Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-7zcd7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-12T10:54:06.273Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competing Visions of Parental Roles and Ideological Constraint

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2006

DAVID C. BARKER  and
JAMES D. TINNICK
DAVID C. BARKER
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
JAMES D. TINNICK
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper explores the etiology of ideological constraint in the United States. In an effort to gain understanding of the ideational elements of political socialization, we concentrate on a provocative new theory put forward by cognitive linguist George Lakoff. Lakoff argues that many people reflexively envision proper power relations between citizens and government based on their understanding of proper power relations between children and parents: “nurturant” visions of parental roles engender egalitarian and humanitarian political values, whereas “disciplinarian” visions of proper parenting predict political individualism and traditionalism. Using data obtained from the 2000 National Election Study, we consider the empirical mettle of this account.

Information

Type
ARTICLES
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 100 , Issue 2 , May 2006 , pp. 249 - 263
Copyright
© 2006 by the American Political Science Association

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abramowitz Alan I., and Saunders Kyle L. 1998. “Ideological Realignment in the U.S. Electorate.” The Journal of Politics 60 (August): 634– 52.Google Scholar
Altemeyer Robert. 1996. The Authoritarian Specter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Barker David C. 2002. Rushed to Judgment: Talk Radio, Persuasion, and American Political Behavior. New York: Columbia University Press.
Brown Robert D., and Edward G. Carmines. 1995. “Materialists, Postmaterialists and the Criteria for Political Choice in U.S. Presidential Elections.” Journal of Politics 57 (May): 483– 94.Google Scholar
Burns Nancy, Donald R. Kinder, Steven J. Rosenstone, Virginia Sapiro, and 2001. National Election Studies. American National Election Study, 2000: Pre- and Post-Election Survey, Study No. 3131.Google Scholar
Cacioppo John T., and Richard E. Petty. 1982. “The Need for Cognition.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42: 116– 31.Google Scholar
Carmines Edward G., and James A. Stimson. 1981. “Issue Evolution, Population Replacement, and Normal Partisan Change” American Political Science Review 75 (March): 107– 18.Google Scholar
Carmines Edward G., and Richard A. Zeller. 1979. Reliability and Validity Assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Carmines Edward G., and Geoffrey C. Layman. 1997. “Value Priorities, Partisanship, and Electoral Choice: The Neglected Case of the United States.” Political Behavior 19 (December): 283– 316.Google Scholar
Converse Philip. 1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Ideology and Discontent, ed. David E. Apter. London: Free Press of Glencoe, 206– 61.
Dobson James C. 1970. Dare to Discipline. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers.
Eagly Alice H., and Shelly Chaiken. 1993. The Psychology of Attitudes. Orlando, FL: Harcourt College Publishers.
Feldman Stanley. 1988. “Structure and Consistency in Public Opinion: The Role of Core Beliefs and Values” American Journal of Political Science 32 (May): 416– 40.Google Scholar
Fiorina Morris P., Samuel J. Abrams, and Jeremy C. Pope. 2005. Culture War?: The Myth of a Polarized America. New York: Pearson Longman.
Greven Philip. 1988. The Protestant Temperament: Patterns of Child Rearing, Religious Experience, and the Self in Early America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Guth James L., John C. Green, Lyman A. Kellstedt, and Corwin E. Smidt. 1995. “Faith and the Environment: Religious Beliefs and Attitudes on Environmental Policy.” American Journal of Political Science 39 (May): 364– 82.Google Scholar
Habermas Jurgen. 1991. Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
Hunter James Davidson. 1991. Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America. New York: Basic Books.
Jacoby William G. 1995. “The Structure of Ideological Thinking in the American Electorate.” American Journal of Political Science 39 (May): 314– 35.Google Scholar
Jennings M. Kent, and Gregory B. Markus 1984. “Partisan Orientations over the Long Haul: Results from the Three-Wave Political Socialization Panel Study.” The American Political Science Review 78 (December): 1000– 18.Google Scholar
Kerlinger Fred N. 1984. Liberalism and Conservatism: The Nature and Structure of Social Attitudes. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Kim Jae-on, and Charles W. Mueller. 1978. Factor Analysis: Statistical Methods and Practical Issues. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Knight Kathleen. 1985. “Ideology in the 1980 Election: Ideological Sophistication Does Matter.” Journal of Politics 47 (August): 828– 53.Google Scholar
Kuklinski James H. 2002. Thinking About Political Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff George. 2002. Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lau Richard R. 1989. “Construct Accessibility and Electoral Choice.” Political Behavior 11 (March): 5– 32.Google Scholar
Lau Richard R., and David P. Redlawsk. 2001. “Advantages and Disadvantages of Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Making.” American Journal of Political Science 45 (October): 951– 71.Google Scholar
Lau Richard R. and Schlesinger. 2005. “Policy Frames, Metaphorical Reasoning, and Support for Public Policies.” Political Psychology 26 (February): 77– 114.Google Scholar
Layman Geoffrey. 2001. The Great Divide. New York: Columbia University Press.
Layman Geoffrey, and Thomas Carsey. 2002. “Party Polarization and ‘Conflict Extension’ in the American Electorate.” American Journal of Political Science 46 (October): 786– 802.Google Scholar
Leege David C., and Lyman A. Kellstedt (eds.). 1993. Rediscovering the Religious Factor in American Politics. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.
Levine Jeffrey, Edward G. Carmines, and Robert Huckfeldt. 1997. “The Rise of Ideology in the Post-New Deal Party System, 1972–1992.” American Politics Quarterly 25 (1): 19– 35.Google Scholar
Long J. Scott, and Jeremy Freese. 2001. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using STATA. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
Mattingly Terry. 2000. “The Map' Spoke Volumes About Our Country's Divisions.” Knoxville News-Sentinal (December 30): B2.Google Scholar
McClosky Herbert, and John Zaller. 1984. The American Ethos: Public Attitudes Toward Capitalism and Democracy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Milburn Michael A., and Sheree D. Conrad. 1996. The Politics of Denial. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Popkin Samuel L. 1991. The Reasoning Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Peffley Mark A., and Jon Hurwitz. 1985. “A Hierarchical Model of Attitude Constraint.” American Journal of Political Science 29 (November): 871– 90.Google Scholar
Rokeach Milton. 1960. The Open and Closed Mind. New York: Basic Books.
Sears David O., Richard R. Lau, Tom R. Tyler, and Harris M. Allen, Jr. 1980. “Self-Interest vs. Symbolic Politics in Policy Attitudes and Presidential Voting.” American Political Science Review 74 (September): 670– 84.Google Scholar
Sidanius Jim, and Felicia Pratto. 1999. Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sniderman Paul. M., Richard A. Brody, and Philip E. Tetlock with Henry E. Brady. 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Spock Benjamin. 1946. The Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce.
Zaller John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.