Many public opinion theories suggest that all citizens rely on core beliefs and values to guide their preferences on social and political issues. The “Expertise Interaction” model of public opinion challenges this postion by arguing that the ability to use core principles in this manner is a function of political expertise. However, there is very little direct evdence that measures of expertise strengthen the relationship between measures of core beliefs and policy preferences. This article analyzes the effects of expertise on principled political thought across several issues with data from the 1990 and 1992 National Election Study surveys. The results demonstrate that the expertise effect is surprisingly limited. These findings call into question the presumed ascendancy of the expertise interaction model.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley
2.
Converse, Philip E.1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics”. In David Apter, ed., Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press.
3.
Cook, Fay Lomax, and Edith J. Barrett. 1992. Support for the American Welfare State. New York: Columbia University Press.
4.
Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Scott Keeter. 1993. “Measuring Political Knowedge: Putting First Things First”. American Journal of Political Science37: 1179-1206.
5.
Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Scott Keeter. 1996. What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.
6.
Feldman, Stanley1983. “Economic Individualism and American Public Opiion”. American Politics Quarterly11: 3-29.
7.
Feldman, Stanley1988. “Structure and Consistency in Public Opinion: The Role of Core Beliefs and Values”. AmericanJournal of Political Science32: 416-440.
8.
Feldman, Stanley, and John Zaller. 1992. “The Political Culture of Ambivalence: Ideological Responses to the Welfare State”. American Journal of Political Scence36: 268-307.
9.
Fiske, Susan T., Richard L. Lau, and Richard A. Smith. 1990. “On the Varieties and Utilities of Political Expertise”. Social Cognition8: 31-48.
10.
Friedrich, Robert J.1982. “In Defense of Multiplicative Terms in Multiple Regresion Equations”. American Journal of Political Science26: 797-833.
11.
Gilens, Martin. 1995. “Racial Attitudes and Opposition to Welfare”. Journal of Politics57: 994-1014.
12.
Goren, Paul1997. “Political Expertise and Issue Voting in Presidential Elections”. Political Research Quarterly50: 387-412.
13.
Greene, William H.1997. Econometric Analysis, 3rd ed.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
14.
Hamill, Ruth, and Milton Lodge. 1986. “Cognitive Consequences of Political Sophistication,” in Richard R. Lau and David 0. Sears, eds., Political Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15.
Hamill, Ruth, Milton Lodge, and Frederick Blake. 1985. “The Breadth, Depth, and Utility of Class, Partisan, and Ideological Schema”. American Journal of Political Science30: 850-870.
16.
Hurwitz, Jon, and Mark Peffley1987. “How are Foreign Policy Attitudes Structured? A Hierarchical Model”. American Political Science Review81: 1099-1120.
17.
Jacoby, William G.1991. “Ideological Identification and Issue Attitudes”. Amercan Journal of Political Science35: 178-205.
18.
Kinder, Donald R.1983. “Diversity and Complexity in American Public Opiion,” in Ada Finifter, ed., Political Science: The State of the Discipline. Wasington, DC: American Political Science Association.
19.
Kinder, Donald R., and Lynn M. Sanders. 1996. Divided by Color: Racial Politics and Democratic Ideals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20.
Kuklinski, James H., Daniel S. Metlay, and W D. Kay1982. “Citizen Knowledge and Choices on the Complex Issue of Nuclear Energy”. American Journal of Political Science26: 615-642.
21.
Lodge, Milton, and Ruth Hamill. 1986. “A Partisan Schema for Political Infomation Processing”. American Political Science Review80: 505-519.
22.
Luskin, Robert C.1987. “Measuring Political Sophistication”. American Journal of Political Science31: 856-899.
23.
Luskin, Robert C.1990. “Explaining Political Sophistication”. Political Behavior12: 331-361.
24.
McCann, James A.1997. “Electoral Choices and Core Value Change: The 1992 Presidential Campaign”. American Journal of Political Science41: 564-583.
25.
McClosky, Herbert, and John Zaller. 1984. The American Ethos. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26.
McGraw, Kathleen M., Milton Lodge, and Patrick Stroh. 1990. “On-Line Prcessing in Candidate Evaluation: The Effects of Issue Order, Issue Importance, and Sophistication”. Political Behavior12: 41-58.
27.
McGraw, Kathleen M., and Marco Steenbergen. 1995. “Pictures in the Head: Memory Representations of Political Candidates,” in Milton Lodge and Kathleen McGraw, eds., Political Judgment: Structure and Processes. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
28.
Neuman, W Russell. 1986. The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Public. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
29.
Peffley, Mark, and Jon Hurwitz. 1985. “A Hierarchical Model of Attitude Costraint”. AmericanJournal of Political Science29: 871-890.
30.
Peffley, Mark, and Jon Hurwitz. 1992. “International Events and Foreign Policy Beliefs: Public Response to Changing Soviet-U.S. Relations”. American Journal of Political Science36: 431-461.
31.
Peffley, Mark, and Jon Hurwitz. 1993. “Models of Attitude Constraint in Foreign Affairs”. Political Behavior15: 61-90.
32.
Pollock, Philip H., Stuart A. Lilie, and M. Elliot Vittes. 1993. “Hard Issues, Core Values, and Vertical Constraint: The Case of Nuclear Power”. Brtish Journal of Political Science23: 29-50.
33.
Price, Vincent, and John Zaller. 1993. “Who Gets the News? Alternative Mesures of News Reception and Their Implications for Research”. Public Opiion Quarterly57: 133-164.
34.
Sears, David O., Leonie Huddie, and Lynitta G. Schaffer. 1986. A Schematic Variant of Symbolic Politics Theory, as Applied to Racial and Gender Equaity, in Richard R. Lau and David 0. Sears, eds., Political Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
35.
Smith, Eric R. A. N.1989. The Unchanging American VoterBerkeley: University of California Press.
36.
Sniderman, Paul M., Richard A. Brody, and Philip Tetlock. 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Zaller, John R.1990. “Political Awareness, Elite Leadership, and the Mass Survey Response”. Social Cognition8: 125-153.
38.
Zaller, John R.1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
