This article explores the role that two theoretically distinct conceptions of mass “ideology”—operational and symbolic—play in shaping policy and electoral change in the United States. I consider both types of ideology as aggregate, dynamic concepts, and find that though the public’s operational and symbolic preferences change in broadly similar ways over time, there are consequential differences in how these two types of ideology respond to the political context and in how they intersect with important political and social outcomes. Changes in the public’s operational ideology—the dominant direction of public views on specific policy matters—react systematically to changes in the policy context and are strongly predictive of both electoral outcomes and federal policy change. Changes in the public’s symbolic ideology—the proportion of citizens who identify as liberals or conservatives—are essentially unconnected to changes in policy and only modestly predictive of electoral results.
AbramowitzA. I. (2008). Forecasting the 2008 presidential election with the time-for-change model. PS: Political Science and Politics, 4, 691-695.
2.
AbramowitzA. I.SaundersK. L. (1998). Ideological realignment in the U.S. electorate. Journal of Politics, 60, 634-652.
3.
AbramowitzA. I.SaundersK. L. (2006). Exploring the bases of partisanship in the American electorate: Social identity vs. ideology. Political Research Quarterly, 59, 175-187.
4.
AnsolabahereS.RoddenJ.SnyderJ. M. (2006). Purple America. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 97-118.
5.
BerryW. D.RingquistE.FordingR.HansonR. L. (2007). The measurement and stability of state citizen ideology. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 7, 111-132.
6.
BinderS. (1999). The dynamics of legislative gridlock, 1947-1996. American Political Science Review, 93, 519-533.
7.
Box-SteffensmeierJ. M.DeBoefS. (2001). Macropartisanship and macroideology in the sophisticated electorate. Journal of Politics, 63, 232-248.
8.
BracePArceneauxK.JohnsonM.UlbigS. G. (2004). Does state political ideology change over time?Political Research Quarterly, 57, 529-540.
9.
Box-SteffensmeierJ.KnightK.SigelmanL. (1998). The interplay of macropartisanship and macroideology: A time series analysis. Journal of Politics, 60, 1031-1049.
10.
CampbellJ. E. (2008). The trial-heat forecast of the 2008 presidential vote: Performance and value considerations in an open-seat election. PS: Political Science and Politics, 41, 697-701.
11.
CantrilA.CantrilS. D. (1999). Reading mixed signals: Ambivalence in public opinion about government. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Press.
12.
CarseyT.HardenJ. (2010). New measures of partisanship, ideology, and policy mood in the American states. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 10, 136-156.
13.
ChiouF.RothenbergL. C. (2003). When pivotal politics meets partisan politics. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 503-522.
14.
ConoverP. J.FeldmanS. (1980). The origins and meaning of liberal-conservative self identifications. American Journal of Political Science, 25, 617-645.
15.
ConverseP. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In ApterD. E. (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206-261). New York, NY: Free Press.
16.
DeBoefS.StimsonJ. A. (1995). The dynamic structure of congressional elections. Journal of Politics, 57, 630-648.
17.
EnnsP.KellstedtP. (2008). Policy mood and political sophistication: Why everybody moves mood. British Journal of Political Science, 38, 433-454.
18.
EllisC.StimsonJ. A. (2009). Symbolic ideology in the American electorate. Electoral Studies, 28, 388-402.
19.
EllisC.StimsonJ. A. (2011). Pathways to ideology in American politics. In SnidermanP. M.HightonB. (Eds), Facing the challenge of democracy (pp. 120-152). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
20.
EllisC.StimsonJ. A. (2012). Ideology in America. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21.
EriksonR. S.MacKuenM. B.StimsonJ. A. (2002a). The macro polity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22.
EriksonR. S.MacKuenM. B.StimsonJ. A. (2002b). Public opinion and policy: Causal flow in a macro model. In ManzaJ.CookF. L.PageB. (Eds.), Navigating public opinion: Polls, policy, and the future of American democracy (pp. 33-53). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
23.
EriksonR. SWrightG.McIverJ. (1993). Statehouse democracy: Public opinion and policy in the American states. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24.
FairR. C. (2009). Presidential and congressional vote-share equations. American Journal of Political Science, 53, 55-72.
25.
FaricyC. (2011). The politics of social policy in America: The causes and effects of indirect versus direct social spending. Journal of Politics, 73, 74-83.
26.
FreeL. A.CantrilH. (1967). The political beliefs of Americans: A study of public opinion. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
27.
GelmanA.ParkD.ShorB.BafumiJ. (2008). Rich state, poor state, red state, blue state. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28.
GrossbackL. J.PetersonD. A. M.StimsonJ. A. (2003). Mandate politics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
29.
HardenJ.CarseyT. (2012). Balancing constituency representation and party responsiveness in the US Senate: the conditioning effect of state ideological heterogeneity. Public Choice (in press).
30.
HetheringtonM. J. (2001). Resurgent mass partisanship: The role of elite polarization. American Political Science Review, 95, 619-631.
31.
HetheringtonM. J. (2005). Why trust matters. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32.
HibbsD. (2010). The 2010 midterm election for the U.S. House of representatives. Retrieved from www.douglas-hibbs.com
33.
HillK. Q.LeighleyJ. E.Hinton-AnderssonA. (1995). Lower-class mobilization and policy linkage in the U.S. states. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 75-86.
34.
JacobyW. G. (1995). The structure of ideological thinking in the American electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 314-335.
35.
JacobyW. G. (2000). Issue framing and public opinion on government spending. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 750-767.
36.
JacobyW. G. (2002). Liberal-conservative thinking in the American electorate. Political Decision Making, Deliberation, and Participation, 6, 97-147.
37.
JacobyW. G. (2009). Ideology and vote choice in the 2004 presidential election. Electoral Studies, 28, 584-594.
38.
KellstedtP.PetersonD. A. M.RamirezM. (2010). The macro politics of a gender gap. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74, 477-498.
39.
KellyN. (2009). The politics of income inequality in the United States. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
KingdonJ. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
41.
KnightK. (1990). Ideology and public opinion. In LongS. (Ed.), Research in micropolitics (Vol. 3, pp. 59-82). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
42.
KnightK. (2006). Transformations of the concept of ideology in the twentieth century. American Political Science Review, 100, 619-626.
43.
LaymanG. C.CarseyT. (2002). Party polarization and “conflict extension” in the American electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 46, 786-802.
44.
LevenduskyM. (2009). The partisan sort. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
45.
LuskinR. C. (1987). Measuring ideological sophistication. American Journal of Political Science, 31, 856-899.
46.
LuttbegN. R.GantM. M. (1985). The failure of liberal-conservative ideology as a cognitive structure. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49, 80-93.
47.
MayhewD. R. (2005). Divided we govern (2nd ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
48.
MillerA. S. (1992). Are self-proclaimed conservatives really conservative? Trends in attitudes and self-identification among the young. Social Forces, 71, 195-210.
49.
NelsonT. E.KinderD. R. (1996). Issue frames and group-centrism in American public opinion. Journal of Politics, 58, 1055-1078.
50.
PageB. I.ShapiroR. Y. (1992). The rational public: Fifty years of trends in American’ policy preferences. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
51.
PooleK. T.RosenthalH. (2007). Ideology and congress. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishing.
52.
PoppE.RudolphT. J. (2011). A tale of two ideologies: Explaining public support for economic interventions. Journal of Politics, 73, 808-820.
53.
RotundaR. D. (1986). The politics of language. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press.
54.
SchifferA. J. (2000). I’m not that liberal: Explaining conservative democratic identification. Political Behavior, 22, 293-310.
55.
SchneiderA.IngramH. (1993). Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy. American Political Science Review, 87, 334-347.
56.
SearsD. O.LauR. R.TylerT. R.AllenH. M.Jr., (1980). Self-interest versus symbolic politics in policy attitudes and presidential voting. American Political Science Review, 74, 670-684.
57.
SearsD.O.CitrinJ. (1982). Tax revolt: Something for nothing in California. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
58.
SmithM. (2000). American business and political power. Chicago, MA: University of Chicago Press.
59.
SorokaS.WlezienC. (2010). Degrees of democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
60.
StimsonJ. A. (1999). Public opinion in America (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview.
61.
StimsonJ. A. (2004). Tides of consent. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
62.
StoneW. J.SimasE. N. (2010). Candidate valence and ideological positions in U.S. House elections. American Journal of Political Science, 54, 371-388.
63.
TreierS.HillygusD. S. (2009). The nature of political ideology in the contemporary electorate. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73, 679-703.
64.
UraJ. D.EllisC. (2008). Income, preferences, and the dynamics of policy responsiveness. PS: Political Science and Politics, 41, 785-794.
65.
VavreckL. (2001). The reasoning voter meets the strategic candidate. American Politics Research, 29, 507-529.
66.
WlezienC. (1995). The public as thermostat: Dynamics of preferences for spending. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 981-1000.
67.
WlezienC. (2000). An essay on combined time series processes. Electoral Studies, 19, 77-93.
