Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't: Citizens' ambivalence about abortion

Political Psychology

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 285-301

  Craig, Stephen C ^a   Kane, James G ^a   Martinez, Michael D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Abortion; Ambivalence; Attitude consistency; Survey research

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036591767     PISSN: 0162895X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/0162-895X.00282     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Abelson, R.P. (1995). Attitude extremity. In R.E. Petty & J.A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 25-41). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Abelson, R.P., Kinder, D.R., Peters, M.D., & Fiske, S.T. (1982). Affective and semantic components in political perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 619-630.
3. Abramowitz, A.I. (1995). It's abortion, stupid: Policy voting in the 1992 presidential election. Journal of Politics, 57, 176-186.
4. Abramowitz, A.I. (1997). The cultural divide in American politics: Moral issues and presidential voting. In B. Norrander & C. Wilcox (Eds.), Understanding public opinion (pp. 211-226). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
5. Adams, G.D. (1997). Abortion: Evidence of an issue evolution. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 718-737.
6. Alvarez, R.M., & Brehm, J. (1995). American ambivalence towards abortion policy: Development of a heteroskedastic probit model of competing values. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 1055-1082.
7. Alvarez, R.M., & Brehm, J. (1997). Are Americans ambivalent towards racial policies? American Journal of Political Science, 41, 345-374.
8. Alvarez, R.M., & Brehm, J. (1998). Speaking in two voices: American equivocation about the Internal Revenue Service. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 418-452.
9. Alvarez, R.M., & Brehm, J. (2001). Hard choices, easy answers: Values, information, and American public opinion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
10. Bargh, J.A., Chaiken, S., Govender, R., & Pratto, F. (1992). The generality of the automatic attitude activation effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 893-912.
11. Cacioppo, J.T., & Berntson, G.G. (1994). Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 401-423.
12. Cantril, A.H., & Cantril, S.D. (1999). Reading mixed signals: Ambivalence in American public opinion about government. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
13. Converse, P.E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D.E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206-261). New York: Free Press.
14. Cook, E.A., Jelen, T.G., & Wilcox, C. (1992). Between two absolutes: Public opinion and the politics of abortion. Boulder, CO: Westview.
15. Cook, E.A., Jelen, T.G., & Wilcox; C. (1994). Issue voting in gubernatorial elections: Abortion and post-Webster politics. Journal of Politics, 56, 187-199.
16. Craig, S.C., Kane, J.G., & Martinez, M.D. (2000). Ambivalence, attitude strength, and response instability: A two-wave panel study of abortion attitudes in Florida. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.
17. Craig, S.C., Martinez, M.D., & Kane, J.G. (1999). The structure of political competition: Dimensions of candidate and group evaluation revisited. Political Behavior, 21, 283-304.
18. Eagly, A.H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
19. Feldman, S. (1995). Answering survey questions. In M. Lodge & K.M. McGraw (Eds.), Political judgment: Structure and process (pp. 249-270). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
20. Feldman, S., & Zaller, J. (1992). The political culture of ambivalence: Ideological responses to the welfare state. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 268-307.
21. Fiorina, M.P. (1996). Divided government (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
22. Hochschild, J. (1981). What's fair? American beliefs about distributive justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. Kaplan, K.J. (1972). On the ambivalence-indifference problem in attitude theory and measurement: A suggested modification of the semantic differential technique. Psychological Bulletin, 77, 367-372.
24. Katz, I. (1981). Stigma: A social psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Katz, I., Wackenhut, J., & Hass, R.G. (1986). Racial ambivalence, value duality, and behavior. In J.F. Dovidio & S.L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 35-59). New York: Academic Press.
26. Klopfer, F.J., & Madden, T.J. (1980). The middlemost choice on attitude items: Ambivalence, neutrality, or uncertainty? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 97-101.
27. Krosnick, J.A., & Abelson, R.P. (1992). The case for measuring attitude strength in surveys. In J.M. Tanur (Ed.), Questions about questions: Inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys (pp. 177-203). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
28. Lavine, H. (2001). The electoral consequences of ambivalence toward presidential candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 915-929.
29. Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J., & Tannenbaum, P.H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
30. Priester, J.R., & Petty, R.E. (1996). The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: Relating the positive and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 431-449.
31. Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers in attitude surveys: Experiments on question form, wording, and context. New York: Academic Press.
32. Scott, W.A. (1969). Structure of natural cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 261-278.
33. Smith, K.B. (1994). Abortion attitudes and vote choice in the 1984 and 1988 presidential elections. American Politics Quarterly, 22, 354-369.
34. Tatalovich, R. (1997). The politics of abortion in the United States and Canada: A comparative study. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
35. Thompson, M., Zanna, M.P., & Griffin, D.W. (1995). Let's not be indifferent about (attitudinal) ambivalence. In R.E. Petty & J.A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 361-386). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Thurstone, L.L. (1928). Attitudes can be measured. American Journal of Sociology, 33, 529-554.
37. Thurstone, L.L., & Chave, E.J. (1929). The measurement of attitude. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38. Tourangeau, R., Rasinski, K.A., Bradburn, N., & D'Andrade, R. (1989). Carryover effects in attitude surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 53, 495-524.
39. Tribe, L.H. (1992). Abortion: The clash of absolutes. New York: Norton.
40. Zaller, J.R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41. Zaller, J., & Feldman, S. (1992). A simple theory of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 579-616.