Recent research on political expertise indicates that what citizens know and how much they think about politics affect the political choices they make. So it would seem for issue voting in presidential elections. Unfor tunately, prior work has yielded such conflicting results that we lack a clear understanding of how expertise affects the vote. Drawing on re search from social and political psychology, I argue that the accessibility of policy attitudes from memory depends on political expertise. Given greater accessibility of policy attitudes, issue voting should be more pro nounced at higher levels of expertise. In contrast to most previous work, this research measures expertise with interval-level knowledge scales and employs formal interaction tests. Data from the 1984 and 1988 National Election Study surveys are used to test my hypotheses. Results show that increasing expertise results in higher levels of sociotropic, ideological, and policy voting.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldrich, John H., John L. Sullivan, and Eugene Borgida.1989. "Foreign Affairs and Issue Voting: Do Presidential Candidates 'Waltz Before a Blind Audience?' " American Political Science Review83: 123-41.
2.
Alvarez, R. Michael, and Charles H. Franklin .1994. "Uncertainty and Political Perceptions." Journal of Politics56: 671-88.
3.
Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes .1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.
4.
Carmines, Edward G., and James A. Stimson .1980. "The Two Faces of Issue Voting ." American Political Science Review74: 78-91.
5.
Conover, Pamela Johnston, Stanley Feldman, and Kathleen Knight.1986. "Judging Inflation and Unemployment: The Origins of Retrospective Evaluations ." Journal of Politics48: 565-88.
6.
Converse, Philip E.1964. "The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics." In David Apter, ed., Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press .
7.
Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Scott Keeter.1993. "Measuring Political Knowledge: Putting First Things First ." American Journal of Political Science37: 1179-1206.
8.
_. 1996. What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters . New Haven: Yale University Press .
9.
Dobson, Douglas, and Douglas St. Angelo .1975. "Party Identification and the Floating Vote: Some Dynamics." American Political Science Review69: 481-90.
10.
Fazio, Russell H.1986. "How Do Attitudes Guide Behavior?" In Richard M. Sorrentino and E. Tory Higgins, eds., Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social BehaviorNew York: Guilford Press.
11.
_. 1989. "On the Power and Functionality of Attitudes." In Anthony R. Pratkanis, Stephen J. Breckler, and Anthony G. Greenwald , eds., Attitude Structure and Function. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
Fazio, Russell H., and Carol J. Williams .1986. "Attitude Accessibility as a Moderator of the Attitude-Perception and Attitude-Behavior Relations: An Investigation of the 1984 Presidential Election." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology51: 505-14.
13.
Feldman, Stanley.1989. "Measuring Issue Preferences: The Problem of Response Instability." PoliticalAnalysis1: 25-60.
14.
Fiorina, Morris P1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections . New Haven: Yale University Press .
15.
Fiske, Susan T., Donald R. Kinder, and W Michael Larter .1983. "The Novice and the Expert: Knowledge-Based Strategies in Political Cognition." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology19: 381-400.
16.
Franklin, Charles H., and John E. Jackson .1983. "The Dynamics of Party Identification ." American Political Science Review77: 957-73.
17.
Green, Donald Philip, and Bradley Palmquist.1990. "Of Artifacts and Partisan Instability." American Journal of Political Science34: 872-902.
18.
Hagle, Timothy M., and Glenn E. Mitchell .1992. "Goodness-of-Fit Measures for Probit and Logit." American Journal of Political Science36: 762-84.
19.
Hamill, Ruth, Milton Lodge, and Frederick Blake.1985. "The Breadth, Depth, and Utility of Class, Partisan, and Ideological Schema." American Journal of Political Science30: 850-70.
20.
Holbrook, Thomas, and James C. Garand .1996. "Homo Economus? Economic Information and Economic Voting." Political Research Quarterly49: 351-76.
21.
Hurwitz, Jon, and Mark Peffley.1987a. "The Means and Ends of Foreign Policy as Determinants of Presidential Support."American Journal of Political Science31: 236-58.
22.
. 1987b. "How are Foreign Policy Attitudes Structured? A Hierarchical Model." American Political Science Review81: 1099-1120.
23.
Jaccard, James, Robert Turrisi, and Choi K. Wan.1990. Interaction Effects in Multiple Regression. Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-072. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
24.
Jacoby, William G.1995. "The Structure of Ideological Thinking in the American Electorate." American Journal of Political Science39: 314-35.
25.
Judd, Charles M., and James W Downing .1990. "Political Expertise and the Development of Attitude Consistency." Social Cognition8: 104-24.
26.
Key, V.O.1966. The Responsible Electorate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27.
Kiewiet, D. Roderick.1983. Macroeconomics & Micropolitics: The Electoral Effects of Economic Issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
Kinder, Donald R.1986. "Presidential Character Revisited." In Richard R. Lau and David O. Sears, eds., Political Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29.
Kinder, Donald R., Gordon S. Adams, and Paul W Gronke.1989. "Economics and Politics in the 1984 American Presidential Election." American Journal of Political Science33: 491-515.
30.
Kinder, Donald R., and D. Roderick Kiewiet .1981. "Sociotropic Politics: The American Case." British Journal of Political Science11: 129-61.
31.
King, Gary.1989. Unifying Political Methodology: The Likelihood Theory of Statistical Inference. New York: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Knight, Kathleen.1985. "Ideology in the 1980 Election: Ideological Sophistication Does Matter." Journal of Politics47: 828-53.
33.
Krosnick, Jon A.1988. "The Role of Attitude Importance in Social Evaluation: A Study of Policy Preferences, Presidential Candidate Evaluations, and Voting Behavior." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology55: 196-210.
34.
_. 1989. "Attitude Importance and Attitude Accessibility." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin15: 297-308.
35.
. 1990. "Expertise and Political Psychology." Social Cognition8: 1-8.
36.
Krosnick, Jon A., and Michael Milburn.1990. "Psychological Determinants of Political Opinionation ." Social Cognition8: 49-72.
37.
Lavine, Howard, John L. Sullivan, Eugene Borgida , and Cynthia J. Thomsen.1996. "The Relationship of National and Personal Issue Salience to Attitude Accessibility on Foreign and Domestic Policy Issues." Political Psychology17: 293-316.
38.
Lodge, Milton.1995. "Toward a Procedural Model of Candidate Evaluation ." In Milton Lodge and Kathleen M. McGraw, eds., Political Judgment: Structure and Process. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
39.
Lodge, Milton, and Ruth Hamill.1986. "A Partisan Schema for Political Information Processing ." American Political Science Review80: 505-19.
40.
Lodge, Milton, Kathleen McGraw, and Patrick Stroh.1989. "An Impression-Driven Model of Candidate Evaluation." American Political Science Review83: 399-419.
41.
Lodge, Milton, Marco Steenbergen, and Shawn Brau.1995. "The Responsive Voter: Campaign Information and the Dynamics of Candidate Evaluation." American Political Science Review89: 309-26.
42.
Luskin, Robert C.1987. "Measuring Political Sophistication." American Journal of Political Science31: 856-99.
43.
_. 1990. "Explaining Political Sophistication." Political Behavior12: 331-61.
44.
Macdonald, Stuart Elaine, George Rabinowitz, and Ola Listhaug.1995. "Political Sophistication and Models of Issue Voting." British Journal of Political Science25: 453-83.
45.
Markus, Gregory B.1982. "Political Attitudes during an Election Year: A Report on the 1980 NES Panel Study." American Political Science Review76: 538-60.
46.
McGraw, Kathleen M., Milton Lodge, and Patrick Stroh.1990. "On-Line Processing in Candidate Evaluation: The Effects of Issue Order, Issue Importance, and Sophistication." Political Behavior12: 41-58.
47.
Menard, Scott.1995. Applied Logistic Regression Analysis. Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, 07-106. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48.
Miller, Arthur H., and Martin P Wattenberg .1985. "Throwing the Rascals Out: Policy and Performance Evaluations of Presidential Candidates, 1952-1980." American Political Science Review79: 359-72.
49.
Moon, David.1990. "What You Use Depends on What You Have: Information Effects on the Determinants of Electoral Choice." American Politics Quarterly18: 3-24.
50.
. 1992. "What You See Still Depends on What You Have: Information Effects in Presidential Elections, 1972-1988." American Politics Quarterly20: 427-41.
51.
Mutz, Diana C.1993. "Direct and Indirect Routes to Politicizing Personal Experience: Does Knowledge Make a Difference?" Public Opinion Quarterly57: 483-502.
52.
Neuman, W Russell.1986. The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Public. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
53.
Norpoth, Helmut and Milton Lodge.1985. "The Difference between Attitudes and Nonattitudes in the Mass Public: Just Measurement?" American Journal of Political Science29: 291-307.
54.
Peffley, Mark, and Jon Hurwitz.1985. "A Hierarchical Model of Attitude Constraint." American Journal of Political Science29: 871-90.
55.
_. 1993. "Models of Attitude Constraint in Foreign Affairs." Political Behavior15: 61-90.
56.
Pierce, Patrick A.1993. "Political Sophistication and the Use of Candidate Traits in Candidate Evaluation." Political Psychology14: 21-35.
57.
Pomper, Gerald M.1972. "From Confusion to Clarity: Issues and American Voters, 1956-1968." American Political Science Review66: 415-28.
58.
Price, Vincent, and John Zaller.1993. "Who Gets the News: Alternative Measures of News Reception and Their Implications for Research." Public Opinion Quarterly57: 133-64.
59.
Rabinowitz, George, and Stuart Elaine Macdonald .1989. "A Directional Theory of Issue Voting." American Political Science Review83: 93-121.
60.
Rahn, Wendy M.1993. "The Role of Partisan Stereotypes in Information Processing about Political Candidates." American Journal of Political Science37: 472-96.
61.
Rahn, Wendy M., John H. Aldrich, Eugene Borgida , and John L. Sullivan.1990. "A Social-Cognitive Model of Candidate Appraisal." In John A. Ferejohn and James H. Kuklinski, eds., Information and Democratic Processes. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
62.
Smith, Eric R. A. N.1989. The Unchanging American Voter. Berkeley: University of California Press .
63.
Sniderman, Paul M., Richard A. Brody, and Philip Tetlock.1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology . New York: Cambridge University Press.
64.
Sniderman, Paul M., James A. Glaser, and Robert Griffin.1990. "Information and Electoral Choice." In John A. Ferejohn and James H. Kuklinski, eds., Information and Democratic Processes . Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
65.
Stimson, James A.1975. "Belief Systems: Constraint, Complexity, and the 1972 Election." American Journal of Political Science19: 393-417.
66.
Verba, Sidney, and Norman H. Nie.1972. Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper & Row.
67.
Zaller, Jon R.1990. "Political Awareness, Elite Opinion Leadership, and the Mass Survey Response." Social Cognition8: 125-53.
68.
. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
