Accuracy and Bias in Perceptions of Political Knowledge

Political Behavior

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 335-356

  Ryan, John Barry ^a  

^a FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Political discussion; Political expertise; Social networks

Indexed keywords

EID: 79956266829     PISSN: 01909320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11109-010-9130-0     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Achen, C. H. (1986). The statistical analysis of quasi-experiments. Berkeley: University of California Press.
2. Ahn, T. K., Huckfeldt, R., Mayer, A. K., & Ryan, J. B. (2008). Political experts and the collective enhancement of civic capacity. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
3. Ahn, T. K., Huckfeldt, R., & Ryan, J. B. (2010). Communication, influence, and informational asymmetries among voters. Political Psychology. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-9221. 2010. 00783. x.
4. Bartels, L. M. (2002). Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior, 24(2), 117-150.
5. Chaffee, S., & Frank, S. (1996). How Americans get political information: Print versus broadcast news. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546, 48-58.
6. Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
7. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper Row.
8. Fiorina, M. P. (1990). Information and rationality in elections. In J. A. Ferejohn & J. H. Kuklinski (Eds.), Information and democratic processes (pp. 329-342). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
9. Fiske, S. T., & Pavelchak, M. A. (1986). Category-based versus piecemeal-based affective responses: Developments in schema-triggered affect. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivations, cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp. 167-203). New York: Guilford Press.
10. Huckfeldt, R. (2001). The social communication of political expertise. American Journal of Political Science, 45(2), 425-438.
11. Huckfeldt, R., Levine, J., Morgan, W., & Sprague, J. (1998). Election campaigns, social communication, and the accessibility of perceived discussant preference. Political Behavior, 20(4), 263-294.
12. Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (1991). Discussant effects on vote choice: Intimacy, structure and interdependence. American Political Science Review, 53(1), 122-158.
13. Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics, and social communication: Information and influence in an election campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14. Kenny, C., & Jenner, E. (2008). Direction versus proximity in the social influence process. Political Behavior, 30(1), 73-95.
15. Klofstad, C., McClurg, S. D., & Rolfe, M. (2006). Family members, friends and neighbors: Differences in personal political networks. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
16. Klofstad, C., McClurg, S. D., & Rolfe, M. (2009). Measurement of political discussion networks: A comparison of two 'name generator' procedures. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73(3), 462-483.
17. Kuklinski, J. H., & Quirk, P. J. (2000). Reconsidering the rational public: Cognition, heuristics, and mass opinion. In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, the bounds of rationality. New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schwieder, D., & Rich, R. F. (2000). Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. Journal of Politics, 62(3), 790-816.
19. Lau, R. R., Andersen, D. J., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2008). An exploration of correct voting in recent U. S. presidential elections. American Journal of Political Science, 52(2), 395-411.
20. Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 951-971.
21. Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2006). How voters decide: Information processing during election campaigns. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22. Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1948). The people's choice: How a voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New York: Columbia University Press.
23. Lippmann, W. (1922). Public opinion. New York: Free Press.
24. Lodge, M., & Taber, C. (2000). Three steps toward a theory of motivated political reasoning. In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality. New York: Cambridge University Press.
25. Lupia, A. (2006). How elitism undermines the study of voter competence. Critical Review, 18, 217-232.
26. Lupia, A., & McCubbins, M. D. (1998). The democratic dilemma: Can citizens learn what they need to know? New York: Cambridge University Press.
27. Luskin, R. C. (1990). Explaining political sophistication. Political Behavior, 12(4), 331-361.
28. McClurg, S. D., & Wade, M. (2006). "He said, she said: The interpersonal foundations of the gender gap." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
29. Mendez, J., & Osborn, T. (2005). Gender crossfire? The political discussion of women and men. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
30. Mendez, J. M., & Osborn, T. (2010). Gender and the perception of knowledge in political discussion. Political Research Quarterly, 63(2), 269-279.
31. Mondak, J. J. (1995). Media exposure and political discussion in U. S. elections. Journal of Politics, 57(1), 62-85.
32. Mondak, J. J., & Anderson, M. R. (2004). The knowledge gap: A reexamination of gender-based differences in political knowledge. Journal of Politics, 66(2), 492-512.
33. Murphy, N. A., Hall, J. A., & Colvin, C. R. (2003). Accurate intelligence assessments in social interactions: Mediators and gender effects. Journal of Personality, 71(3), 465-493.
34. Paulhus, D. L., & Morgan, K. L. (1997). Perceptions of intelligence in leaderless groups: The dynamic effects of shyness and acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(3), 581-591.
35. Price, V., & Zaller, J. (1993). Who gets the news? Alternative measures of news reception and their implications for research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57(2), 133-164.
36. Richey, S. (2008). The autoregressive influence of social network political knowledge on voting behaviour. British Journal of Political Science, 38(3), 527-542.
37. Ryan, J. B. (2010). The effects of network expertise and biases on vote choice. Political Communication, 27(1), 44-58.
38. Sokhey, A. E., & McClurg, S. D. (2008). Social networks and correct voting. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
39. Zebrowitz, L. A., Hall, J. A., Murphy, N. A., & Rhodes, G. (2002). Looking smart and looking good: Facial cues to intelligence and their origins. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(2), 238-249.