The Electoral Consequences of Ambivalence toward Presidential Candidates

Lavine, Howard

doi:10.2307/2669332

Cited by 199 publications

(254 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

237

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Attitudes that are low in ambivalence tend to exhibit strength consequences more than attitudes that are high in ambivalence (Conner & Armitage, 2008). For example, as already noted, ambivalent attitudes are less predictive of behavior (e.g., Conner et al, 2002;Lavine, 2001) and more susceptible to change (e.g., Armitage & Conner, 2000;Bell & Esses, 2002;DeMarree et al, 2011). A new question raised by the current research concerns the extent to which actual-desired attitude discrepancies are associated with strength consequences.…”

Section: Attitude Strengthmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…The term ambivalence broadly refers to these mixed evaluative reactions whether they stem from explicit or implicit discrepancies ). People can be ambivalent about a wide variety of topics (e.g., abortion, career choices) and domains (e.g., health, race, self), and the study of ambivalence has therefore interested scholars in psychology (Conner & Armitage, 2008;van Harreveld, van der Pligt, & de Liver, 2009), political science (Lavine, 2001;Rudolph & Popp, 2007), sociology (Hajda, 1968), and other related disciplines (e.g., Otnes, Lowrey, & Shrum, 1997) for decades.…”

Section: Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because of the psychological importance of subjective ambivalence, it is vital to understand its antecedents. Research on ambivalence often only measures objective ambivalence (for exceptions, see e.g., Haddock, 2003;Priester & Petty, 1996, 2001), but researchers typically assume that objective ambivalence leads to subjective ambivalence (e.g., Maio et al, 1996). As described next, however, objective ambivalence is an inadequate predictor of subjective ambivalence.…”

Section: Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Wanting other attitudes: Actual–desired attitude discrepancies predict feelings of ambivalence and ambivalence consequences

DeMarree

Wheeler

Briñol

et al. 2014

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Esta es la versión de autor del artículo publicado en: This is an author produced version of a paper published in: El acceso a la versión del editor puede requerir la suscripción del recurso Access to the published version may require subscription ACTUAL-DESIRED ATTITUDE DISCREPANCIES 2 AbstractFeelings of attitudinal ambivalence (subjective ambivalence) are important because they predict key consequences of attitudes (e.g., attitude-behavior correspondence, attitude stability).However, the field's understanding of the antecedents of subjective ambivalence is still developing. We explore a previously unexamined antecedent of subjective ambivalence.Specifically, we examined discrepancies between participants' actual attitudes and their desired attitudes as antecedents of subjective ambivalence and ambivalence consequences. Six studies using a variety of attitude objects were conducted to test these ideas. The first four studies demonstrated that actual-desired attitude discrepancies predicted subjective ambivalence over its previously documented antecedents. Critically, two additional studies showed that actual-desired attitude discrepancies predicted important consequences of ambivalence. As actual-desired attitude discrepancies increased, participants' attitude-behavior correspondence decreased (Study 5), and desire to reduce attitudinal conflict increased (Study 6). Process data in these latter studies revealed indirect effects through subjective ambivalence that held after controlling for the objective presence of evaluative conflict.

show abstract

Section: Attitude Strengthmentioning

confidence: 68%

Section: Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Wanting other attitudes: Actual–desired attitude discrepancies predict feelings of ambivalence and ambivalence consequences

DeMarree

Wheeler

Briñol

et al. 2014

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the literature on public opinion, the unstable attitudes of many citizens are often described as ambivalence (Lavin 2001;Steenbergen & Brewer 2000;Craig et al 2005). It is now widely acknowledged that political opinions are not simply positive or negative but often both simultaneously.…”

Section: Can We Expect That People Know What They Want?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizens' perceptions of political processes. A critical evaluation of preference consistency and survey items

Bengtsson¹

2012

Rev. int. sociol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current state of research does not tell us much about citizens' expectations of political decision making. Most surveys allow respondents to evaluate how the current system is working, but do not inquire about alternative political decision-making procedures. The lack of established survey items can be explained by the fact that radical changes in decision-making procedures have been hard to envisage, but also by a general scepticism regarding people's ability to form opinions on these matters. Political processes are, without doubt, complex matters that do not lend themselves very well to simplistic survey questions. Moreover, previous research has convincingly shown that most people in general have difficulties forming single, coherent and stable attitudes even towards far more straightforward political issues. In order to determine if trying to grasp attitudes towards political decision-making in future empirical studies can be considered a fruitful endeavour, this study sets out to critically assess the extent to which people express coherent preferences on these matters, and if preferences are in line with expectations in previous, rather scattered research. The study is based on the Finnish National Election Study 2011; a study which, contrary to most other election studies, includes a rich variety of survey items on the topic, and utilises a combination of strategies in order to explore patterns in the opinions held by citizens. KeywordsCitizen preferences; Direct democracy; Political decision making; Representative democracy; Stealth democracy. resumenEl estado actual de las investigaciones no nos dice mucho sobre las expectativas de los ciudadanos con respecto a la toma de decisiones políticas. La mayoría de las encuestas permiten que quienes las responden evalúen cómo funciona el sistema actual, pero no preguntan por procedimientos alternativos de decisión política. La falta de preguntas de encuesta contrastadas se puede explicar tanto por el hecho de que los cambios en los procedimientos de toma de decisiones han resultado difíciles de prever, como por el escepticismo general con respecto a la capacidad de las personas para formarse una opinión sobre estos asuntos. Los procesos políticos son, sin duda, asuntos complejos que no se prestan bien a preguntas simplistas de encuesta. Además, los estudios previos han demostrado convincentemente que la mayoría de la gente tiene dificultades en general para adoptar una actitud única, estable y coherente que tenga que ver con asuntos políticos incluso mucho más directos. Para determinar si el hecho de intentar captar las actitudes hacia la toma de decisiones políticas en futuros estudios empíricos es una empresa fructífera, este estudio pretende valorar críticamente hasta qué punto la gente expresa preferencias coherentes sobre estos asuntos, y si esas preferencias están en consonancia con lo que se esperaba en las dispersas investigaciones previas. Este estudio se basa en la Encuesta Electoral Finlandesa de 2011, un estudio que, a diferencia de la ...

show abstract

“…This dimension, in turn, ultimately explains their position on political issues and their political actions (Dalton 2006;Lavine 2001;Lavine and Gschwend 2007;Saunders and Abramowitz 2004;Saunders, Abramowitz, and Williamson 2005;Teixeira 1992). The linchpin to this perspective is the role of ideology, and the deductive process that the perspective assumes.…”

Section: Theories Of Attitudinal Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Equal Opportunity, Market Preference and Voter Turnout: An Analysis of the 1996, 32000, and 2004 U.S Presidential Elections

Hughes

2009

Social Thought and Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Electoral Consequences of Ambivalence toward Presidential Candidates

Cited by 199 publications

References 32 publications

Wanting other attitudes: Actual–desired attitude discrepancies predict feelings of ambivalence and ambivalence consequences

Wanting other attitudes: Actual–desired attitude discrepancies predict feelings of ambivalence and ambivalence consequences

Citizens' perceptions of political processes. A critical evaluation of preference consistency and survey items

Equal Opportunity, Market Preference and Voter Turnout: An Analysis of the 1996, 32000, and 2004 U.S Presidential Elections

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About