ASKING WHY ABOUT SOCIAL PROBLEMS: IDEOLOGY AND CAUSAL MODELS IN THE PUBLIC MIND

Abstract

In 'The Art of Asking Why' Paul Lazarsfeld (1935) pointed out the deficiency of simply asking people 'why' they did something, and developed the idea of accounting models to guide a much more extensive series of questions about reasons for action. A similar problem arises when people are asked 'why' about social phenomena like unemployment, poverty, inflation, or urban riots. A review of research asking people for their explanations of social problems shows that open-ended responses are rarely probed to elicit the whole 'causal model' which the respondent has in mind; that closed-ended questions tend to offer limited choices, and not to explore the possibility of 'causal chains' or conditional effects; and that there is a tendency to classify answers into crude dichotomies rather than explore the public's ideas about specific causal mechanisms for social problems. Particular problems arise in studying elite belief systems since these are likely to be more elaborate than the public's. Content analysis of elite group discussions and elite media offer one avenue for studying such groups. Almost 60 years ago, Paul Lazarsfeld published his famous article on 'The Art of Asking Why' (1935). His 'reason analysis' exploited the fact that people, unlike inanimate objects, are conscious of at least some of the motives and perceptions which enter into a willed action, and unlike laboratory animals, can be asked why they are doing what they do. Lazarsfeld pointed out the complexity of the very idea of 'reasons' for action, and the need to structure the questioning around a kind of causal model of human action, which he called an 'accounting model.' An accounting model, constructed from exploratory interviews or past research, distinguishes causal elements in the action situation to guide the interview. For individual action, these include the actor's inner dispositions (such as desires or values), perceptions of the external situation in which action takes place (such as characteristics of the alternative objects of choice), and channels of influence on dispositions and © World Association for Public Opinion Research iggs 3OO INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH perceptions, which may include the actor's own observations, inter-personal influence, and mass communications. In Lazarsfeld's writing and in his collection. The Language of Social Research (Lazarsfeld and Rosenberg 1955), the idea of an 'accounting model' is developed through many examples. The most common is a consumer or voter choice model in which the elements are: 1. perceived attributes of product or candidate A; 2. perceived attributes of alternatives available; 3. channels of influence or communication about objects of choice; 4. motives, standards, or values of the chooser relevant to the decision. Simply asking someone 'Why did you choose A?' could lead to an answer under any of these headings, and the respondent is unlikely spontaneously to cover all of them in reply to a single 'why' question. The result of such a survey will be a list mainly of single answers, given by respondents using different frames of reference, which cannot adequately describe each individual's basis for action, or the frequency with which each attribute, channel, and motive is considered important by the sample. But starting with an adequate accounting model, one develops questions to probe each of these elements of the choice situation, and obtains answers which can be statistically analyzed to show how many people mention each of the possibilities under each heading, and how they rate their importance. Another kind of 'asking why' occurs when public opinion researchers ask people for their explanations of social phenomena. The questions may ask for explanations of: (a) general types of social behavior: 'In your opinion, what are the most important causes of crime?' (Iyengar