Disagreement and the Avoidance of Political Discussion: Aggregate Relationships and Differences across Personality Traits

Social networks play a prominent role in the explanation of many political phenomena. Using data from a nationally representative survey of registered voters conducted around the 2008 U.S. presidential election, we document three findings. First, we show that during this period, people discussed politics as frequently as (or more frequently than) other topics such as family, work, sports, and entertainment with frequent discussion partners. Second, the frequency with which a topic is discussed is strongly and positively associated with reported agreement on that topic among these same discussion partners. Supplementary experimental evidence suggests this correlation arises because people avoid discussing politics when they anticipate disagreement. Third, we show that Big Five personality traits affect how frequently people discuss a variety of topics, including politics. Some of these traits also alter the relationship between agreement and frequency of discussion in theoretically expected ways. This suggests that certain personality types are more likely to be exposed to divergent political information, and that not everyone is equally likely to experience cross‐cutting discourse, even in heterogeneous networks.     

Personality and the Strength and Direction of Partisan Identification

We examine the associations between personality traits and the strength and direction of partisan identification using a large national sample. We theorize that the relationships between Big Five personality traits and which party a person affiliates with should mirror those between the Big Five and ideology, which we find to be the case. This suggests that the associations between the Big Five and the direction of partisan identification are largely mediated by ideology. Our more novel finding is that personality traits substantially affect whether individuals affiliate with any party as well as the strength of those affiliations, effects that we theorize stem from affective and cognitive benefits of affiliation. In particular, we find that three personality traits (Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Openness) predict strength of partisan identification (p?<?0.05). This result holds even after controlling for ideology and a variety of issue positions. These findings contribute to our understanding of the psychological antecedents of partisan identification.     

New Political Spaces and Public Sphere ‘Deliberativeness’ in Ecuador, 1822–2011

Widely adopted decentralisation policies have increased the significance of local citizen participation in Latin America, especially with regard to ‘new political spaces’, or spaces for citizen–government engagement distinct from both electoral democracy and non-electoral political activism. Since new political spaces tend to employ ‘deliberative democratic’ methods of decision making, their prospects depend to a considerable extent on the extent to which surrounding ‘public spheres’ enable or constrain deliberation. This paper focuses on the specific case of Ecuador, drawing upon theories of deliberative democracy and the public sphere to assess the likely prospects for new political spaces in Ecuador through an examination of the key aspects of Ecuadorian politics and society since independence from Spain in 1822.     

When is Changing Policy Positions Costly for Politicians? Experimental Evidence

Although changing policy positions is often thought of as costly for politicians, this may not always be the case. We present findings from two survey experiments designed to assess how people respond to politicians who change positions on an issue. We examine the direct effects of position changes on both summary evaluations of a candidate and ratings of a candidate’s character. We find that the effect of changing positions varies across issues and that the passage of time attenuates the negative effects of a change of position. We also find that although individual voters prefer a candidate who moves closer to their own preferred policy position to one who sticks to a disliked policy position, in the aggregate changing policy positions may be costly unless the prospective new position is supported by a supermajority of the public.     

Lobbying and the 2006 U.S. midterm elections

• Lobbyists are inextricably intertwined with the electoral process in the United States, but rarely have they ever featured so prominently in an election year as in 2006. The midterm elections came at the end of a year in which the political news was often dominated by stories of lobbying scandal, most notably that involving Jack Abramoff. Lobbying was an important issue in many peoples' voting decisions, and moreover one of the immediate outcomes of the election was a raft of lobbying reform measures both in Congress and in the individual states. As one commentator put it: ‘For lobbyists, 2006 rolled by like a late‐night B movie where the earthquake wipes out the villagers who refused to heed the warning signs’ (Divis, 2006 ). This article reviews some of the most substantial lobbying scandals which emerged during 2006, considers how lobbying and lobbyists fared during the election campaigns, and analyses the various reforms which have recently been considered and implemented, before briefly examining how lobbyists will impact upon the 2008 election races.

Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Framing lobbying messages: defining and communicating political issues persuasively

• The concept of product positioning is well established in the commercial communication sphere, as are the notions of issue definition and agenda setting in the field of political science. Less thoroughly researched, though, is an area which intersects these two fields—the way in which lobbyists use language in order to frame policy issues so as to position their organization and its policy preferences to greatest effect. Lobbyists consciously frame and define issues in an effort to encourage policy makers both to share the lobbyist's perspective on a given policy problem, and to suggest to those policy makers what policy solution ought to be adopted. In doing so, they explicitly draw upon ideas and practices more commonly associated with other forms of commercial communication such as advertising and marketing. This paper suggests that the use of language by lobbyists is a potentially fruitful field for both academics and practitioners interested in political communication broadly defined—indeed, lobbying is essentially a form of persuasive communication in the political arena. It is well understood that how political issues are presented is an important factor in the extent to which an issue will be supported; this paper focuses on how lobbyists make use of this understanding in their efforts to achieve a desired policy outcome.

Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The offensive posture of NATO's missile defence system

A compelling case can be made to develop a NATO's missile defence system in response to the advancement of missile technology and the danger of nuclear weapons. However, this development also undermines Russia's retaliatory capacity, and consequently heightens the offensive potential of nuclear weapons. This article explores the offence/defence posture of NATO's missile defence plans in terms of both capabilities and strategy. It is argued that NATO is incrementally increasing the strength and reach of its missile defence components, while rejecting any international treaty to regulate and limit their future expansion. This corresponds with a strategy of achieving invulnerability through counterforce and utilising NATO as an ‘insurance policy’ against Russia, to be activated when conflicts arise. We conclude that NATO has the capacity to distinguish between an offensive and defensive posture by discriminating between potential targets, but it has displayed no intention to do so.