Making a Party Leader Less of a Party Member: The Impact of Ambivalence on Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Political Party Attitudes

Political Psychology

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 769-780

  Haddock, Geoffrey ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Ambivalence; Assimilation and contrast effects; Political attitudes

Indexed keywords

EID: 0346265165     PISSN: 0162895X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1467-9221.2003.00353.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Abelson, R. P., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., & Fiske, S. T. (1982). Affective and semantic components in political person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 619-630.
2. Alvarez, M. R., & Brehm, J. (1997). Are Americans ambivalent towards racial policies? American Journal of Political Science, 41, 345-374.
3. Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2000). Attitudinal ambivalence: A test of three key hypotheses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1421-1432.
4. Bassili, J. N. (1996). Meta-attitudinal versus operative indexes of psychological attributes: The case of measures of attitude strength. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 637-653.
5. Bassili, J. N., & Krosnick, J. A. (2000). Do strength-related attitude properties determine susceptibility to response effects? New evidence from response latency, attitude extremity, and aggregate indices. Political Psychology, 21, 107-132.
6. Bless, H., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Context effects in political judgment: Assimilation and contrast effects as a function of categorization processes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 159-172.
7. Fazio, R. H., & Williams, C. J. (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 Psychology, 51, 505-514.
8. Fitzsimons, G. J., & Shiv, B. (2001). Nonconscious and contaminative effects of hypothetical questions on subsequent decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 224-238.
9. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
10. Haddock, G., & Carrick, R. S. (1999). "The Queen Mother and I": Assimilation, contrast, and attitudes toward social groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 123-129.
11. Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133-168). New York: Guilford.
12. Hodges, S. D., & Wilson, T. D. (1993). Effects of analyzing reasons on attitude change: The moderating role of attitude accessibility. Social Cognition, 11, 353-366.
13. Kinder, D. R. (1998). Opinion and action in the realm of politics. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., vol. 2, pp. 778-867). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
14. Lavine, H. (1997). Reaction time: A methodological tool for political psychology? Political Psychologist, 2, 3-6.
15. Lavine, H. (2001). The electoral consequences of ambivalence toward presidential candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 915-929.
16. Lavine, H., Borgida, E., & Sullivan, J. L. (2000). On the relationship between attitude involvement and attitude accessibility: Toward a cognitive-motivational model of political information processing. Political Psychology, 21, 81-106.
17. Lavine, H., Huff, J. W., Wagner, S. H., & Sweeney, D. (1998). The moderating influence of attitude strength on the susceptibility to context effects in attitude surveys. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 359-371.
18. Lord, C. G., & Lepper, M. R. (1999). Attitude representation theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 262-342.
19. Meffert, M. F., Guge, M., & Lodge, M. (in press). Good, bad, and ambivalent: The consequences of multidimensional political attitudes. In W. Saris & P. Sniderman (Eds.), The issue of belief: Essays in the intersection of non-attitudes and attitude change. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Press.
20. Morwitz, V. G., & Pluzinski, C. (1996). Do polls reflect opinions or do opinions reflect polls? The impact of political polling on voters' expectations, preferences, and behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 53-67.
21. Schwarz, N. (1999). Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist, 54, 93-105.
22. Schwarz, N., & Bless, H. (1992). Constructing reality and its alternatives: An inclusion/exclusion model of assimilation and contrast effects in social judgment. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), The construction of social judgments (pp. 217-245). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Schwarz, N., Strack, F., & Mai, H. P. (1991). Assimilation and contrast effects in part-whole question sequences: A conversational logic analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 3-23.
24. Sia, T. L., Lord, C. G., Blessum, K. A., Ratcliff, C. D., & Lepper, M. R. (1997). Is a rose always a rose? The role of social category exemplar change in attitude stability and attitude-behavior consistency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 501-514.
25. Snyder, M., & Kendzierski, D. (1982). Acting on one's attitudes: Procedures for linking attitudes and behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 165-183.
26. Stapel, D. A., & Schwarz, N. (1998). The Republican who did not want to become president: Colin Powell's impact on evaluations of the Republican party and Bob Dole. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 690-698.
27. Thompson, M. 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.
28. Tourangeau, R., Rasinski, K. A., Bradburn, N., & D'Andrade, R. (1989). Carryover effects in attitude surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 53, 495-524.
29. Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (Eds.) (2000). The psychology of survey response. New York: Cambridge University Press.
30. Wegener, D. T., Downing, J., Krosnick, J. A., & Petty, R. E. (1995). Measures and manipulations of strength-related properties of attitudes: Current practice and future directions. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 455-487). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. 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.