Daniel C. Williams

Voter Decisionmaking in a Primary Election: An Evaluation of Three Models of Choice *

Summative, averaging, and elimination by aspects models of choice were applied to voter decisionmaking in the 1972 New Hampshire presidential primary. Predictions were generated from each of the models and compared to election outcome, candidate preference, and reported vote. The summative and elimination by aspects procedures predicted equally well, and both predicted significantly better than the averaging procedure. Candidate personal attributes were identified by the majority of voters as more important dimensions in deciding for whom to vote than candidate issue positions. Primary elections have many interesting features. Turnout is lower than in general elections. The voters are more involved, and tend to differ from participants in general elections in the same ways that general election voters differ from nonvoters (Ranney and Epstein, 1966; Ranney, 1968). In some states, participation is limited to partisans; in others, independents or members of the rival party may participate if they wish. Often more than two candidates compete for a partys nomination, and voters choosing between them lack the familiar guidepost of party identification. Even nonpartisan elections differ from primaries in this last respect, since voters often know the

Beliefs of smokers and never smokers about the motives that underlie tobacco smoking.

The purpose of this investigation was to study beliefs about the reasons or motives that people have for the smoking of tobacco products. Specifically, the respondents were asked to indicate what they felt were the benefits of smoking to smokers in general, and not just to refer to their own experience if they currently were or had previously been smokers. The purpose was not to establish the actual motivational basis of smoking behavior in a sample of users. Rather the intent derived from a research program whose general goal is the examination of a variety of aspects of the social support system that operates to maintain and encourage the use of tobacco in our society (Shor & Williams, 1978b; Williams & Shor, 1979). In that context, then, this investigation was designed to explicate the beliefs about the benefits of smoking held by persons who currently smoke and to compare their responses with those of persons who have-with the possible exception of very occasional experimentation-never smoked. Knowledge regarding what people believe to be the benefits of smoking to smokers is likely to have utility from a variety of perspectives. The study will identify consistencies and contrasts in the beliefs of smokers and of persons who have to rely on indirect sources of information about smoking including culturally shared beliefs. In the absence of actual experience, indirectly generated beliefs are likely to influence the probability that individuals will begin to smoke. Given the role that expectations may play in structuring reactions to events, beliefs may also affect the level of satisfaction experienced by new smokers. Beliefs about benefits may also have an impact on normative evaluations and social attributions that people make regarding tobacco use. These, in turn, may function as determinants of both private and social behavior, and may influence social policy. In addition, such knowledge may serve as a background and framework of comparison for research dealing with the actual motivational factors that support tobacco use. Finally, an examination of the overall level as well as the differences between the two groups being studied has potential for furthering our understanding of how social and personal factors influence the development of these beliefs. Although a substantial number of investigations and reviews of research on smoking behavior have dealt with motivational factors (e.g., Barry, 1960; Borgatta & Evans, 1968; Dicken & Bryson, 1978; Dunn, 1973; Eysenck, 1965; Fuller, 1973; Hunt, 1970; Jarvik, Cullen, Gritz, Vogt, & West, 1977; Mausner & Platt, 1971; Office on Smoking and Health, 1979; Zagona, 1966) only four programs of research have attempted a systematic and comprehensive elucidation of motives. This work by Horn and his associates (Horn, 1968; Horn & Waingrow, 1966; Ikard, Green, & Horn, 1969; also see Tomkins, 1966, 1968), McKennell and his associates (McKennell, 1968, 1970, 1973; McKennell & Bynner, 1969; McKennell & Thomas, 1967; also see Frith, 1971) Russell and his associates (Russell, 1971a, 197lb; Russell, Peto, & Patel, 1974), and Best and Hakstian (1978) provides a useful foundation for the present research effort. All of these approaches have involved the development of self-report questionnaires as the basis for gathering information from current smokers about their personal motives for smoking or of situations in which they feel the need to smoke. The primary method of analysis has been factor analytic and has

Effects of Aptitude, Diligence, and Performance on the Attribution of Motivation and Ability

Summary To investigate the influence of inconsistencies between and within indices of aptitude and diligence on attributed ability and motivation, 300 male and female American psychology students were asked to rate the motivation and ability of a fictitious student (TP) who allegedly participated in a multisession experiment on concept integration. Results indicated that attributed ability was directly related to TPs aptitude scores (p < .01) and inversely related to his diligence scores (p < .05). However, while attributed motivation was directly related to diligence scores (p < .001), it proved to be unrelated to the aptitude manipulation. It was suggested that this latter finding may have resulted from what appeared to be an attenuated aptitude manipulation. Ratings of confidence in both attributions dropped when Ss were shown inconsistent diligence scores. Collectively, these findings support Heiders attributional analysis in the case of inconsistency between classes of indicators and Kelleys analy...

Beliefs of Smoking and Nonsmoking College Students about the Effects of Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Related Issues.

The purpose of the present investigation was to survey beliefs on the aversiveness of environmental tobacco smoke held by smoking and nonsmoking college students. A few questions were also included on several closely related issues including the health hazards of smoking to smokers. Analysis was made of a thirty-one item section from a longer questionnaire that had been administered to sixty-one smoking and 246 nonsmoking college students at the University of New Hampshire. Although nonsmokers expressed a statistically significant degree of belief in most of the environmental smoke items there was considerable room for the beliefs to develop strength. In general smokers expressed slightly more skepticism or uncertainty. Both groups expressed quite strong levels of belief on a general statement on health hazards but considerably less strong belief on statements dealing with specific hazards. The question is raised whether most people really have an effective understanding of the health hazards.