Arthur H. Miller

Political Issues and Trust in Government: 1964–1970.

National survey data demonstrate that support of the federal government decreased substantially between 1964 and 1970. Policy preference, a lack of perceived difference between the parties, and policy dissatisfaction were hypothesized as correlates of trust and alternative explanations of this decrease. Analysis revealed that the increased distrust in government, or cynicism, was associated with reactions to the issues of racial integration and U.S. involvement in the Vietnam war. A curvilinear relationship was found between policy preference on these and other contemporary social issues and political cynicism. The minority favoring centrist policies was more likely to trust the government than the large proportion who preferred noncentrist policy alternatives. This complex relationship between trust and policy preference is explained by dissatisfaction with the policies of both political parties. The dissatisfied noncentrists formed highly polarized and distinct types: “cynics of the left,†who preferred policies providing social change, and “cynics of the right,†who favored policies of social control.

Schematic Assessments of Presidential Candidates

This article applies theories of social cognition in an investigation of the dimensions of the assessments of candidates employed by voters in the United States. An empirical description of the publics cognitive representations of presidential candidates, derived from responses to open-ended questions in the American National Election Studies from 1952 to 1984, reveals that perceptions of candidates are generally focused on “personality” characteristics rather than on issue concerns or partisan group connections. Contrary to the implications of past research, higher education is found to be correlated with a greater likelihood of using personality categories rather than with making issue statements. While previous models have interpreted voting on the basis of candidate personality as indicative of superficial and idiosyncratic assessments, the data examined here indicate that they predominately reflect performance-relevant criteria such as competence, integrity, and reliability. In addition, both panel and aggregate time series data suggest that the categories that voters have used in the past influence how they will perceive future candidates, implying the application of schematic judgments. The reinterpretation presented here argues that these judgments reflect a rich cognitive representation of the candidates from which instrumental inferences are made.

Group Consciousness and Political Participation

This article explores the theoretical and methodological problems underlying the relationship between group consciousness and political participation with data from the Center for Political Studies (CPS) 1972 and 1976 National Election Studies. It delineates four conceptual components of group consciousness and examines their relationships with electoral and nonelectoral participation among both subordinate and dominant social groups. An interactive model fits both a theory of mobilization and the data far better than a linear, additive model.

Political Parties and Confidence in Government: A Comparison of Norway, Sweden and the United States

Comparable survey data from Norway, Sweden and the United States are used to examine trends in political trust for the period 1964–86. During the early part of that period trust declined in all three countries; later it recovered for Norway but continued to plummet in Sweden and the United States. Three major features of the party system are hypothesized to explain the difference in these trends for the three countries. These features are: the structural aspects of the party system; the publics cognitive judgements of the parties as representatives of the policy interests; and the possibility that a negative rejection of political parties as undesirable institutions may spill over to citizen evaluations of government more generally.

Throwing the Rascals Out: Policy and Performance Evaluations of Presidential Candidates, 1952-1980

This article explores two dimensions of public evaluations of presidential candidates on the basis open-ended survey questions from 1952 to 1980. The first dimension looks at whether citizens evaluate candidates on the basis of policies, performance, or strictly candidate attributes; the second examines the time perspective of these assessments, that is, whether they are retrospective or prospective. It is found that incumbents have been judged primarily on the basis of retrospective performance, challengers on prospective policy, and candidates running in nonincumbent races on prospective performance. Throughout the period from 1952 to 1980 both policy and performance considerations have become increasingly related to the vote. Except for 1964, performance has outweighed policy as a predictor of the vote, with an emphasis on retrospective evaluations whenever a incumbent runs for reelection and on prospective assessments in nonincumbent races. The 1964 case provides the best example of a policy mandate, with the 1972 election also fitting the pattern to a lesser degree. The data for the 1980 election, however, fail to support the claim of a mandate for Reagans policy stands.

American national election studies data sourcebook, 1952-1978

Data on elements influencing voters that will interest political scientists, journalists, and consultants. Major sections include personal characteristics; partisanship; candidate traits; media exposure; and voter turnout and political participation. Spiral bound in a horizontal format. No index or

Confidence in Government During the 1980s

Data from the American National Election Studies are used to examine trends in political trust for the period of 1980 to 1988. The data reveal a substantial growth in trust during the first half of the eighties, followed by plummeting confidence in government at the end of the decade. A number of plausible explanations for these shifts in public trust are examined. The analysis reveals that the downturn in trust after 1984 was not a response to the Iran-Contra scandal of 1986. Rather, it reflected the emerging perception that Reagan lacked compassion, as well as growing dissatisfaction with foreign and domestic policies.

Emerging Party Systems in Post-Soviet Societies: Fact or Fiction?

The political science literature reflects two viewpoints regarding the formation of party systems in post-Soviet societies. Scholars drawing on traditional theories of party formation usually argue that the formation of institutionalized party systems in post-Communist states will be an extended process. However, newer studies reveal that parties, partisan support, and even party systems may form relatively quickly. To illuminate this debate, we offer analysis of both mass and elite cross-temporal data from Russia, Ukraine, and Lithuania. These data reveal a rapid rise in partisanship, strong partisan voting in parliamentary elections, a sharp differentiation on issues between members of various party blocs, a high degree of issue cohesion among those who identify with a given party, and a strong correlation between the policy views of elites and ordinary citizens identifying with the same party. In short, the evidence strongly supports the conclusion that party systems are developing in the post-Soviet societies.

Understanding Political Change in Post-Soviet Societies: a Further Commentary On Finifter and Mickiewicz

1V tSUnion. Finifter and Mickiewicz (1992), however, based on a 1989 survey in the Soviet Union, found that the less well educated were more supportive of individual locus of control than were the better educated. Examining survey data collected in the former USSR during 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1995, we find consistent reconfirmation of the modernization theory, despite a major decline in support for an opportunities society that occurs between 1992 and 1995. This recent increase in preference for socialism is explained by rising nationalism, growing nostalgia for communists, and disillusionment with certain aspects of the market economy, particularly the perceived growth of social inequality.

The American Political Science Review Hall of Fame: Assessments and Implications for an Evolving Discipline

Fame is a matter of politics (witness the controversy surrounding the Pete Rose exclusion). Clearly, despite baseballs heavy emphasis on statistical records of performance, other criteria besides hard numbers are invoked for admission. No doubt politics would also enter into selecting individuals for a Political Science Hall of Fame. We hope to avoid some of these politics by narrowing our scope to an American Political Science Review (APSR) Hall of Fame. Who would comprise the Political Science Hall of Fame if the criterion for induction was the number of publications in the APSR? How would the APSR Hall of Fame compare to the roster that would result if other measures of visibility and performance, such as the frequency of citations, were employed?