IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v88y1994i04p945-958_09.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Question Form and Context Effects in the Measurement of Partisanship: Experimental Tests of the Artifact Hypothesis

Author

Listed:
  • Bishop, George F.
  • Tuchfarber, Alfred J.
  • Smith, Andrew E.
  • Abramson, Paul R.
  • Ostrom, Charles W.

Abstract

Previous articles in this Review, including a Controversy in 1992, debated the comparability of alternative forms of the question about partisanship asked in Gallup and Michigan SRC surveys. Bishop, Tuchfarber and Smith contribute to this debate by reporting and analyzing evidence from 15 experimental surveys in Ohio in 1991–1993. They conclude that the distribution of partisan loyalties will generally be the same whether one uses the Gallup or Michigan Survey Research Center question and that, contrary to findings of Abramson and Ostrom, the Gallup form is no more responsive to short-term political forces than its SRC counterpart. In response, Abramson and Ostrom agree that during many time periods there will be little difference between aggregate levels of macropartisanship regardless of which measure is used. But they argue that during periods of political volatility the Gallup approach will accentuate differences, while the SRC version will attenuate them.

Suggested Citation

  • Bishop, George F. & Tuchfarber, Alfred J. & Smith, Andrew E. & Abramson, Paul R. & Ostrom, Charles W., 1994. "Question Form and Context Effects in the Measurement of Partisanship: Experimental Tests of the Artifact Hypothesis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(4), pages 945-958, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:88:y:1994:i:04:p:945-958_09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400094582/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:88:y:1994:i:04:p:945-958_09. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.