The structure of partisan attitudes: Reexamining partisan dimensionality and ambivalence

Political Psychology

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 809-822

  Greene, Steven ^a  

^a NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Ambivalence; Partisan dimensionality; Party Identification

Indexed keywords

EID: 27344444689     PISSN: 0162895X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00445.x     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Aldrich, J. H. (1995). Why parties? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Alvarez, R. M. (1990). The puzzle of party identification. American Politics Quarterly, 18, 476-491.
3. Alvarez, R. M., & Brehm, J. J. (1995). American ambivalence towards abortion policy: Development of a heteroskedastic probit model of competing values. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 1055-1082.
4. Alvarez, R. M., & Brehm, J. J. (1997). Are Americans ambivalent towards racial policies? American Journal of Political Science, 41, 345-374.
5. Boyd, H. W., & Westfall, R. (1972). Marketing research (3rd Ed.). Homewood, IL: Richard D Irwin.
6. Cacioppo, J. T., & Berntson, G. G. (1994). Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review of the separability of positive and negative substrates. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 401-423.
7. Chiu, I., & Brennan, M. (1990). The effectiveness of some techniques for improving mail survey response rates: A meta-analysis. Marketing Bulletin, 1, 13-18.
8. Craig, S. C. (1985). Partisanship, independence, and no preference: Another look at the measurement of party identification. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 274-290.
9. Craig, S. C., Kane, J. G., & Martinez, M. D. (2002). Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't: Citizens' ambivalence about abortion. Political Psychology, 23, 285-301.
10. 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.
11. Crites, S., Fabrigar, L. R., & Petty, R. E. (1994). Measuring the affective and cognitive properties of attitudes: Conceptual and methodological issues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 619-634.
12. Fabrigar, L. R., & Petty, R. E. (1998). The role of the affective and cognitive bases of attitudes in susceptibility to affectively and cognitively based persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 363-381.
13. Geer, J. G. (2002). Parties and partisanship: A brief introduction. Political Behavior, 24, 85-91.
14. Green, D. P. (1988). On the dimensionality of public sentiment towards partisan and ideological groups. American Journal of Political Science, 32, 758-780.
15. Green, D. P., Palmquist, P., & Schickler, E. (2002). Partisan hearts and minds. New Haven: Yale University Press.
16. Greene, S. (1999). The psychological structure of partisanship: Affect, cognition, and social identity in partisanship. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
17. Greene, S. (2002). The social-psychological measurement of partisanship. Political Behavior, 24, 171-197.
18. Keith, B., Magleby, B., Nelson, C., Orr, E., Westyle, M., & Wolfinger, R. (1992). The myth of the independent voter. Berkeley: University of California Press.
19. Kennedy, P. (1998). A guide to econometrics. Cambridge: MIT Press.
20. Knight, K. (1984). The dimensionality of partisan and ideological affect. American Politics Quarterly, 12, 305-334.
21. Lavine, H. (2001). The electoral consequences of ambivalence toward presidential candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 915-929.
22. Petrocik, J. (1974). An analysis of intransitivities in the index of party identification. Political Methodology, 1, 31-47.
23. Stanga, J., & Sheffield, J. (1987). The myth of zero partisanship: Attitudes towards American political parties, 1964-1984. American Journal of Political Science, 31, 829-855.
24. Thompson, M. M., Zanna, M. P., & Griffin, D. W. (1995). Let's not be indifferent about (attitudinal) ambivalence. In J. A. Krosnick & R. E. Petty (Eds.), Attitude strength: antecedents and consequences (pp. 361-386). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
25. Wattenberg, M. P. (1998). The decline of American political parties, 1952-1996. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
26. Weisberg, H. F. (1980). A multidimensional conceptualization of party identification. Political Behavior, 2, 33-60.
27. Wilcox, C., Sigelman, L., & Cook, E. (1989). Some like it hot: Individual differences in responses to group feeling thermometers. Public Opinion Quarterly, 53, 246-257.