Electoral Choices and Core Value Change: The 1992 Presidential Campaign

Abstract

Theory: The recent scholarly literature on core political values has paid relatively little attention to how values change over time. Drawing on studies in social psychology that find that values are reformulated as individuals take on new identities and roles or process new political information, I argue that choosing sides during a major national election campaign provokes shifts in core political values. Furthermore, in keeping with Philip Converse's (1964) discussion of dynamic attitude constraint, value change following electoral mobilization is expected to lead to new positions regarding particular government policies. Hypotheses: Backing Bill Clinton in 1992 led citizens to become more committed to egalitarianism and less attached to moral traditionalism; the reverse is hypothesized to have occurred for supporters of George Bush. In turn, changes in levels of egalitarianism caused shifts in support for federal social welfare spending; new positions on moral traditionalism led to changes regarding abortion policy. Methods: Maximum likelihood (LISREL) measurement and structural models are estimated using a CPS panel survey of the mass public in 1990 and 1992. Results: As hypothesized, presidential preferences in 1992 led to changes in core value stands, even when measurement error and reciprocity between value positions and candidate choice were factored in. As the respondents' values changed, moreover, their positions on several concrete policy items were also significantly modified.