Political parties, motivated reasoning, and public opinion formation

Political Psychology

Volumn 35, Issue SUPPL.1, 2014, Pages 129-156

  Leeper, Thomas J ^a   Slothuus, Rune ^a  

^a AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Motivated reasoning; Political parties; Public opinion

Indexed keywords

EID: 84892840895     PISSN: 0162895X     EISSN: 14679221     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/pops.12164     Document Type: Article

References (172)

1. Aldrich, J. H. (1995). Why parties? Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
2. Althaus, S. L. (2006). False starts, dead ends, and new opportunities in public opinion research. Critical Review, 18(1-3), 75-104.
3. Bartels, L. M. (1996). Uninformed votes: Information effects in presidential elections. American Journal of Political Science, 40(1), 194-230.
4. Bartels, L. M. (2002). Beyond the running tally. Political Behavior, 24(2), 117-150.
5. Bartels, L. M. (2008). Unequal democracy: The political economy of the new gilded age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529.
7. Berelson, B. R. (1952). Democratic theory and public opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 16(3), 313-330.
8. Bolsen, T., Druckman, J. N., & Cook, F. L (n.d.). The influence of partisan motivated reasoning on public opinion. Political Behavior. Forthcoming.
9. Boninger, D. S., Krosnick, J. A., & Berent, M. K. (1995). Origins of Attitude Importance: Self-interest, social identification, and value relevance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(1), 61-80.
10. Boudreau, C., & MacKenzie, S. A. (n.d.). Informing the electorate? How party cues and policy information affect public opinion about initiatives. American Journal of Political Science. Forthcoming.
11. Brader, T., Tucker, J. A., & Duell, D. (2013). Which parties can lead opinion? Experimental evidence on partisan cue taking in multiparty democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 46(11), 1485-1517.
12. Brader, T. A., Tucker, J. A., & Duell, D. (n.d.). Which parties can lead opinion? Experimental evidence on partisan cue taking in multiparty democracies. Comparative Political Studies. Forthcoming.
13. Brady, H. E., & Sniderman, P. M. (1985). Attitude attribution: A group basis for political reasoning. American Political Science Review, 79(4), 1061-1078.
14. Bullock, J. G. (2011). Elite influence on public opinion in an informed electorate. American Political Science Review, 105(August), 496-515.
15. Bullock, J. G., Gerber, A. S., Huber, G. A., & Hill, S. J. (2013). Partisan bias in factual beliefs about politics. Yale University. Typescript.
16. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Morris, K. J. (1983). Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(4), 805-818.
17. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York, NY: Wiley.
18. nd ed., pp. 23-58). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
19. Carmines, E. G., & Kuklinski, J. H. (1990). Incentives, opportunities, and the logic of public opinion in American political representation. In J. A. Ferejohn & J. H. Kuklinski (Eds.), Information and democratic processes (240-268). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
20. Carsey, T. M., & Layman, G. C. (2006). Changing sides or changing minds? Party identification and policy preferences in the American electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 464-477.
21. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752-766.
22. Chaiken, S., & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(March), 460-473.
23. nd ed., 96-129). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
24. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. American Political Science Review, 101(4), 637-655.
25. Christiansen, M. B. (2013). How closed-minded are partisans? The ambiguity of economic conditions and the dynamics of partisan motivated reasoning. Presented at Workshop on Political Psychology: Framing and Opinion Formation at European University Institute (EUI), Italy.
26. Coan, T. G., Merolla, J. L., Stephenson, L. B., & Zechmeister, E. J. (2008). It's not easy being green: Minor party labels as heuristic Aids. Political Psychology, 29(3), 389-405.
27. Cohen, J. L. (2003). Party over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(5), 808-822.
28. Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In David Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206-261). New York, NY: Free Press.
29. Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
30. Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
31. Dancey, L., & Sheagley, G. (2012). Heuristics behaving badly: Party cues and voter knowledge. American Journal of Political Science, 57(2), 312-325.
32. Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
33. Dijksterhuis, A., van Knippenberg, A., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1996). Motivated social cognition: Need for closure effects on memory and judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32(3), 254-270.
34. Disch, L. (2011). Toward a mobilization conception of democratic representation. American Political Science Review, 105(1), 100-114.
35. Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York, NY: Harper and Row.
36. Druckman, J. N. (2012). The politics of motivation. Critical Review, 24, 199-216.
37. Druckman, J. N. (n.d.). Pathologies of studying public opinion, political communication, and democratic responsiveness. Political Communication. Forthcoming.
38. Druckman, J. N., & Bolsen, T. (2011). Framing, motivated reasoning, and opinions about emergent technologies. Journal of Communication, 61(August), 659-688.
39. Druckman, J. N., Kuklinski, J. H., & Sigelman, L. (2009). The unmet potential of interdisciplinary research: Political psychological approaches to voting and public opinion. Political Behavior, 31, 485-510.
40. Druckman, J. N., Fein, J., & Leeper, T. J. (2012). A source of bias in public opinion stability. American Political Science Review, 106(2), 430-454.
41. Druckman, J. N., & Leeper, T. J. (2012). Learning more from political communication experiments: Pretreatment and its effects. American Journal of Political Science, 56(4), 875-896.
42. Druckman, J. N., Peterson, E., & Slothuus, R. (2013). How elite partisan polarization affects public opinion formation. American Political Science Review, 107(1), 57-79.
43. Feldman, S. (2003). Values, ideology, and the structure of political attitudes. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 477-508). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
44. nd ed., pp. 591-626). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
45. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
46. Fiorina, M. P. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
47. Fishbach, A., & Ferguson, M. J. (2007). The goal construct in social psychology. In Arie W. Kruglanski & E. Tory Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 490-515). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
48. Fishbach, A., Shah, J. Y., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2004). Emotional transfer in goal systems. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(6), 723-738.
49. Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2008). Social cognition: From brains to culture. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
50. Förster, J., Liberman, N., & Friedman, R. S. (2007). Seven principles of goal activation: A systematic approach to distinguishing goal priming from priming of non-goal constructs. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(3), 211-233.
51. nd ed., pp. 237-261). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
52. Gadarian, S. K., & Albertson, B. (2013). Anxiety, immigration, and the search for information. Political Psychology. Forthcoming.
53. Gaines, B. J., Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Peyton, B., & Verkuilen, J. (2007). Same facts, different interpretations: Partisan motivation and opinion on Iraq. Journal of Politics, 69(4), 957-974.
54. Gilens, M., & Murakawa, N. (2002). Elite cues and political decision-making. In M. X. delli Carpini, L. Huddy, & R. Y. Shapiro (Eds.), Research in micropolitics (Political decision-making, deliberation and participation, Vol. 6, pp. 15-49). Amsterdam, Netherlands: JAI.
55. Gollwitzer, P. M. (1990). Action phases and mind-sets. In E. Tory Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp. 53-92). New York, NY: Guilford.
56. Goren, P. (2013). On voter competence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
57. Goren, P., Federico, C. M., & Kittlilson, M. C. (2009). Source cues, partisan identities, and political value expression. American Journal of Political Science, 55(October), 805-820.
58. Green, D. P., Palmquist, B., & Schickler, E. (2002). Partisan hearts and minds. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
59. Green, Donald P., & Shapiro, I. (1994). Pathologies of rational choice theory: A critique of applications in political science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
60. Greene, S. (1999). Understanding party identification: A social identity approach. Political Psychology, 20(2), 393-403.
61. Greyer, E. H., Bettman, J. R., & Payne, J. W. (1990). The impact of accuracy and effort feedback and goals on adaptive decision behavior. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 1-16.
62. Groenendyk, E. W. (2013). Competing motives in the partisan mind. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
63. Hart, J., Shaver, P. R., & Goldenberg, J. L. (2005). Attachment, self-esteem, worldviews, and terror management: Evidence for a tripartite security system. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(6), 999-1013.
64. Hart, W., Albarracín, D., Eagly, A. H., Brechan, I., Lindberg, M. J., & Merrill, L. (2009). Feeling validated versus being correct: A meta-analysis of selective exposure to information. Psychological Bulletin, 135(4), 555-588.
65. Hatemi, P. K., & McDermott, R. (2012). Broadening political psychology. Political Psychology, 33(1), 11-25.
66. Hibbing, J. R. (2013). Ten misconceptions concerning neurobiology and politics. Perspectives on Politics, 11(02), 475-489.
67. Highton, B., & Kam, C. D. (2011). The long-term dynamics of partisanship and issue orientations. Journal of Politics, 73(1), 202-215.
68. Hobolt, S. B. (2007). Taking cues on Europe? Voter competence and party endorsements in referendums on European integration. European Journal of Political Research, 46(2), 151-182.
69. Holbrook, A. L., Berent, M. K., Krosnick, J. A., Visser, P. S., & Boninger, D. S. (2005). Attitude importance and the accumulation of attitude-relevant knowledge in memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(5), 749-769.
70. Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
71. Huddy, L. (2001). From social to political identity: A critical examination of social identity theory. Political Psychology, 22(1), 127-156.
72. nd ed., pp. 737-773). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
73. Huddy, L., Sears, D. O., & Levy, J. S. (Eds.). (2013). Oxford handbook of political psychology. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
74. Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology a social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405-431.
75. Iyengar, S., & Valentino, N. A. (2000). Who says what? In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of reason (pp. 108-129). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
76. Jarvis, W. B. G., & Petty, R. E. (1996). The need to evaluate. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 172-194.
77. Jerit, J. (2009). How predictive appeals affect policy opinions. American Journal of Political Science, 53(April), 411-426.
78. Jerit, J., Kuklinski, J. H., & Quirk, P. J. (2009). Strategic politicians, emotional citizens, and the rhetoric of prediction. In E. Borgida, C. M. Federico, & J. L. Sullivan (Eds.), The political psychology of democratic citizenship (pp. 100-124). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
79. Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 290-314.
80. Kam, C. (2005). Who toes the party line? Cues, values, and individual differences. Political Behavior, 27(June), 163-182.
81. Kam, C. D. (2007). When duty calls, do citizens answer? Journal of Politics, 69(1), 17-29.
82. Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communication. New York, NY: Free Press.
83. Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (2005). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communication. Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
84. Key, V. O., Jr. (1966). The responsible electorate. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
85. th ed., pp. 778-867). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
86. Kinder, D. R. (2013). Prejudice and politics. In L. Huddy, D. O. Sears, & J. S. Levy (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (2nd ed., pp. 812-851). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
87. Klar, S. (2013a). Identity and engagement among political independents. Political Psychology. Forthcoming.
88. Klar, S. (2013b). Partisanship in a social setting. Working paper, Northwestern University.
89. Klar, S. (2013c). The influence of competing identities on political preferences. Journal of Politics. Forthcoming.
90. Kriesi, H. (2005). Direct democratic choice. Plymouth, KY: Lexington Books.
91. Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). The psychology of being "right": The problem of accuracy in social perception and cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 106(3), 395-409.
92. Kruglanski, A. W., & Boyatzi, L. M. (2012). The psychology of closed and open mindedness, rationality, and democracy. Critical Review, 24(2), 217-232.
93. Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R. S., Christian, L. M., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002). A theory of goal systems. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 331-378.
94. Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: "Seizing" and "freezing". Psychological Review, 103(2), 263-283.
95. Kuklinski, J. H., & Hurley, N. L. (1994). On hearing and interpreting political messages: A cautionary tale of citizen cue-taking. Journal of Politics, 56(3), 729-751.
96. Kuklinski, J. H., & Quirk, P. J. (2000). Reconsidering the rational public. In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of reason (pp. 153-182). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
97. Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(November), 480-498.
98. Kunda, Z. (1999). Social cognition: Making sense of people. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
99. Lasswell, H. D. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. In Lyman Bryson (Ed.), The communication of ideas: A series of addresses, (pp. 37-51). New York, NY: Cooper Square.
100. Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (1997). Voting correctly. American Political Science Review, 91(3), 585-598.
101. 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.
102. Lavine, H., Johnston, C., & Steenbergen, M. (2012). The ambivalent partisan. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
103. Lebo, M. J., & Cassino, D. (2007). The aggregated consequences of motivated reasoning and the dynamics of partisan presidential approval. Political Psychology, 28(6), 719-746.
104. Leeper, T. J. (N.d.). The informational basis of mass polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly. Forthcoming.
105. Lenz, G. S. (2012). Follow the leader? How voters respond to politicians' performance and policies. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
106. Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 255-275.
107. Levendusky, M. S. (2010). Clearer cues, more consistent voters: A benefit of elite polarization. Political Behavior, 32(1), 111-131.
108. Lewin, K. (1931). The conflict between Aristotelian and Galileian modes of thought in Contemporary Psychology. Journal of General Psychology, 5, 141-177.
109. Lodge, M., & Hamill, R. (1986). A partisan schema for political information processing. American Political Science Review, 80(2), 505-519.
110. Lodge, M., McGraw, K. M, Conover, P. J., Feldman, S., & Miller, A. H. (1991). Where is the schema? Critiques. American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1357-1380.
111. Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2005). The automaticity of affect for political leaders, groups, and issues: An experimental test of the hot cognition hypothesis. Political Psychology, 26(3), 455-482.
112. Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2013). The rationalizing voter. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
113. Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098-2109.
114. Lupia, A. (2006). How elitism undermines the study of voter competence. Critical Review, 18(1-3), 217-232.
115. Lupia, A., & McCubbins, M. D. (1998). The democratic dilemma: Can citizens learn what they need to know? New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
116. Lupu, N. (2013). Party brands and partisanship: Theory with evidence from a survey experiment in Argentina. American Journal of Political Science, 57(1), 49-64.
117. Mansbridge, J. J. (1990). Beyond self-interest. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
118. McGraw, K. M. (2000). Contributions of the cognitive approach to political psychology. Political Psychology, 21(4), 805-832.
119. McGuire, W. J. (1969). The nature of attitudes and attitude change. The Handbook of Social Psychology, 3, 136-314.
120. Merolla, J. L., Stephenson, L. B., & Zechmeister, E. J. (2008). Can Canadians take a hint? The (in)effectiveness of party labels as information shortcuts in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 673-696.
121. Molden, D. C., & Higgins, E. T. (2005). Motivated thinking. In K. Holyoak & B. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 295-318). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
122. Mondak, J. J. (1993). Source cues and policy approval: The cognitive dynamics of public support for the Reagan agenda. American Journal of Political Science, 37(January), 186-212.
123. Mondak, J. J., Hibbing, M. V., Canache, D., Seligson, M. A., & Anderson, M. R. (2010). Personality and civic engagement: An integrative framework for the study of trait effects on political behavior. American Political Science Review, 104(1), 85-110.
124. Nicholson, S. P. (2012). Polarizing cues. American Journal of Political Science, 56(1), 52-66.
125. Nicholson, S. P., & Segura, G. M. (2012). Who's the party of the people? Economic populism and the U.S. public's beliefs about political parties. Political Behavior, 34(2), 369-389.
126. Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220.
127. Nir, L. (2011). Motivated reasoning and public opinion perception. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(3), 504-532.
128. Parker-Stephen, E. (2010). Following the sport vs. rooting for the team: The multiple paths to political sophistication. Working paper, Texas A&M University.
129. Parker-Stephen, E. (2013). Tides of disagreement: How reality facilitates (and inhibits) partisan public opinion. Journal of Politics, 75(4), 1077-1088.
130. Petersen, M. B., Skov, M., Serritzlew, S., & Ramsøy, T. (n.d.). Motivated reasoning and political parties: Evidence for increased processing in the face of party cues. Political Behavior. Forthcoming.
131. Petersen, M. B., Slothuus, R., & Togeby, L. (2010). Political parties and value consistency in public opinion formation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(3), 530-550.
132. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979). Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(10), 1915-1926.
133. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(1), 69-81.
134. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion. New York, NY: Springer.
135. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1990). Involvement and persuasion: Tradition versus integration. Psychological Bulletin, 107(3), 367-374.
136. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 847-855.
137. Petrocik, J. R. (1996). Issue ownership in presidential elections, with a 1980 case study. American Journal of Political Science, 40(July), 825-850.
138. Pittman, T. S., & Zeigler, K. R. (2007). Basic human needs. In Arie W. Kruglanski & E. Tory Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 869-887). New York, NY: Guilford.
139. Popkin, S. L. (1991). The reasoning voter. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
140. Prior, M., Sood, G., & Khanna, K. (2013). You cannot be serious: Do Partisans believe what they Say? Princeton University. Typescript.
141. Redlawsk, D. (2002). Hot cognition or cool consideration. Journal of Politics, 64(November), 1021-1044.
142. Redlawsk, D. P., Civettini, A. J. W., & Emmerson, K. M. (2010). The affective tipping point: Do motivated reasoners ever "get it"? Political Psychology, 31(4), 563-593.
143. Riker, W. H. (1982). Liberalism against populism: A confrontation between the theory of democracy and the theory of social choice. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
144. Rosenblum, N. L. (2010). On the side of the angels: An appreciation of parties and partisanship. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
145. Rosenblum, N. L. (2011). A political theory of partisanship and independence. In J. C. Green & D. J. Coffey (Eds.), The state of the Parties: The changing role of contemporary American parties (pp. 289-306). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.
146. Schattschneider, E. E. (1942). Party government. New York, NY: Rinehart.
147. Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semisovereign people. Hindsdale, IL: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
148. Sears, D. O., & Funk, C. L. (1991). The role of self-interest in social and political attitudes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 1-91.
149. nd ed., pp. 205-236). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
150. Slothuus, R. (2010). When can political parties lead public opinion? Evidence from a natural experiment. Political Communication, 27(2), 158-177.
151. 2 72(3), 630-645.
152. Sniderman, P. M. (2000). Taking Sides: A fixed choice theory of political reasoning. In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of reason (pp. 67-84). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
153. Sniderman, P. M., Brody, R. A., & Tetlock, P. E. (1991). Reasoning and choice: Explorations in political psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
154. Sniderman, P. M., & Bullock, J. (2004). A consistency theory of public opinion and political choice: The hypothesis of menu dependence. In W. E. Saris, & P. M. Sniderman (Eds.), Studies in public opinion (pp. 337-357). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
155. Sniderman, P. M., & Stiglitz, E. H. (2012). The reputational premium: A theory of party identification and spatial reasoning. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
156. Snyder, J. M., & Ting, M. M. (2002). An informational rationale for political parties. American Journal of Political Science, 46(1), 90-110.
157. Stroh, P. K. (1995). Voters as pragmatic cognitive misers: The accuracy-effort trade-off in the candidate evaluation process. In M. Lodge & K. M. McGraw (Eds.), Political judgment: Structure and process (pp. 207-228). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
158. Stubager, R., & Slothuus, R. (2013). What are the sources of political parties' issue ownership? Testing four explanations at the individual level. Political Behavior. Forthcoming.
159. Taber, C. S., Cann, D., & Kucsova, S. (2009). The motivated processing of political arguments. Political Behavior, 31(2), 137-155.
160. Taber, C., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(July), 755-769.
161. Taber, C., & Lodge, M. (2012). The scope and generality of automatic affective biases in political thinking: Reply to the symposium. Critical Review, 24(2), 247-268.
162. Tetlock, P. E. (1983). Accountability and complexity of thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(1), 74-83.
163. Tetlock, P. E., & Levi, A. (1982). Attribution bias: On the inconclusiveness of the cognition-motivation debate. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18(1), 68-88.
164. Tetlock, P. E., Skitka, L., & Boettger, R. (1989). Social and cognitive strategies for coping with accountability: Conformity, complexity, and bolstering. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(4), 632-640.
165. Tocqueville, A. de. (2000). Democracy in America. Harper Perennial Modern Classics.
166. Tomz, M., & van Houweling, R. P. (2008). Candidate positioning and voter choice. American Political Science Review, 102(3), 303-318.
167. Tomz, M., & van Houweling, R. P. (2009). The electoral implications of candidate ambiguity. American Political Science Review, 103(1), 83-98.
168. Valentino, N. A., Hutchings, V. L., Banks, A. J., & Davis, A. K. (2008). Is a worried citizen a good citizen? Emotions, political information seeking, and learning via the Internet. Political Psychology, 29(2), 247-273.
169. Visser, P. S., Bizer, G. Y., & Krosnick, J. A. (2006). Exploring the latent structure of strength-related attitude attributes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38(06), 1-67.
170. Visser, P. S., Krosnick, J. A., & Simmons, J. P. (2003). Distinguishing the cognitive and behavioral consequences of attitude importance and certainty: A new approach to testing the common-factor hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(2), 118-141.
171. Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
172. Zaller, J. R. (1996). The myth of massive media impact revived: New support for a discredited Idea. In D. C. Mutz, P. M. Sniderman, & R. A. Brody (Eds.), Political persuasion and attitude change (pp. 17-78). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 17-78.