Who's ambivalent and who's not?: Social welfare ambivalence across ideology

American Politics Research

Volumn 36, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 210-235

  Gainous, Jason ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE   (United States)

Author keywords

Affect; Attitude ambivalence; Political ideology; Public opinion; Social cognition; Welfare policy

Indexed keywords

EID: 38849116441     PISSN: 1532673X     EISSN: 15523373     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1532673X07312584     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. 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.
2. Alvarez, R.M., & Brehm, J. (1997). Are Americans ambivalent towards racial policies ? American Journal of Political Science, 41, 345-374.
3. 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.
4. Bartels, L.M. (1993). Messages received: The political impact of media exposure. American Political Science Review, 87, 267-285.
5. Bassili, J.N. (1996). Meta-judgmental versus operative indexes of psychological attributes: The case of measures of attitude strength. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 637-653.
6. Bobo, L., & Kluegel, J.R. (1993). Opposition to race targeting: Self-interest, stratification ideology, or racial attitudes. American Sociological Review, 58, 443-464.
7. Breckler, S.J., & Wiggins, E.C. (1989). Affect versus evaluation in the structure of attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 253-271.
8. Campbell, A., Converse, P.E., Miller, W.E., & Stokes, D.E. (1960). The American voter. New York: John Wiley.
9. Cantril, A.H., & Cantril, S.D. (1999). Reading mixed signals: Ambivalence in American public opinion about government. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
10. Cook, F.L., & Barrett, E.J. (1992). Support for the American welfare state: The views of Congress and the public. New York: Columbia University Press.
11. 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.
12. Craig, S.C., Martinez, M.D., Kane, J.G., & Gainous, J. (2005). Core values, value conflict, and citizens' ambivalence about gay rights. Political Research Quarterly, 58, 5-17.
13. Eagly, A.H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
14. Esses, V.M., Haddock, G., & Zanna, M.P. (1993). Values, stereotypes and emotions as determinants of intergroup attitudes. In D. L. Hamilton & D. M. Mackie (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 137-166). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
15. Federico, C.M. (2005). Education, ideology, and racial ambivalence: Conflict amplification or conflict resolution? In S. C. Craig & M. D. Martinez (Eds.), Ambivalence, politics, and public policy (pp. 83-102). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
16. Feldman, S. (1988). Structure and consistency in public opinion: The role of core beliefs and values. American Journal of Political Science, 32, 416-440.
17. Feldman, S., & Steenbergen, M.R. (2001). The humanitarian foundation of public support for social welfare. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 658-677.
18. Feldman, S., & Zaller, J. (1992). The political culture of ambivalence: Ideological responses to the welfare state. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 268-307.
19. Fiske, S.T., & Taylor, S.E. (1991). Social cognition (2 nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
20. Gainous, J., & Martinez, M.D. (2005). What happens when we simultaneously want opposite things? Ambivalence about social welfare. In S. C. Craig & M. D. Martinez (Eds.), Ambivalence, politics, and public policy (pp. 47-62). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
21. Gilens, M. (1995). Racial attitudes and opposition to welfare. Journal of Politics, 57, 994-1014.
22. Goren, P. (2001). Core principles and policy reasoning in mass publics: A test of two theories. British Journal of Political Science, 31, 159-177.
23. Hill, J.L., & Kriesi, H. (2001). An extension and test of Converse's "black-and-white" model of response stability. American Political Science Review, 95, 397-413.
24. Hodson, G., Maio, G.R., & Esses, V.M. (2001). The role of attitudinal ambivalence in susceptibility to consensus information. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 23, 197-205.
25. Horton, N.J., & Lipsitz, S.R. (2001). Multiple imputation in practice: Comparison of software packages for regression models with missing variables. American Statistician, 55, 244-254.
26. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D.R. (1987). News that matters: Television and American opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28. Iyengar, S., & McGuire, W.J. (1993). Explorations in political psychology. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
29. Jacoby, W.G. (1991). Ideological identification and issue attitudes. American Journal of Political Science, 35, 178-205.
30. Jacoby, W.G. (1994). Public attitudes toward government spending. American Journal of Political Science, 38, 336-361.
31. Jacoby, W.G. (2002). Core values and political attitudes. In B. Norrander & C. Wilcox (Eds.), Understanding public opinion (2 nd ed., pp. 177-202). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
32. Jacoby, W.G. (2005). Is it really ambivalence? Public opinion toward government spending. In S. C. Craig & M. D. Martinez (Eds.), Ambivalence and the structure of political opinion (pp. 149-172). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
33. 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, 361-372.
34. Katz, I., & Hass, G. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 893-905.
35. 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.
36. Kinder, D.R., & Sanders, L.M. (1996). Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37. Kinder, D.R., & Winter, N. (2001). Exploring the racial divide: Blacks, Whites, and opinion on national policy. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 439-456.
38. Krosnick, J.A., & Kinder, D.R. (1990). Altering the foundations of support for the president through priming. American Political Science Review, 84, 497-512.
39. Marcus, G.E. (2003). The psychology of emotions. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 182-22). New York: Oxford University Press.
40. Marcus, G.E., Neuman, W.R., & MacKuen, M. (2000). Affective intelligence and political judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41. Martinez, M.D., Craig, S.C., Kane, J.G., & Gainous, J. (2005). Ambivalence and value conflict: A test of two issues. In S. C. Craig & M. D. Martinez (Eds.), Ambivalence, politics, and public policy (pp. 63-82). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
42. McCann, J.A. (1997). Electoral choices and core value change: The 1992 presidential campaign. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 564-583.
43. Millar, M.G., & Tesser, A. (1986). Effects of affective and cognitive focus on the attitude-behavior relation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 270-276.
44. Miller, J.M., & Krosnick, J.A. (2000). News media impact on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Politically knowledgeable citizens are guided by a trusted source. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 301-315.
45. Mutz, D.C. (1998). Impersonal influence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
46. Nelson, T.E. (1999). Group affect and attribution in social policy opinion. Journal of Politics, 61, 331-362.
47. Nelson, T.E., & Kinder, D.R. (1996). Issue frames and group-centrism in American public opinion. Journal of Politics, 58, 1055-1078.
48. Newby-Clark, I.R., McGregor, I., & Zanna, M.P. (2005). Ambivalence and accessibility: The consequences of accessible ambivalence. In S. C. Craig & M. D. Martinez (Eds.), Ambivalence and the structure of political opinion (pp. 33-53). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
49. Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J., & Tannenbaum, P.H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
50. Popkin, S.L. (1991). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
52. Schneider, S.K., & Jacoby, W.G. (2005). Elite discourse and American public opinion: The case of welfare spending. Political Research Quarterly, 58, 367-379.
53. Schnell, F. (1993). The foundations of abortion attitudes: The role of values and value conflict. In M. L. Goggin (Ed.), Understanding the new politics of abortion (pp. 23-43). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
54. Schwartz, S.H. (1992). Universals in the content of structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1-65). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
55. Sears, D.O. (2000). The role of affect in symbolic politics. In J. H. Kuklinski (Ed.), Citizens and politics: Perspective from political psychology (pp. 14-40). New York: Cambridge University Press.
56. Sniderman, P.M., Brody, R.A., & Tetlock, P.E. (1991). Reasoning and choice: Explorations in political psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
57. Steenbergen, M.R., & Brewer, P.R. (2000). The not-so-ambivalent public: Policy attitudes in the political culture of ambivalence. In W. E. Saris & P. M. Sniderman (Eds.), The issue of belief: Essays in the intersection of non-attitudes and attitude change (pp. 101-142). Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam School of Communication Research.
58. Stoker, L. (1993). Judging presidential character: The demise of Gary Hart. Political Behavior, 15, 193-223.
59. 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: Lawrence Erlbaum.
60. Valentino, N.A., Hutchings, V.L., & White, I.K. (2002). Cues that matter: How political ads prime racial attitudes during campaigns. American Political Science Review, 96, 75-90.
61. Wilcox, C., & Norrander, B. (2002). Of moods and morals: The dynamics of opinion on abortion and gay rights. In B. Norrander & C. Wilcox (Eds.), Understanding public opinion (2 nd ed., pp. 121-147). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
62. Zaller, J.R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
63. Zaller, J.R., & Feldman, S. (1992). A simple theory of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 579-616.