Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-489z4 Total loading time: 0.485 Render date: 2022-05-28T07:05:56.321Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Caught in the Draft: The Effects of Vietnam Draft Lottery Status on Political Attitudes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2011

ROBERT S. ERIKSON*
Affiliation:
Columbia University
LAURA STOKER*
Affiliation:
University of California at Berkeley
*
Robert S. Erikson is Professor of Political Science, Columbia University, 7th Floor, International Affairs Building, 420 W. 118th Street, New York, NY 10027 (RSE14@columbia.edu).
Laura Stoker is Associate Professor of Political Science, University of California at Berkeley, 778 Barrows Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720 (stoker@socrates.berkeley.edu).

Abstract

The 1969 Vietnam draft lottery assigned numbers to birth dates in order to determine which young men would be called to fight in Vietnam. We exploit this natural experiment to examine how draft vulnerability influenced political attitudes. Data are from the Political Socialization Panel Study, which surveyed high school seniors from the class of 1965 before and after the national draft lottery was instituted. Males holding low lottery numbers became more antiwar, more liberal, and more Democratic in their voting compared to those whose high numbers protected them from the draft. They were also more likely than those with safe numbers to abandon the party identification that they had held as teenagers. Trace effects are found in reinterviews from the 1990s. Draft number effects exceed those for preadult party identification and are not mediated by military service. The results show how profoundly political attitudes can be transformed when public policies directly affect citizens' lives.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2011

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

Angrist, J. 1990. “Lifetime Earnings and the Vietnam Era Draft Lottery: Evidence from Social Security Administrative Records.” American Economic Review 80 (3): 313–36.Google Scholar
Angrist, J. 1991. “The Draft Lottery and Voluntary Enlistment in the Vietnam Era.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 86 (415): 584–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Apsler, R. 1972. “Effects of the Draft Lottery and a Laboratory Analogue on Attitudes.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 24: 262–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baskir, L., and Strauss, W.. 1978. Chance and Circumstance: The Draft, the War, and Vietnam Generation. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Bergen, D. 2009. “The Draft Lottery and Attitudes toward the Vietnam War.” Public Opinion Quarterly 73: 379–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berinsky, A.J. 2010. “An Empirical Justification for the Use of Draft Lottery Numbers as a Random Treatment in Political Science Research.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Cacioppo, J.T., and Gardner, W.L.. 1999. “Emotion.” Annual Review of Psychology 50: 191214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, A.L. 2003. How Policies Make Citizens: Senior Political Activism and the American Welfare State. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, D., and Lemieux, T.. 2001. “Going to College to Avoid the Draft: The Unintended Legacy of the Vietnam War.” American Economic Review 91 (2): 97102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, D., Citrin, J., and Conley, P.. 2001. “When Self-interest Matters.” Political Psychology 22 (3): 541–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Citrin, J., and Green, D.P.. 1990. “The Self-interest Motive in American Public Opinion.” Research in Micropolitics 3: 128.Google Scholar
Dolan, R.J. 2002. “Emotion, Cognition, and Behavior.” Science 298: 1191–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edgington, E.S., and Onghena, P.. 2007. Randomization Tests. 4th ed. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis.Google ScholarPubMed
Foley, Michael S. 2003. Confronting the War Machine: Draft Resistance during the Vietnam War. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Frank, D.H. 2007. “As Luck Would Have It: The Effect of the Vietnam Draft Lottery on Long-term Career Outcomes.” INSEAD Faculty and Research Working Paper.Google Scholar
Gartner, S.S., Segura, G.M., and Wilkening, M.. 1997. “All Politics Are Local: Local Losses and Individual Attitudes toward the Vietnam War.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 41 (5): 669–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D.P., and Gerkin, A.E.. 1989. “Self-interest and Public Opinion toward Smoking Restrictions and Cigarette Taxes.” Public Opinion Quarterly 53: 116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallin, D.C. 1984. “The Media, the War in Vietnam, and Political Support: A Critique of the Thesis of an Oppositional Media.” Journal of Politics 46 (1): 224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hearst, N., and Newman, T.B.. 1988. “Proving Cause and Effect in Traumatic Stress: The Draft Lottery as a Natural Experiment.” Journal of Traumatic Stress 1 (2): 173–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddy, L., Feldman, S., and Cassese, E.. 2007. “On the Distinct Political Effects of Anxiety and Anger.” In The Affect Effect, eds. Neuman, W. Russell, Marcus, George E., Crigler, Ann N., and MacKuen, Michael. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 124–51.Google Scholar
Imai, K., Keele, L., and Yamamoto, T.. 2009. “Identification, Inference, and Sensitivity Analysis for Causal Mediation Effects.” Princeton University. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Izard, C.E. 2009. “Emotion Theory and Research: Highlights, Unanswered Questions, and Emerging Issues.” Annual Review of Psychology 60: 125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jennings, M.K., and Markus, G.B.. 1977. “The Effect of Military Service on Political Attitudes: A Panel Study.” American Political Science Review 71 (1): 131–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, M.K., and Niemi, R.G.. 1974. The Political Character of Adolescence: The Influence of Families and Schools. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jennings, M.K., Stoker, L., and Bowers, J.. 2009. “Politics across Generations: Family Transmission Reconsidered.” Journal of Politics 71: 782–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krosnick, J.A. 1990. “Government Policy and Citizen Passion: A Study of Issue Publics in Contemporary America.” Political Behavior 12 (1): 5992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lau, R.R., Brown, T.A., and Sears, D.O.. 1978. “Self-interest and Civilians’ Attitudes toward the Vietnam War.” Public Opinion Quarterly 42 (4): 464–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longino, C.F. Jr. 1973. “Draft Lottery Numbers and Student Opposition to War.” Sociology of Education 46: 499506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, L., and Dashiell, T.C.. 1975. “Reactions to the Draft Lottery: A Test of Conflict Theory.” Human Relations 28 (2): 155–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, G.E., Neuman, W.R., and MacKuen, M.. 2000. Affective Intelligence and Political Judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Markus, G.B. 1979. “The Political Environment and the Dynamics of Public Attitudes: A Panel Study.” American Journal of Political Science 23: 338–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, B. 1967. “In Pursuit of Equity: Who Serves When Not All Serve?” Report of the National Advisory Commission on Selective Service. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
McKelvey, R.D., and Zavoina, W.. [1975] 2007. “A Statistical Model for the Analysis of Ordinal Level Dependent Variables.” In Positive Changes in Political Science: The Legacy of Richard D. McKelvey's Most Influential Writings, eds. Aldrich, John H., Alt, James E., and Lupia, Arthur. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 143–64.Google Scholar
Mercer, J. 2005. “Prospect Theory and Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 8: 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, B.E. 2006. The Effects of the Draft on U.S. Presidential Approval Ratings during the Vietnam War, 1954–1975. Ph.D. diss. University of Alabama.Google Scholar
Mueller, J. 1973. War, Presidents and Public Opinion. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Nichols, A., and Shaffer, M.E.. 2007. “Clustered Standard Errors in Stata.” Presented at the 2007 Group Meeting of the United Kingdom Stata Users.Google Scholar
Rostker, B. 2006. I Want You! The Evolution of the All-volunteer Force. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.Google Scholar
Schuman, H. 1972. “Two Sources of Antiwar Sentiment in America.” American Journal of Sociology 78: 513–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, D.O. 1983. “The Persistence of Early Political Predispositions: The Roles of Attitude Object and Life Stage.” In Review of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 4, eds. Wheeler, Ladd and Shaver, Paul. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. 79116.Google Scholar
Sears, D.O. 1993. “Symbolic Politics: A Socio-psychological Theory.” In Explorations in Political Psychology, eds. Iyengar, S. and McGuire, W.J.. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. 113–49.Google Scholar
Sears, D.O., and Citrin, J.. 1982. Tax Revolt: Something for Nothing in California. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sears, D.O., and Funk, C.L.. 1990. “Self-interest in Americans’ Political Opinions.” In Beyond Self-interests, ed. Mansbridge, Jane J.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 147–70.Google Scholar
Sears, D.O., and Funk, C.L.. 1999. “Evidence of the Long-term Persistence of Adults’ Political Predispositions.” Journal of Politics 61: 128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soss, J., and Schram, S.F.. 2007. “A Public Transformed? Welfare Reform as Policy Feedback.” American Political Science Review 101: 111–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steelman, T.A., and Carmin, J.. 1998. “Common Property, Collective Interests, and Community Opposition to Locally Unwanted Land Uses.” Society and Natural Resources 11: 485504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarr, C.W. 1981. By the Numbers: The Reform of the Selective Service System 1970–1972. Washington, DC: National Defense University Press.Google Scholar
Zaller, J. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
79
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Caught in the Draft: The Effects of Vietnam Draft Lottery Status on Political Attitudes
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Caught in the Draft: The Effects of Vietnam Draft Lottery Status on Political Attitudes
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Caught in the Draft: The Effects of Vietnam Draft Lottery Status on Political Attitudes
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *