Money, Time, and Political Knowledge: Distinguishing Quick Recall and Political Learning Skills

American Journal of Political Science (Impact Factor: 2.76). 12/2007; 52(1):169 - 183. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00306.x

ABSTRACT Surveys provide widely cited measures of political knowledge. Do seemingly arbitrary features of survey interviews affect their validity? Our answer comes from experiments embedded in a representative survey of over 1200 Americans. A control group was asked political knowledge questions in a typical survey context. Treatment groups received the questions in altered contexts. One group received a monetary incentive for answering the questions correctly. Another was given extra time. The treatments increase the number of correct answers by 11–24%. Our findings imply that conventional knowledge measures confound respondents' recall of political facts with variation in their motivation to exert effort during survey interviews. Our work also suggests that existing measures fail to capture relevant political search skills and, hence, provide unreliable assessments of what many citizens know when they make political decisions. As a result, existing knowledge measures likely underestimate people's capacities for informed decision making.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Political parties play a vital role in democracies by linking citizens to their representatives. Nonetheless, a longstanding concern is that partisan identification slants decision-making. Citizens may support (oppose) policies that they would otherwise oppose (support) in the absence of an endorsement from a political party—this is due in large part to what is called partisan motivated reasoning where individuals interpret information through the lens of their party commitment. We explore partisan motivated reasoning in a survey experiment focusing on support for an energy law. We identify two politically relevant factors that condition partisan motivated reasoning: (1) an explicit inducement to form an “accurate” opinion, and (2) cross-partisan, but not consensus, bipartisan support for the law. We further provide evidence of how partisan motivated reasoning works psychologically and affects opinion strength. We conclude by discussing the implications of our results for understanding opinion formation and the overall quality of citizens’ opinions.
    Political Behavior 06/2014; · 1.63 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In general, citizens use a number of cognitive tools to efficiently navigate the uncertainty, ambiguity, and complexity of the political world. Metaphor and narrative are not simply linguistic flourishes or persuasive devices in political rhetoric; they are effective reasoning tools in civic cognition. Both devices provide constructs for categorizing and making sense of incoming information and experiences in the political world, satisfying our need for cognitive coherence. Despite similarity in the cognitive functions of metaphor and narrative, few attempts have been made to integrate the two concepts into a unified cognitive model. This chapter will review why metaphor and narrative are important for civic reasoning and cognition, how they are similar, and how they are likely to be related. The discussion will highlight the cognitive nature of language, the need for an integrated model of civic cognition that includes both metaphor and narrative, prospects for the more explicit incorporation of metaphor and narrative in civic education, and the inextricability of political cognition from its social context. Because they shape political identities, frame political issues, and offer the potential to enhance civic tolerance and reflection, metaphor and narrative feature prominently in civic cognition and merit further investigation.
    07/2014; , ISBN: 184872568X
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Here, we advance the ideological migration hypothesis — individuals choose to live in communities with ideologies similar to their own to satisfy their need to belong. In Study 1, incongruity between personal and community ideology predicted greater residential mobility and attraction to more ideologically-congruent communities. In Study 2, participants who perceived their ideology to be at odds with their community’s displayed a decreased sense of belonging and an increased desire to migrate. In Studies 3 and 4, participants induced to view their current community as growing more incongruent with their own ideology expressed a decreased sense of belonging and an increased desire to migrate. Ideological migration may contribute to the rise in segregation and polarization of the American electorate.
    Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 10/2012; 51.


Available from