Abstract
In this paper, I examine how the stated alternatives on a set of political issues influence the structure of American public opinion. The analysis applies a Guttman scaling strategy to data from the CPS 1984 National Election Study in order to map issue alternatives onto a general liberal-conservative dimension. Doing so reveals that there are significant differences across issues in the ideological content of issue alternatives. This, in turn, affects public responses to those issues. The scaled arrangement of issue alternatives provides useful insights concerning citizens' ideological orientations, variations in issue polarization, and issue attitude consistency. I discuss the implications of the findings for the nature of political issues, the political attitudes of the mass public, and elite political behavior.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call