Barbara Norrander

Measuring State Public Opinion with the Senate National Election Study

The surveys of Senate races from 1988 to 1992 conducted by the American National Election Study include a number of issue questions that can be aggregated to measure state public opinion. A simple-to-compute coefficient is used to judge the aggregated reliability of these measures. A comparison of these state public opinion measures on specific issues to more general indicators, such as state ideology and partisanship, demonstrates their usefulness in obtaining a richer depiction of public preferences for studies of state politics.

The Evolution of the Gender Gap

Most studies of the gender gap focus on the greater attraction of the Democratic party for women than for men. Scholars and journalists first noticed the gender gap in connection with the 1980 presidential election (Mueller 1988). Thus, initial explanations of the gender gap centered on how Ronald Reagans opposition to abortion and the Equal Rights Amendment led women to be less likely than men to vote for Reagan. These womens issues, however, were subsequently found not to explain the gender gap, since mens and womens positions on these issues tended to be the same (Cook, Jelen, and Wilcox 1992; Mansbridge 1985). Subsequent explanations for the gender gap turned to issue areas where mens and womens positions diverged, such as use of force abroad or at home and compassion issues (Conover and Sapiro 1993; Fite, Genest, and Wilcox 1990; Shapiro and Mahajan 1986; Smith 1984). Feminist attitudes also were debated as the source of the gender gap (Conover 1988; Cook and Wilcox 1991). Finally, varying economic positions and differences in weighting economic factors in voting decisions also have been argued to underlie the gender gap (Chaney, Alvarez, and Nagler 1998; Erie and Rein 1988; May and Stephenson 1994; Miller 1988; Seltzer, Newman, and Leighton 1997; Welch and Hibbing 1992). Despite the focus on different sets of issues, most research still attempts to explain why women have a greater attraction to the Democratic party than do men. Scholars are increasingly using a longitudinal perspective to understand the origins of the gender gap, and these researchers are finding that the greatest movement in partisan preferences in recent decades has occurred among men who left the Democratic party more quickly than did women (Kaufmann and Petrocik 1997; Kenski 1988; Miller 1991; Wirls 1986). In addition, mens and womens voting patterns diverged before the 1980 election. Men were more likely than women to vote for George Wallace in 1968 and Richard Nixon in 1972 (Norrander 1999). To better understand the long-term evolution of the gender gap two factors need to be considered. First, changes in partisan preferences have been greater in the

The Gender Gap in Latin America: Contextual and Individual Influences on Gender and Political Participation

While a substantial literature explores gender differences in participation in the United States, Commonwealth countries and Western Europe, little attention has been given to gender’s impact on participation in the developing world. These countries have diverse experiences with gender politics: some have been leaders in suffrage reforms and equal rights, while, in others, divorce has only recently been legalized. This article examines the relationship between gender and participation in seventeen Latin American countries. Many core results from research in the developed world hold in Latin America as well. Surprisingly, however, there is no evidence that economic development provides an impetus for more equal levels of participation. Instead, the most important contextual factors are civil liberties and women’s presence among the visible political elite.

Ideological Representativeness of Presidential Primary Voters

Contrary to conventional wisdom and previous research, this article finds little evidence that presidential primary voters are ideologically unrepresentative. In drawing this conclusion, two assertions are made. First, the article argues the appropriate comparison group for primary voters is general election voters who fail to vote in primaries, not all primary nonvoters. The latter group includes habitual nonvoters whose differences from primary voters would be attributable not to the primary process but to general patterns of participation in the United States. Second, the article argues ideology must be defined as more than extremism. Ideology can be construed as a sophisticated belief system or a psychological identification. Only on these latter two definitions do a few minor differences arise between presidential primary voters and general election voters.

The multi-layered impact of public opinion on capital punishment implementation in the American States

Four traditional models linking public opinion with government policies are found to form one combined, historical chain with opinion and policies intertwined over time. The traditional simple majority rule model takes a short-term approach to representation. A reverse linkage, with policies shaping opinion, extends the causal model backwards in time, as does an incrementalism and institutional lag model. The importance of this historical chain model is demonstrated in explaining crossstate differences in death penalty sentencing rates in the 1990s. Current public opinion does influence death penalty sentencing rates, but so does political culture. Past public opinion has an indirect influence on current punishment rates through the influence of past opinion on past policies. The presence of a prior capital punishment law provides a legitimization effect, resulting in greater support for the death penalty among a states population. Without an extended causal chain approach, the interrelationships between public opinion and government policies cannot be fully appreciated.

The Attrition Game: Initial Resources, Initial Contests and the Exit of Candidates During the US Presidential Primary Season

In contests for the presidential nominations from the Democratic and Republican parties in the United States, the duration of candidacies determines both the winning candidate (i.e., the one who outlasts his or her opponents) and the amount of intraparty conflict before the nomination is bestowed. This article analyses how strategic considerations lead some candidates to exit the race more quickly than others. Factors which could shape such strategic considerations include initial candidate assets and characteristics (national poll standings, fund-raising totals and occupational background), initial contest outcomes (Iowa and New Hampshire) and structural variables (proportional representation delegate distribution rules, party, front-loaded calendar). Results from a duration model indicate that poll standings, money (in a curvilinear pattern), New Hampshire and Iowa results, occupational backgrounds and the front-loading of the primary calendar shaped the length of candidacies for presidential contestants from 1980 to 2004. Candidates lacking in initial assets or early victories leave the nomination race in a process most resembling a game of attrition.

Efficient Use of Reference Group Cues in a Single Dimension

If there are groups whose endorsements voters can use as positive (or negative) cues, we demonstrate that voters do not need to know anything directly about candidate positions to be able to identify the candidate whose issue positions and performance is likely to be closest to the voters own preferences. In one dimension we show that, given certain simplifying assumptions, voters are best off adopting the choice recommended by the single reference group to which they are closest. We also show that even a decision by reference groups not to endorse any candidate may be informative to voters.

The End Game in Post-Reform Presidential Nominations

Candidate attrition is a central dynamic element of the post-reform presidential nomination process. Candidates withdraw from the contest as their resources dwindle or as they fall significantly behind the front runner in voter support. This article tests six measures of delegate strength to judge at what stage in the campaign the front runners lead is sufficient to conclude that the nomination race is over. Since 1988, candidates in both parties have quickly left the race once the front runner has established such a lead.

Presidential Nomination Politics in the Post-Reform Era

Since 1980, more than 175 scholarly articles, chapters, or books have been published about the post-reform presidential nomination system. Numer ous authors investigate primary rules, media coverage, candidates, voters, or momentum. Less well covered are the subjects of interest groups, win nowing of candidates, campaign contributors, and connections to other phases of the presidency Research on presidential nominations has to con tend with an ever-changing environment as rules change, candidates exit the contests, and the primary season progresses from February through June. This environmental complexity adds to the challenge of investigating the first phase of the presidential selection process. Coupling this environ mental complexity with a lack of consensus among scholars on measure ment, model building, and theory leads to contradictory findings in a number of areas. Nevertheless, much has been learned about the patterns of presidential nominations.

Explaining Cross-State Variation in Independent Identification

The proportion of a states residents who consider themselves to be independents varies vastly across the states, from a high of 60 percent in Rhode Island to a low of 20 percent in South Dakota. The state-level nature of independence has been ignored by those studying partisanship, who view independence as an isolated individual phenomenon, and by those studying state politics, who examine interparty competition instead. The analysis presented in this article demonstrates that the cross-state variation in independent identification is due to variations in state political characteristics such as interparty competition, organizational strength of parties, type of primary, and primary turnout. However, the effects of these variables are not uniform across all the states. Rather, the effects of interparty competition are specified by region, and primary turnout is only significant in southern states.