Institutional Context, Cognitive Resources and Party Attachments Across Democracies

e-mail: jdh39{at}columbia.edu e-mail: gck2001{at}columbia.edu e-mail: ell2002{at}columbia.edu This paper develops and tests arguments about how national-levelsocial and institutional factors shape the propensity of individualsto form attachments to political parties. Our tests employ atwo-step estimation procedure that has attractive propertieswhen there is a binary dependent variable in the first stageand when the number of second-level units is relatively small.We find that voters are most likely to form party attachmentswhen group identities are salient and complimentary. We alsofind that institutions that assist voters in retrospectivelyevaluating parties—specifically, strong party disciplineand few parties in government—increase partisanship. Theseinstitutions matter most for those individuals with the fewestcognitive resources, measured here by education.     

The "Race Card" Revisited: Assessing Racial Priming in Policy Contests

In The Race Card (2001), Mendelberg finds support for her theory that implicit racial appeals, but not explicit ones, prime racial resentment in opinion formation. She argues that citizens reject explicit appeals, rendering them ineffective, because they violate widespread egalitarian norms. Mendelberg's innovative research, however, suffers from several limitations. We remedy these deficiencies using two randomized experiments with over 6,300 respondents. We confirm that individuals do tend to reject explicit appeals outright, but find that implicit appeals are no more effective than explicit ones in priming racial resentment in opinion formation. In accounting for the differences between previous research and our own, we show that education moderates both the accessibility of racial predispositions and message acceptance. This suggests that the necessary assumptions of Mendelberg's theory hold only for different and exclusive subsets of the general population.