Suchergebnisse

Iraq and the polls: The myth of war support -- Manufacturing public opinion -- Telling Americans what they think -- Inscrutable elections -- Misreading the public -- Media polls and democracy : damaging democracy -- Uncertain future -- Reforming the polls

Intro -- CONTENTS -- PREFACE: Pollsters under Attack -- CHAPTER ONE: Iraq and the Polls-The Myth of War Support -- CHAPTER TWO: Manufacturing Public Opinion -- CHAPTER THREE: Telling Americans What They Think -- CHAPTER FOUR: Inscrutable Elections -- CHAPTER FIVE: Misreading the Public -- CHAPTER SIX: Damaging Democracy -- CHAPTER SEVEN: Uncertain Future -- CHAPTER EIGHT: A New Direction -- AFTERWORD: America Speaks . . . Again -- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS -- NOTES -- INDEX.

This article reports on the identification of two new types of question-order effects that can occur in surveys due to the order in which questions are presented to the respondents. The new effects, termed here as "additive" & "subtractive," are part of a different dimension from the one that produces "contrast" & "consistency" effects (initially named by Schuman & Presser [1981] but also analyzed by many researchers since then, including Tourangeau, Rips, & Rasinski [2000] & Sudman, Bradburn, & Schwarz [1996], among many others). The fact that the additive & subtractive effects were not discovered earlier could well be related to a lack of a clear operational definition of question-order effects. Thus, in addition to identifying the new effects, this article also presents such an operational definition. 5 Tables, 32 References. Adapted from the source document.

The knowledge-gap hypothesis, according to which sudden injection of information increases rather than decreases the differences between high- & low-status voters, can be tested effectively with evidence from political campaigns. A 2-panel survey of NH residents (N = 495 in the original survey, 348 recontacted 6 weeks later), interviewed by telephone during the 1978 NH gubernatorial campaign, finds that on 1 issue the knowledge gap increased during the campaign, while on another issue it remained constant. These differences are hypothesized to be a result of different diffusion curves of the high- & low-status voters, with implications for the varying lengths of time states allow between primary & general elections. 1 Table, 2 Figures, 1 Appendix, 21 References. Modified HA