Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T20:13:40.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aggregate Stability and Individual-Level Flux in Mass Belief Systems: The Level of Analysis Paradox

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 1985

Ronald Inglehart
Ronald Inglehart*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Converse's findings of low constraint and stability among mass attitudes are only one side of the story; mass attitudes often manifest much more coherent and stable patterns at the aggregate level than would seem possible if one took the results of panel survey analysis at face value. Items designed by Rokeach and Inglehart to tap basic value priorities, show modest individual-level stability, together with remarkably high aggregate stability structured in ways that could not occur if random answering were the prevailing pattern. Materialist/postmaterialist values show large differences between birth cohorts that not only persisted throughout 1970-1984 but seem to reflect distinctive formative experiences that occurred as much as 50 years ago. These aggregate results are much too skewed to result from equiprobable random answering and cannot be attributed to methods effects. They reflect underlying attitudinal predispositions in the respondents themselves. While random response to given items does play an important role, it is much less widespread than Converse's Black and White model implies and does not generally reflect an absence of relevant preferences. Structural equation analysis of multiple indicators demonstrates much stabler, broader orientations underlying the response to given items that account for the high aggregate-level stability observed here. Because it usually measures such orientations imperfectly, individual-level survey data tend systematically to underestimate constraint and stability in mass attitudes.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 79 , Issue 1 , March 1985 , pp. 97 - 116
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramson, P. R., & Inglehart, R. Generational replacement and value change in six west European societies. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C., 1984.Google Scholar
Achen, C. H. Mass political attitudes and the survey response. American Political Science Review, 1975, 69, 1218–1231.10.2307/1955282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, S. H., Kaase, M., et al. Political action: Mass participation in five western democracies. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1979.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. Attitudes and non-attitudes: continuation of a dialogue. In Tufte, E. R. (Ed.), The quantitative analysis of social problems. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1970, 168–190.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. Comment: Rejoinder to Judd and Milburn. American Political Science Review, 1980, 45, 644–646.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. Comment: The status of nonattitudes. American Political Science Review, 1974, 68, 650–660.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. The nature of belief systems among mass publics. In Apter, D. (Ed.), Ideology and discontent. New York: Free Press, 1964, 206–261.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E., & Markus, G. Plus ca change … The new CPS election study panel. American Political Science Review, 1979, 73, 32–49.10.2307/1954729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, P. E., & Pierce, R. Political representation in France. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Dalton, R. J. Was there a revolution? A note on generational versus life-cycle explanations of value differences. Comparative Political Studies, 1977, 9, 459–474.10.1177/001041407700900404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalton, R. J. The persistence of values and life-cycle changes. In Klingemann, H. D. et al. (Eds.), Politische Psychologie, Sonderheft 12 of Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 1981, 22, 189–207.Google Scholar
Erikson, R. S. Analyzing one variable-three wave panel data: A comparison of two models. Political Methodology, 1978, 5, 151–161.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R. The changing structure of political cleavages in western society. In Dalton, R. et al. (Eds.), Electoral change: Realignment and dealignment in advanced industrial democracies. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1984.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R. New perspectives on value change: Responses to Lafferty and Knutsen, Savage, Boltken, and Jagodzinski. Comparative Political Studies, 1985, 17, 485–530.10.1177/0010414085017004004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, R. Postmaterialism in an environment of insecurity. American Political Science Review, 1981, 75, 880–900.10.2307/1962290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, R. The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R. The silent revolution in Europe: Intergenerational change in postindustrial societies. American Political Science Review, 1971, 65, 991–1017.10.2307/1953494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, R. Value priorities and socioeconomic change. In Barnes, S., Kaase, M. et al. (Eds.). Political action. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1979.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R., & Hochstein, A. Alignment and dealignment of the electorate in France and the United States. Comparative Political Studies, 1972, 4.Google Scholar
Jackson, D. J., & Alwin, D. The factor analysis of ipsative measures. Sociological methods and research, 1980, 9, 218–238.10.1177/004912418000900206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, J. E. The systematic beliefs of the mass public: estimating policy preferences with survey data. Journal of Politics, 1983, 45, 840–865.10.2307/2130415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judd, C. M., Krosnick, J. & Milburn, M. A. Political involvement and attitude structure in the general public. American Sociological Review, 1981, 46, 660–669.10.2307/2094947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judd, C. M., & Milburn, M. A. The structure of attitude systems in the general public: comparisons of a structural equation model. American Sociological Review, 1980, 45, 627–643.10.2307/2095012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinder, D. R. Diversity and complexity in American public opinion. In Finifter, A.W., Political science: The state of the discipline, Washington, D.C.: American Political Science Association, 1983, pp. 389–428.Google Scholar
Martin, S. S. New methods lead to familiar Results: A comment on Judd and Milburn, “The structure of attitude systems.” American Sociological Review, 1981, 46, 670–675.10.2307/2094948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, J. C., & Rose, D. Nonattitudes and American public opinion: examination of a thesis. American Political Science Review, 1974, 68, 626–649.10.1017/S0003055400117435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, R., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. V. Attitude stability among Italian elites. American Journal of Political Science, 1979, 23, 463–494.10.2307/2111026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rokeach, M. Beliefs, attitudes and values. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1968.Google Scholar
Rokeach, M. The nature of human values. New York: Free Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Stockton, R. R., & Wayman, F. W. A time of turmoil: Values and voting in the 1970s. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1983.Google Scholar
Stokes, D. E. Spatial models of party competition. American Political Science Review, 1963, 57, 368–377.10.2307/1952828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Deth, J. The persistence of materialist and postmaterialist value orientations. European Journal of Political Research, 1983, 11, 63–79.10.1111/j.1475-6765.1983.tb00043.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zajonc, R. B. Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 1980, 35, 151–175.10.1037/0003-066X.35.2.151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zajonc, R. B., & Markus, H. Affective and cognitive factors in preferences. Journal of Consumer Research (in press).Google Scholar
Zajonc, R. B., Pietromonaco, P., & Bargh, J. Independence and interaction of affect and cognition. In Clark, M. S. & Fiske, S. T. (Eds.), Affect and Cognition, Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum Associates, 1982, 221–227.Google Scholar
Zentralarchiv fur empirische Sozialforschung. Political action: An eight nation study (codebook). Cologne: Zentralarchiv, 1979.Google Scholar