Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T00:39:16.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Plus ça change…: The New CPS Election Study Panel*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Philip E. Converse  and
Gregory B. Markus
Philip E. Converse
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Gregory B. Markus
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Between 1956 and 1960, the first long-term panel study of the American electorate was carried out at the University of Michigan. Among other findings from this original panel were sharp contrasts between the high individual-level stability of party identification and more labile individual preferences on major political issues of the day. Since 1960, several changes in the nature of the American electoral response have caught the attention of scholars, including an erosion of party loyalties on one hand and an increasing crystallization of issue attitudes on the other. Completion of a new panel segment, 1972–76, makes it possible to review the original 1956–60 findings in the light of these intervening changes. We discovered that the contrasts in individual-level continuity of party and issue positions remain nearly identical to those estimated for 1956–60. The theoretical significance of these counter-intuitive results is discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 73 , Issue 1 , March 1979 , pp. 32 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The research on which this report is based was supported by National Science Foundation Grant SOC-7707537. We are also grateful to Jean Dotson, Maria Sanchez and Peter Joftis for their aid in data preparation.

References

Achen, Christopher H. (1975). “Mass Political Attitudes and the Survey Response.” American Political Science Review 69:1218–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, George F., Tuchfarber, Alfred J., and Oldendick, Robert W. (1978). “Change in the Structure of American Political Attitudes: The Nagging Question of Question Wording.” American Journal of Political Science 22:250–69.Google Scholar
Brody, Richard A. (1977). “Stability and Change in Party Identification: Presidential to Off-years.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Burnham, Walter Dean (1968). “American Voting Behavior and the 1964 Election.” Midwest Journal of Political Science 12:1–40.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E. (1960). The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. (1964). “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Apter, David E. (ed.), Ideology and Discontent. Glencoe: Free Press, pp. 206–61.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. (1970). “Attitudes and Non-Attitudes: Continuation of a Dialogue.” In Tufte, Edward R. (ed.), The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, pp. 168–89.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. (1975). “Public Opinion and Voting Behavior.” In Greenstein, Fred I. and Polsby, Nelson W. (ed.), Handbook of Political Science, Vol. 4. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. (1976). The Dynamics of Party Support. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. and Pierce, Roy (1970). “Basic Cleavages in French Politics and the Disorders of May and June, 1968.” Paper presented at the Seventh World Congress of Sociology, Varna, Bulgaria.Google Scholar
Heise, David R. (1969). “Separating Reliability and Stability in Test-Retest Correlation.” American Sociological Review 34:93–101.Google Scholar
Jennings, M. Kent and Niemi, Richard G. (1977). “The Persistence of Political Orientations: An Overtime Analysis of Two Generations.” British Journal of Political Science 8:333–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolis, Michael (1977). “From Confusion to Confusion: Issues and the American Voter (1956–1972).” American Political Science Review 71:31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Warren E. and Levitin, Teresa E. (1976). Leadership and Change. Cambridge, Mass.: Winthrop.Google Scholar
Nie, Norman H. with Andersen, Kristi (1974). “Mass Belief Systems Revisited: Political Change and Attitude Structure.” Journal of Politics 36:541–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pomper, Gerald M. (1972). “From Confusion to Clarity: Issues and American Voters, 1956–1968.” American Political Science Review 66:415–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, John L., Piereson, James E., and Marcus, George E. (1978). “Ideological Constraint in the Mass Public: A Methodological Critique and Some New Findings.” American Journal of Political Science 22:233–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundquist, James (1973). Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Brookings.Google Scholar
Wiley, David E. and Wiley, James A. (1970). “The Estimation of Measurement Error in Panel Data.” American Sociological Review. 35:112–17.Google Scholar