Identity Salience, Identity Acceptance, and Racial Policy Attitudes: American National Identity as a Uniting Force

Political science has paid a great deal of attention to sources of intergroup conflict, but the discipline has focused less on forces that bring people together and lead them to transcend group boundaries. This study presents evidence that attachment to a shared superordinate identity can improve intergroup relations by reducing the social distance between people of different racial groups. Using a survey experiment, this research shows that making a superordinate identity salient increased support for a tax increase. The effects of the identity salience treatment are compared to a policy particularism treatment in terms of effect size and their interaction with each other. The size and direction of the identity salience effect is affected by the degree of respondents' acceptance of the proffered identity. Implications for social identity theory, racial policy attitudes, and American national identity are discussed.     

Strategic Party Government: Party Influence in Congress, 1789–2000

Why does the influence of Congressional parties fluctuate over time? Building on prevailing answers, we develop a model, Strategic Party Government, which highlights the electoral motives of legislative parties and the strategic interaction between parties. We test this theory using the entire range of House and Senate party behavior from 1789 to 2000 and find that the strategic behavior of parties complements members' preferences as an explanation for variation in party influence. Specifically, the strongest predictors of one party's voting unity are the unity of the opposing party and the difference between the parties in the preceding year. Moreover, we find strong links between party behavior in Congress and electoral outcomes: an increase in partisan influence on legislative voting has adverse electoral costs, while winning contested votes has electoral benefits.     

Agenda Control, the Median Justice, and the Majority Opinion on the U.S. Supreme Court

Some scholars argue that the author of the majority opinion exercises the most influence over the Court's opinion-writing process and so can determine what becomes Court policy, at least within the limits of what some Court majority finds acceptable. Other students of the Court have suggested that the Court's median justice effectively dictates the content of the majority opinion: whatever policy the median justice most wants, she can get. We test these competing models with data on Supreme Court decision making during the Burger Court (1969–86). While we find substantial evidence for both models, the agenda control model gains greater support. This suggests that opinions on the Court on each case are driven, in general, by the interaction of three key variables: the policy preferences of the majority opinion author, the policy preferences of the median justice, and the location of the legal status quo .     

Present but Not Accounted For? Gender Differences in Civic Resource Acquisition

We investigate the sources of an important form of social inequality: the social processes by which men and women acquire participatory resources in organizations. In particular, we investigate the extent to which men and women acquire civic skills and are targets for political recruitment within churches. Integrating theory about social interaction within an organizational structure, we hypothesize that the ways in which women gain politically relevant resources from the church are simply different from those of men. Three factors explain the institutional treatment of women in churches: (1) women's political contributions are devalued; (2) women respond to social cues more than men do; (3) women respond to political cues from clergy—especially female clergy—whereas men do not. Our findings of gender differences in civic resource acquisition provide a more nuanced treatment of the mobilization process and have broad implications for the relationship between political difference and participatory democracy .     

Factors in successful program implementation in Russia during the transition: pilot programs as a guide

While much of the implementation literature over the past several decades has recognised the importance of context (e.g. in issues of institutional culture, degree of hierarchy), little of the literature comparing the results of numerous program implementation experiences examines the experience of non‐Western contexts. This study seeks to partially fill this gap by applying the ‘conventional wisdom’ of implementation theory to program implementation experience in Russia. We analyse the implementation of 18 demonstration projects in Russia against 9 success factors identified in the implementation literature. Most of the pilots involved multiple cities; so there are a total of 48 city‐case observations to study. Overall, the findings are that the factors associated with successful program implementation among OECD countries are also those at work in Russia's transitional economy. The weights associated with the various factors may differ, however. One could imagine, for example, that political support counts for more in Russia than in the western local governments. One might also believe that opportunities for learning from other implementers could be more important in the West, where professional associations are more highly developed. The core finding of consistency should be valuable to administrators across transitional economies who can now refer to the rich findings of implementation research with greater confidence of its applicability to their programs. Perhaps equally important is the finding that some of the same factors predominantly associated with successful or troubled implementation in Russia have similar effects in implementation examples drawn from transition and developing nations; there are, however, some important differences. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Were Bosnian policy research organisations more effective in 2006 than in 2003? Did technical assistance play a role?

In 2003 the policy development process in Bosnia and Herzegovina was characterised by international community (IC) dominance. The IC provided the vast majority of the analysis of problems facing the country and drafted many of the laws. This article documents developments from fall 2003 to fall 2006 in the use of evidence and analysis in the policy development process and the role of local policy research organisations (PROs—often called think tanks) in it. The likely relation between these changes and the activities of a PRO mentoring project that operated over the same period is also assessed. Evidence comes as a series of interviews in both years with government officials and members of parliament, on the one hand, and leaders of PROs and advocacy NGOs on the other. The broad picture that emerges from the above review is of a substantial positive development in the policy development process in Bosnia and Herzegovina over the period. Factual evidence and analysis are playing a much greater role, and PROs have been a major provider of this information. The evidence indicates that PROs have been successful in convincing the policy community that they are purveyors of objective, disinterested advice and analysis. The improvements occurred in a conducive environment that steadily placed greater responsibility for policy formation on Bosnian officials. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Holzer,Harry J., and Neumark,David (2006). Affirmative action: What do we know? The Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26(2), 463‐490.

The original article to which this Erratum refers was published in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 25(2), 463–490.