In public opinion research, response latency is a measure of attitude accessibility, which is the ease or swiftness with which an attitude comes to mind when a respondent is presented with a survey question. Attitude accessibility represents the strength of the association in memory between an attitude object and an evaluation of the object. Recent research shows that attitude accessibility, as measured by response latency, casts light on a wide range of phenomena of public opinion and political behavior. We discuss response latency methodology for survey research and advocate the use of latent response latency timers (which are invisible both to respondents and interviewers) as a low cost, low-maintenance alternative to traditional methods of measuring response latency in public opinion surveys. We show that with appropriate model specification latent response latency timers may provide a suitable alternative to the more complicated and expensive interviewer-activated timers.

Despite recent periods of unified party control of government in Washington, DC, divided government has been the norm in recent decades. Scholars agree that when both presidential and congressional candidates are on the ballot the driving force behind divided government at the national level is split-ticket voting. In this study, I present a new psychological model of split-ticket voting. I posit that ticket splitting is motivated by ambivalence over the two major political parties. I test this partisan ambivalence explanation on split-ticket votes between president and Congress nationally between 1988 and 2004 and voting for state executive offices in Ohio in 1998. I find that partisan ambivalence predicts ticket splitting at both the national and state levels and does so about as well as some other explanations. The results of this study suggest that divided government occurs, in part, because voters are divided within themselves.Although the Democrats have held the reins of power in Washington of late, the norm for more than half a century has been divided government, where control of the House, Senate, and presidency is split between the two major political parties. Fourteen of the past twenty-one congressional elections and seven of the past eleven presidential elections have resulted in divided government. In presidential election years, scholars agree that divided government is driven largely by split-ticket voting, where citizens, voting for president and Congress, split their ballots between candidates of the two parties. Ticket splitting and divided government have also been common in state legislatures and in the "plural executive," where voters split their ballots between state executive officers, such as the governor and attorney general,

Objectives. Most studies of media effects in political communication focus on news media. A smaller body of work extends theories of news media effects to fictional entertainment media. Just as news media engage in priming and agenda setting, these studies suggest that fictional media do as well. In this study, we deal with fictional media's framing of issues. No research has sought to test the effects of framing in explicitly fictional media on political opinions. We develop the outlines of a theory we call “fictional framing” and test it in an experiment. Methods. Participants in our treatment group watched the film Cider House Rules. The movie frames the issue of abortion in the case of incest in a pro‐choice way, and frames morality in terms of following one's own conscience. Results. The film influenced opinions in ways consistent with the framing of these issues. Conclusions. Since abortion opinions and moral values tend to be entrenched, we consider this a strong first test of the effects of fictional framing.

Most research on media effects in political science deals with the news media or political campaigns. While some recent work looks at the effects of soft news on beliefs and opinions, little attention has been paid to the potential consequences of media that are fictional. Although viewers typically watch fiction for entertainment, the themes, plots, and dialogue may nevertheless influence their thoughts about politics. This paper examines the effects of fiction on political beliefs. We do this in the context of an experimental design, where subjects in the treatment group watched the outlandish movie, Wag the Dog. The results show that those who watched the film were more likely to believe in a far-fetched conspiracy, namely that the U.S. government has and will fabricate a war for political gain. The findings stretch the boundaries of fictional influence by focusing on extreme, conspiratorial beliefs. We suggest that political science and communications scholars should focus greater attention on the implications of fiction for beliefs and attitudes, as the consequences can be perverse.

Objective. Research on opinion leadership examines the convergence of opinion between elites and masses on issues of public policy. I examine the confluence of opinion between Pope John Paul II and American Catholics on the death penalty and legalized abortion. Method. I use data from three nationally representative opinion surveys and one statewide survey conducted prior to John Paul's death. Results. The results support the supposition that Catholics who esteemed the pope are more negative in their evaluations of the death penalty and abortion. Conclusions. John Paul II, as leader of the Catholic Church, may have influenced Catholic opinion on political issues.