Abstract
The primary purpose of this paper is to introduce an alternative, grid-group theory, to the conventional liberal-conservative continuum for understanding the structure of mass belief systems. We also examine the potential advantages of this alternative in explaining preference formation with a series of exploratory empirical comparisons of the relative strengths and weaknesses of grid-group theory and the conventional measure of political ideology. While certain data limitations make our results tentative, we conclude that political ideology retains the advantage of parsimony as the single most powerful predictor of mass attitudes across a range of social and economic issues. But grid-group theory allows us to unpack distinct social logics that are conflated in a unidimensional model. These logics not only tell us more about the bases for persons' attitudes, they offer an explanation for the shifting structure of political conflicts and coalitions. Thus grid-group theory helps us explain who holds which `core values' and why.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
