Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Explaining political sophistication

  • Published:
Political Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Debates over the political sophistication of mass publics smolder on. The more fundamental question, however, is why people become as politically sophisticated or unsophisticated as they do. This paper develops a nonlinear simultaneous equation model to weigh explanations of three general sorts: the politicalinformation to which people are exposed, theirability to assimilate and organize such information, and theirmotivation to do so. The estimates suggest that interest and intelligence, representing motivation and ability, have major effects, but that education and media exposure, the big informational variables, do not. I consider the reasons and sketch some implications for the sophistication of mass publics, for the study of sophistication and other “variables of extent,” and for democratic theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aitchison, John, and Brown, J. A. C. (1957).The Lognormal Distribution: With Special Reference to Its Uses in Economics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrain, Charles F. (1971).Children and Civic Awareness: A Study in Political Education. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asher, Herbert B. (1988).Presidential Elections and American Politics: Voters, Candidates, and Campaigns Since 1952, 4th ed. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J. (1982). Personality and intelligence. In Robert J. Sternberg (ed.),Handbook of Human Intelligence. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, Paul Allen (1977). The role of agents in political socialization. In Stanley Allen Renshon (ed.),Handbook of Political Socialization. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolland, John M., Kuklinski, James H., and Luskin, Robert C. (1987). Where's the Schema? Schema Theory in Political Psychology. Presented at the annual meeting of the International Society of Political Psychology.

  • Bousfield, Weston A. (1953). The occurrence of clustering in recall of randomly arranged.Journal of General Psychology 49: 229–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Box, George E. P., and Cox, David R. (1964). An analysis of transformations.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. series B, 26: 211–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, John D., and Johnson, Marcia K. (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 11: 717–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brody, Richard A., and Sniderman, Paul M. (1977). From life space to polling place: The relevance of personal concerns for voting behavior.British Journal of Political Science 7: 337–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buschke, Herman (1976). Learning is organized by chunking.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 15: 313–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E. (1960).The American Voter. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., and Rodgers, Willard L. (1976).The Quality of American Life: Perceptions, Evaluations, and Satisfactions. New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campione, Joseph C., Brown, Ann L., and Bryant, Nancy R. (1985). Individual differences in learning and memory. In Robert J. Sternberg (ed.),Human Abilities: An Information Processing Approach. New York: W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, John B., and Maxwell, Scott E. (1979). Individual differences in cognitive abilities. In Mark R. Rosenzweig and Lyman W. Porter (eds.),Annual Review of Psychology. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassel, Carol A. (1984). Issues in measurement: The ‘levels of conceptualization’ index of ideological sophistication.American Journal of Political Science 28: 418–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaffee, Steven H., Jackson-Beeck, Marilyn, Duvall, Jean, and Wilson, Donna (1977). Mass communication in political socialization. In Stanley Allen Renshon (ed.),Handbook of Political Socialization. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken, Shelly (180). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus cur messages in persuasion.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39: 752–766.

  • Chaiken, Shelly, and Baldwin, Mark W. (1981). Affective cognitive consistency and the effect of salient behavioral information on the self-perception of attitudes.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 41: 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiesi, Harry L., Spilich, George J., and Voss, James F. (1979). Acquisition of domain-related information in relation to high and low domain knowledge.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18: 257–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chong, Dennis, McClosky, Herbert, and Zaller, John R. (1983). Patterns of support for democratic and capitalist values.British Journal of Political Science 13: 401–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, Peter, and Fredin, Eric (1978). Newspapers, television, and political reasoning.Public Opinion Quarterly 42: 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philipe E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In David E. Apter (ed.),Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philipe E. (1974). Some priority variables in comparative electoral research. In Richard Rose (ed.),Electoral Behavior: A Comparative Handbook. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, Philipe E. (1975). Public opinion and voting behavior. In Fred I Greenstein and Nelson W. Polsby (eds.),Handbook of Political Science, vol. 4. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crewe, Ivor (1981). Electoral participation. In David Butler, Howard R. Penniman, and Austin Ranney (eds.),Democracy at the Polls: A Comparative Study of Competitive National Elections. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, Robert A. (1984).Modern Political Analysis, 4th ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dooling, D. James, and Lachman, Roy (1971). Effects of comprehension on retention of prose.Journal of Experimental Psychology 88: 216–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, Otis Dudley (1968). Ability and achievement.Eugenics Quarterly 15: 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, John Osgood, and Anderson, Ronald E. (1969). Ideology in the public's conceptualization of the 1964 election.Public Opinion Quarterly 33: 389–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, Susan T., Kinder, Donald R., and Larter, W. Michael (1983). The novice and the expert: Knowledge-based transmission strategies in political cognition.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 19: 381–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, Susan T., and Taylor, Shelley E. (1984).Social Cognition. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, James L., and Bingham, Richard D. (1985).Civil Liberties and Nazis: The Skokie Free Speech Controversy. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, James L., and Wenzel, James P. (1988). Intelligence, Cognitive Sophistication, and Political Tolerance. Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association.

  • Glenn, Norval D., and Grimes, Michael (1968). Aging, voting, and political interest.American Sociological Review 33: 563–575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberger, Arthur S. (1964).Econometric Theory. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberger, Arthur S. (1968).Topics in Regression Analysis. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberger, Arthur S., Nagar, A. L., and Odeh, H. S. (1961). The covariance matrices of reduced from coefficients and of forecasts for a structural economic model.Econometrica 29: 556–573.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graber, Doris A. (1984).Processing the News: How People Tame the Information Tide. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagner, Paul R., and Pierce, John C. (1982). Correlative characteristics of levels of conceptualization in the American public: 1956–1976.Journal of Politics 44: 779–807.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamill, Ruth C., and Lodge, Milton (1986). Cognitive consequences of political sophistication. In Richard R. Lau and Davis O. Sears (eds.),Political Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamill, Ruth C., Lodge, Milton, and Blake, Frederick (1985). The breadth, depth, and utility of class, partisan, and ideological schemata.American Journal of Political Science 29: 850–870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, S. K., and Harvey, T. G. (1970). Adolescent political outlooks: The effects of intelligence as an independent variable.Midwest Journal of political science 14: 565–594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, Ronald (1979). Political action: The impact of values, cognitive level and social background. In Samuel Barnes and Max Kaase (eds.),Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald R. (1987).News That Matters: Television and American Public Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar, Shanto, Peters, Mark D., and Kinder, Donald R. (1982). Experimental demonstrations of the not-so-minimal consequences of television news programs.American Political Science Review 76: 848–858.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings M. Kent, and Niemi, Richard G. (1974).The Political Character of Adolescence: The Influence of Families and Schools. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, M., and Niemi, Richard G. (1981).Generations and Politics: A Panel Study of Young Adults and Their Parents. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kent, K. E., and Rush, Ramona R. (1976). How communication behavior of older persons affects their public affairs knowledge.Journalism Quarterly 53: 40–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinder, Donald R. (1983). Diversity and complexity in American public opinion. In Ada W. Finifter (ed.),Political Science: The State of the Discipline. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klingemann, Hans D. (1979a). The background of ideological conceptualization. In Samuel H. Barnes and Max Kaase (eds.),Political Action: Mass Participation in Western Democracies. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klingemann, Hans D. (1979b). Ideological conceptualization and political action. In Samuel H. Barnes and Max Kaase (eds.),Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, Kathleen (1985). Ideology in the 1980 election: Ideological sophistication does matter.Journal of Politics 47: 828–853.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langton, Kenneth P., and Jennings, M. Kent (1968). Political socialization and the high school civics curriculum in the United States.American Political Science Review 62: 852–867.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, Jill, McDermott, John, Simon, Dorothea P., and Simon, Herbert A. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems.Science 208: 1335–1342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luskin, Robert C. (1987a). Explaining Political Sophistication. Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association.

  • Luskin, Robert C. (1987b). Measuring political sophistication.American Journal of Political Science 31: 856–899.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luskin, Robert C. (Forthcoming). Abusus non tollit usum: Bounded truthfulness in statistics.American Journal of Political Science.

  • Markus, Gregory B., and Converse, Philip E. (1979). A dynamic simultaneous equation model of electoral choice.American Political Science Review 73: 1055–1070.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClosky, Herbert (1964). Consensus and ideology in American politics.American Political Science Review 58: 371–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClosky, Herbert, and Zaller, John R. (1984).The American Ethos: Public Attitudes Toward Capitalism and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClure, Robert D., and Patterson, Thomas E. (1976). Print vs. network news.Journal of Communication 26: 18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merelman, Richard (1971).Political Socialization and Educational Climates: A Study of Two School Districts. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merelman, Richard (1981). Communication.American Political Science Review 74: 319–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Arthur H., and Miller, Warren E. (1976). Ideology in the 1972 election: Myth or reality—a rejoinder.American Political Science Review 70: 832–849.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Arthur H., Miller, Warren E., Raine, Alden S., and Brown, Thad A. (1976). A majority party in disarray: Policy polarization in the 1972 election.American Political Science Review 70: 753–778.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Warren E., and Levitin, Theresa E. (1976).Leadership and Change: The New Politics and the American Electorate. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W. Russell (1986).The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Electorate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W. Russell (1981). Differentiation and integration: Two dimensions of political thinking.American Journal of Sociology 86: 1236–1268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W. Russell (1976). Pattern of recall among television news viewers.Public Opinion Quarterly 40: 115–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie, Norman H., Verba, Sidney, and Petrocik, John R. (1976).The Changing American Voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, Benjamin I., and Jones, Calvin C. (1979). Reciprocal effects of party loyalties, policy preferences, and the vote.American Political Science Review 73: 1071–1089.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, Thomas E. (1980).The Mass Media Election: How Americans Choose Their President. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, Thomas E., and McClure, Robert P. (1976).The Unseeing Eye: The Myth of Television Power in National Politics. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, Richard E., and Cacioppo, John T. (1979). Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37: 1915–1926.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, Richard E., and Cacioppo, John T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46: 69–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, John C., and Hagner, Paul R. (1982). Conceptualization and party identification: 1956–1976.American Journal of Political Science 26: 377–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popkin, Samuel, Gorman, John W., Phillips, Charles, and Smith, Jeffrey A. (1976). Comment: What have you done for me lately? Toward an investment theory of voting.American Political Science Review 70: 779–805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, G. Bingham, Jr. (1982).Contemporary Democracies: Participation, Stability, and Violence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, G. Bingham, Jr. (1986). American voter turnout in comparative perspective.American Political Science Review 80: 17–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renshon, Stanley Allen (1977). Assumptive frameworks in political socialization theory. In Stanley Allen Renshon (ed.),Handbook of Political Socialization. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, John P. (1972). Mass communication and information diffusion. In F. Gerald Kline and Philip J. Techenor (eds.),Current Perspectives in Mass Communication Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, John P. (1977).How Americans Use Time: A Social-Psychological Analysis of Everyday Behavior. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenstone, Steven J., and Wolfinger, Raymond E. (1978). The effect of registration laws on voter turnout.American Political Science Review 72: 22–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroder, Harold, Driver, Michael, and Streufert, Siegfried (1967).Human Information Processing. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, William A. (1963). Conceptualizing and measuring structural properties of cognition. In O. J. Harvey (ed.),Motivation and Social Interaction: Cognitive Determinants. New York: Ronald Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Eric R. A. N. (1980). Levels of conceptualization: False measures of ideological sophistication.American Political Science Review 74: 685–696.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Eric R. A. N. (1981). Communication.American Political Science Review 75: 152–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sniderman, Paul (1975).Personality and Democratic Politics. Berkeley: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson, William (1967).The Play Theory of Mass Communication. Chicago: University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, Robert L., and White, Kathryn P. (1980). The cumulative audience of network television news.Journalism Quarterly 57: 477–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, Philip E. (1983). Accountability and complexity of thought.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46: 365–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, Philip E. (1984). Cognitive style and political belief systems in the British House of Commons.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46: 365–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, Dennis F. (1970).The Democratic Citizen: Social Science and Democratic Theory in the Twentieth Century. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torney, Judith V., Oppenheim, A. N., and Farnen, Russell F. (1975).Civic Awareness in Ten Countries. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulving, Endel (1961). The effect of alphabetical subjective organization on memorizing unrelated words.Canadian Journal of Psychology 16: 185–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verba, Sidney, and Nie, Norman H. (1972).Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, Elliot S. (1969). Intelligence, individual differences, and learning: An approach to political socialization.British Journal of Sociology 20: 50–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfinger, Raymond, and Rosenstone, Steven J. (1980).Who Votes? New Haven, CT: Yale.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyckoff, Mikel (1980). Belief system constraint and policy voting: A test of the unidimensional consistency model.Political Behavior 2: 115–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajonc, Robert B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Monograph Supplement 9 (2, Part 2): 2–27.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Texas at Austin, 78712, Austin, TX

    Robert C. Luskin

Authors
  1. Robert C. Luskin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Luskin, R.C. Explaining political sophistication. Polit Behav 12, 331–361 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992793

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992793

Keywords

Search

Navigation