Belief Congruence between Interest-Group Leaders and Members: An Empirical Analysis of Three Theories and a Suggested Synthesis

Abstract

Theories of internal interest-group dynamics vary in their predictions concerning the degree of belief congruence between leaders and ordinary members. Exchange theory expects to find substantial congruence, except when selective incentives are important. Commitment theory argues that leaders should be more extreme in their views than ordinary members, while the moderating elite approach suggests they should be less extreme. Survey data from two interest groups, one environmental, the other economic, at two points in time provide some support for exchange theory, even more support for commitment theory, and no support for the moderating elites approach. The paper concludes with a proposed synthesis involving elements of the first two theories and additional factors, such as level of conflict in the policy subsystem.