The Political Environment and Foreign Policy Opinions: British Attitudes Toward European Integration, 1972–1979

British Journal of Political Science

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 1986, Pages 113-134

  Dalton, Russell J ^a   Duval, Robert ^b  

^a FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84974253142     PISSN: 00071234     EISSN: 14692112     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0007123400003823     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. David Handley, ‘Public Opinion and European Integration', European Journal of Political Research, ix (1981), 335–64.
2. Roger Jowell and Gerald Hoinville, eds, Britain into Europe (London: Croom Helm, 1977);
3. Hugh Berrington, ‘Public Opinion and the Common Market', paper presented at the Universities Association for Contemporary European Studies, 1975.
4. Jowell and Hoinville, Britain into Europe;
5. Berrington, ‘Public Opinion and the Common Market'.
6. Karl Deutsch and Richard Merritt, ‘Effects of Events on National and International Images', in H. Kelman, ed., International Behavior (New York: Holt, 1965);
7. James Rosenau, Public Opinion and Foreign Policy (New York: Random House, 1961).
8. David Butler and Donald Stokes, Political Change in Britain: The Evolution of Electoral Choice, 2nd edn (London: Macmillan, 1974), pp. 309–13.
9. M. Abravanel and Barry Hughes, ‘Public Opinion and Foreign Policy Behavior', in Patrick McGowan, ed., Sage International Yearbook of Foreign Policy Studies (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1973);
10. John Mueller, War, Presidents and Public Opinion (New York: Wiley, 1973);
11. Rosenau, Public Opinion and Foreign Policy;
12. Robert Shepard, Public Opinion and European Integration (Lexington, Mass.: Lexington, 1975).
13. Sophia Peterson, ‘Events, Mass Opinion and Elite Attitudes', in Richard Merritt, ed., Communication in International Politics (Champaign-Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press, 1972), pp. 252–71.
14. Michael MacKuen, ‘Social Communication and the Mass Policy Agenda', in Michael MacKuen and Steve Coombs, More Than News (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1981).
15. Joseph Klapper, The Effects of Mass Communication (New York: Free Press, 1960).
16. Berrington, ‘Public Opinion and the Common Market'.
17. Jowell and Hoinville, Britain into Europe, Chap. 2.
18. Jowell and Hoinville, Britain into Europe, pp. 54–7.
19. Juliet Lodge and Valentine Herman, ‘Direct Elections to the European Parliament', European Journal of Political Research, viii (1980), 45–62.
20. Eurobarometer Reports (Brussels: Commission of the European Communities, semi-annual series).
21. Colin Seymour-Ure, ‘Press', in David Butler and Uwe Kitzinger, eds, The 1975 Referendum (London: Macmillan, 1976).
22. Richard Rose, Politics in England, 3rd edn (Boston: Little, Brown, 1980), pp. 214–16.
23. Bo Särlvik et al., ‘Britain's Membership in the EEC', European Journal of Political Research, iv (1976), 83–113;
24. Handley, ‘Public Opinion and European Integration';
25. Ronald Inglehart, The Silent Revolution (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977), Chap. 12.
26. Abravanel and Hughes, ‘Public Opinion and Foreign Policy';
27. for another application of this logic see Philip Converse, ‘The Concept of the Normal Vote', in Angus Campbell et al., Elections and the Political Order (New York: Wiley, 1966).
28. Abravanel and Hughes, ‘Public Opinion and Foreign Policy';
29. R. B. Mahoney, ‘The Superpower Balance, Military Policy and Public Opinion in the United Kingdom, France, and the Federal Republic of Germany', in D. Daniel, ed., International Perceptions of the Superpower Balance (New York: Praeger, 1978);
30. Peterson, ‘Events, Mass Opinion, and Elite Attitudes'.
31. MacKuen, ‘Social Communication and the Mass Policy Agenda'; Lutz Erbring, ‘The Impact of Political Events on Mass Publics' (Ann Arbor: doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1975).
32. A model of two-step opinion flow also was tested with these data using the procedures described in MacKuen, ‘Social Communication and the Mass Policy Agenda', pp. 37–46. The predictive power of the two-step model equalled the opinion-decay model, even though the former includes more parameters. Parsimony led us to rely on the simpler, though equally accurate, opinion-decay model as the best representation of the events-opinion linkage.
33. The dynamic model utilized in this study had been developed by MacKuen (‘Social Communication and the Mass Policy Agenda')
34. Erbring (The Impact of Political Events). The basic elements of their model can be described briefly, although the interested reader is encouraged to consult the original sources.
35. The reciprocal of c (3.32) represents the time-lag in months required for 63.2 per cent of the initial and residual impact of an event to be accumulated (see MacKuen, ‘Social Communication and the Mass Policy Agenda', p. 45).
36. Thus, opinions do lag behind events, but the time-lag is relatively brief (cf., Abravanel and Hughes, ‘Public Opinion and Foreign Policy Behavior', p. 121).
37. MacKuen, ‘Social Communication and the Mass Policy Agenda', Chap 5.
38. Butler and Stokes, Political Change in Britain, p. 279;
39. Jowell and Hoinville, Britain into Europe, Chap. 3.
40. Arthur H. Miller, Edie N. Goldenberg and Lutz Erbring, ‘Type-set Politics', American Political Science Review, lxxiii (1979), 67–84.
41. Berrington, ‘Public Opinion and the Common Market'.
42. Mueller, War, Presidents and Public Opinion.
43. Ronald Inglehart, ‘An End to European Integration?' American Political Science Review, lxi (1967), 91–105;
44. Inglehart, The Silent Revolution;
45. Leon Lindberg and S. Scheingold, Europe's Would-be Polity (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1967);
46. Shepard, Public Opinion and European Integration.
47. Handley, Public Opinion and European Integration.