenomena and scales of attitude measurement: Placement of items with individual choice of number of categories.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 48: 135–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M., and Hovland, C. I. (1961).Social Judgement: Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Communication and Attitude Change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, J. E. (1968). The bothersomeness of inconsistency. InTheories of Cognitive Consistency: A Sourcebook, R. P. Abelson, E. Aronson, W. J. Mcguire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg, and P. H. Tannenbaum (eds.) Chicago: Rand McNally, pp. 393–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. B., Bruner, J. S., and White, R. W. (1956).Opinions and Personality. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. W. (1982). Attitude constraint as a function of non-affective dimensions.General Social Survey Technical Report No.39. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stimson, J. A. (1975). Belief systems: Constraint, complexity and the 1972 election.American Journal of Political Science 19: 393–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, D. E. (1963). Spatial models of party competition.American Political Science Review 57: 368–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tedin, K. L. (1980). Assessing peer and parent influence on adolescent political attitudes.American Journal of Political Science 24: 136–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallone, R. P., Ross, L., and Lepper, M. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49: 577–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verba, S., and Brody, R. A. (1970). Participation, political preferences, and the War in Vietnam.Public Opinion Quarterly 34: 325–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verba, S., and Nie, N. H. (1972).Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfinger, R. E., and Rosenstone, S. J. (1980).Who Votes? New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W. (1982). Retrieval of attitude-relevant information from memory: Effects on susceptibility to persuasion and on intrinsic motivation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42: 798–810.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., Kallgren, C. A., and Preisler, R. M. (1985). Access to attitude-relevant information in memory as a determinant of persuasion: The role of message attributes.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 21: 73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yankelovich, D., Skelly, F., and White, A. (1981).The Mushiness Index: A Refinement in Public Policy Polling Techniques. New York: Yankelovich, Clancey, Shulman.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Psychology and Political Science, Ohio State University, 1827 Neil Avenue, 43210, Columbus, OH

    Jon A. Krosnick

Authors
  1. Jon A. Krosnick
    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

Krosnick, J.A. Government policy and citizen passion: A study of issue publics in contemporary America. Polit Behav 12, 59–92 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992332

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992332

Keywords

Search

Navigation