Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-768ffcd9cc-b9rrs Total loading time: 0.284 Render date: 2022-12-06T21:18:41.821Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Why Does the Apple Fall Far from the Tree? How Early Political Socialization Prompts Parent-Child Dissimilarity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2013

Abstract

Children are more likely to adopt their family's political views when politics is important to their parents, and the children of politically engaged parents tend to become politically engaged adults. When these transmission dynamics are considered together, an important hypothesis follows: the children who are most likely to initially acquire the political views of their parents are also most likely to later abandon them as a result of their own engagement with the political world. Data from the Political Socialisation Panel Study provide support for this hypothesis, illuminate its observational implications and shed light on the mechanisms, pointing to the role of new social contexts, political issues and salient political events. Replications using different data from the US and the UK confirm that this dynamic is generalizable to different cohorts and political periods.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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.)

Footnotes

*

School of Politics and International Relations, University of Nottingham (email: elias.dinas@nottingham.ac.uk). Fabrizio Bernardi, Cees van der Eijk, Mark Franklin, Gabor Toka and Till Weber provided very useful comments in previous versions of the article. The article was also significantly improved by suggestions made by the three anonymous reviewers and the editor. Most importantly, I am in Laura Stoker's debt for her invaluable help throughout the revision process. Most of the data analysed in the article have been made available to the scholarly community by the Inter-University Consortium for Political Research. An early version of the article was presented at the 2009 APSA annual meeting, where it was awarded the John Sullivan Prize for the best graduate student paper on an Elections, Public Opinion, and Voting Behavior Panel. The usual disclaimer applies. Data replication sets and online appendices are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123413000033.

References

Achen, Christopher. 2002. Parental Socialisation and Rational Party Identification. Political Behavior 24 (2):151170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alford, John, Funk, Carolyn Hibbing, John. 2005. Are Political Orientations Genetically Transmitted? American Political Science Review 99 (2):153167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alford, John, Hatemi, Peter K., Hibbing, John, Martin, Nicholas G. Eaves, Lindon J.. 2011. The Politics of Mate Choice. Journal of Politics 73 (2):362379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alwin, Duane F. Krosnick, Jon A.. 1991. Aging, Cohorts and the Stability of Sociopolitical Orientations Over the Life Span. American Journal of Sociology 97 (1):169195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alwin, Duane F. McCammon, Ryan J.. 2007. Rethinking Generations. Research in Human Development 4:219237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagdikian, Ben H. 1973/1974. Shaping Media Content: Professional Personnel and Organisational Structure. Public Opinion Quarterly 37 (4):569579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bafumi, Joseph Shapiro, Robert. 2009. A New Partisan Voter. Journal of Politics 7 (1):124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bandura, Albert Walters, Richard H.. 1963. Social Learning and Personality Development. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Beck, Paul Allen Jennings, Kent M.. 1975. Parents as ‘Middlepersons’ in Political Socialisation. Journal of Politics 37:83107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, Paul Allen Jennings, Kent M.. 1991. Family Traditions, Political Periods and the Development of Partisan Orientations. Journal of Politics 53 (3):742763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, David Stokes, Donald E.. 1974. Political Change in Britain, 2nd Edition. London: MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Bruce A. 1980. A Theoretical Approach to Peer Influence in Adolescence Socialisation. American Journal of Political Science 24 (2):324344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E. Stokes, Donald E.. 1960. The American Voter. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward G. Woods, James A.. 2005. Validity Assessment. In Encyclopedia of Social Measurement 2, edited by Kimberly Kempf-Leonard, 933937. Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Harold, Sanders, David, Stewart, Marianne Whiteley, Paul. 2004. Political Choice in Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1964. The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics. In Ideology and Discontent, edited by David E. Apter, 206261. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1976. The Dynamics of Party Support: Cohort-Analyzing Party Identification. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Dawes, Christopher T. Fowler, James H.. 2009. Partisanship, Voting, and the Dopamine D2 Receptor Gene. Journal of Politics 71 (3):11571171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denver, David. 1994. Elections and Voting Behavior in Britain. London: Harveste Wheatsheaf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Franklin, Charles. 1984. Issue Preferences, Socialisation and the Evolution of Party Identification. American Journal of Political Science 28 (3):459478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, Charles Jackson, John. 1983. The Dynamics of Party Identification. American Political Science Review 77 (4):957973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert Stoker, Laura. 2011. Caught in the Draft: The Effects of Vietnam Lottery Status on Political Attitudes. American Political Science Review 105 (2):221237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gartner, Scott Sigmund Segura, Gary M.. 2000. Race, Opinion, and Casualties in the Vietnam War. Journal of Politics 62 (1):115146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, Mark. 1973. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology 78:13601380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Donald P. Palmquist, Bradley. 1990. Of Artifacts and Partisan Instability. American Journal of Political Science 34 (3):872902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Donald P., Palmquist, Bradley Schickler, Eric. 2002. Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Greenstein, Fred I. 1965. Children and Politics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Harris, Judith R. 1998. The Nurture Assumptions: Why Children Turn out the Way They Do. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Hatemi, Peter K., Alford, John R., Hibbing, John R., Martin, Nicholas G. Eaves, Lindon J.. 2009. Is There a “Party” in Your Genes? Political Research Quarterly 62 (3):584600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highton, Benjamin Wolfinger, Raymond E.. 2001. The First Seven Years of the Political Life Cycle. American Journal of Political Science 45 (1):202209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holsti, Ole R. Rosenau, James N.. 1980. Does Where You Stand Depend on When You Were Born? The Impact of Generation on Post-Vietnam Foreign Policy Beliefs. Public Opinion Quarterly 44:122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Gerd-Rainer. 2007. The Spirit of '68: Rebellion in Western Europe and North America, 1956–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert Sprague, John. 1995. Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto Simon, Adam F.. 2000. New Perspective and Evidence on Political Communication and Campaign Effects. Annual Review of Psychology 51:149169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacoby, William. 1982. Unfolding the Party Identification Scale: Improving the Measurement of an Important Concept. Political Methodology 8:3360.Google Scholar
Jennings, M. Kent. 2002. Generation Units and the Student Protest Movement in the United States: An Intra- and Inter-Generational Analysis. Political Psychology 23 (2):303324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, M. Kent Markus, Gregory B.. 1984. Partisan Orientations Over the Long Haul: Results from the Three-Wave Political Socialisation Panel Study. American Political Science Review 78 (4):10001018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, Kent M., Stoker., Laura 2001. The Persistence of the Past: The Class of 1965 Turns 50. Working Paper 2001-16, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Jennings, M. Kent, Gregory B. Markus, Richard G., and Laura Stoker. 2005. Youth-Parent Socialization Panel Study, 1965–1997: Four Waves Combined. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.Google Scholar
Jennings, Kent M., Stoker, Laura Bowers, Jake. 2009. Politics Across Generations: Family Transmission Reexamined. Journal of Politics 71:782799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, M. Kent Niemi, Richard. 1968. The Transmission of Political Values between Parent and Child. American Political Science Review 62:169184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, Kent M. Niemi, Richard G.. 1974. The Political Character of Adolescence: The Influence of Families and Schools. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jennings, M. Kent. Niemi, Richard G.. 1981. Generations and Politics: A Panel Study of Young Adults and Their Parents. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, M. Kent. Niemi, Richard G. 1991. Youth-Parent Socialisation Panel Study, 1965–1973. University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies. Ann Arbor: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.Google Scholar
Kellstedt, Paul M. 2000. Media Framing and the Dynamics of Racial Policy Preferences. American Journal of Political Science 44 (2):245260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klofstad, Casey A. 2010. The Lasting Effect of Civic Talk on Civic Participation: Evidence from a Panel Study. Social Forces 88 (5):23532376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroh, Martin Selb, Peter. 2009a. Inheritance and the Dynamics of Party Identification. Political Behavior 31 (4):559574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroh, Martin Selb, Peter. 2009b. Individual and Contextual Origins of Durable Partisanship. In Political Parties and Partisanship: Social Identity and Individual Attitudes, edited by John Bartle and Paolo Bellucci, 107120. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Langton, Kenneth P. 1969. Political Socialisation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mannheim, Karl. 1952. The Problem of Generations. In Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge, edited by Paul Kecskemeti, 276320. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mayer, William G. 1992. The Changing American Mind. How and Why American Public Opinion Changed Between 1960 and 1988. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Light, Donald Jr Spiegel, John P.. 1977. The Dynamics of University Protest. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
McDonald, Michael P. 2005. Validity, Data Sources. In Encyclopedia of Social Measurement 3, edited by Kimberly Kempf-Leonard, 939948. Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mutz, Diana C. Mondak, Jeffrey J.. 2006. The Workplace as a Context for Cross-Cutting Political Discourse. Journal of Politics 68 (1):140155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neundorf, Anja, Stegmueller, Daniel Scotto, Thomas J.. 2011. The Individual-Level Dynamics of Bounded Partisanship. Public Opinion Quarterly 75 (3):458482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niemi, Richard G. Jennings, Kent M.. 1991. Issues and Inheritance in the Formation of Party Identification. American Journal of Political Science 35:970988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osborne, Danny, Sears, David O. Valentino, Nicholas A.. 2011. The End of the Solidly Democratic South: The Impressionable-Years Hypothesis. Political Psychology 32 (1):81108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plutzer, Eric. 2002. Becoming a Habitual Voter: Inertia, Resources and Growth in Young Adulthood. American Political Science Review 96 (1):4156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schickler, Eric Green, Donald P.. 1997. The Stability of Party Identification in Western Democracies: Results from Eight Panel Surveys. Comparative Political Studies 30 (4):450483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuman, Howard Corning, Amy D.. 2012. Generational Memory and the Critical Period: Evidence for National and World Events. Public Opinion Quarterly 76 (1):131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, David O. 1983. The Persistence of Early Political Predispositions: The Roles of Attitude Object and Life Stage. In Review of Personality and Social Psychology 4, edited by Lad Wheeler, 79116. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Sears, David O. Funk, Carolyn L.. 1999. Evidence of the Long-term Persistence of Adults’ Political Predispositions. Journal of Politics 61 (1):128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoker, Laura Jennings, Kent M.. 2008. Of Time and the Development of Partisan Polarization. American Journal of Political Science 52 (2):619635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tedin, Kent L. 1974. The Influence of Parents on the Political Attitudes of Adolescents. American Political Science Review 68:15791592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tedin, Kent L. 1980. Assessing Peer and Parent Influence on Adolescent Political Attitudes. American Journal of Political Science 24 (1):136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verba, Sidney, Schlozman, Key L. Burns, Nancy. 2005. Family Ties: Understanding the Intergenerational Transmission of Political Participation. In The Social Logic of Politics: Personal Networks as Contexts for Political Behavior, edited by Alan Zucherman, 94114. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
van der Eijk, Cees Franklin, Mark N.. 2009. Elections and Voters. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visser, Penny S. Krosnick, Jon A.. 1998. The Development of Attitude Strength Over the Life Cycle: Surge and Decline. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75:13881409.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weisberg, Herbert. 1980. A Multidimensional Conceptualization of Party Identification. Political Behavior 2 (1):3360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westholm, Anders. 1999. The Perceptual Pathway: Tracing the Mechanisms of Political Value Transfer Across Generations. Political Psychology 20 (3):525551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Richard. 2006. Generalized Ordered logit/partial Proportional-odds Models for Ordinal Dependent Variables. Stata Journal 6:5882.Google Scholar
Wolak, Jennifer. 2009. Explaining Change in Party Identification in Adolescence. Electoral Studies 28 (4):573583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Simon N. 2006. Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R. Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall/CRC.Google Scholar
Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuckerman, Alan, Dasovic, Josip Fitzgerald, Jennifer. 2007. Partisan Families: The Social Logic of Bounded Partisanship in Germany and Britain. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Dinas Supplementary Material

Dinas Supplementary Material

Download Dinas Supplementary Material(PDF)
PDF 151 KB
48
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.

Why Does the Apple Fall Far from the Tree? How Early Political Socialization Prompts Parent-Child Dissimilarity
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.

Why Does the Apple Fall Far from the Tree? How Early Political Socialization Prompts Parent-Child Dissimilarity
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.

Why Does the Apple Fall Far from the Tree? How Early Political Socialization Prompts Parent-Child Dissimilarity
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? *