Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:38:09.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Contributions of Survey Research to Political Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Henry E. Brady
Henry E. Brady*
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
The Public Value of Political Research
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 33 , Special Issue 1: The Public Value of Political Science Research , March 2000 , pp. 47 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

David Collier, Jim Gibson, Richard Johnston, Cynthia S. Kaplan, Samantha Luks, Nelson Polsby, Virginia Sapiro, Kay Schlozman, Merrill Shanks, Paul Sniderman, Sidney Verba, and John Zaller made valuable suggestions on this paper. It is worth emphasizing that this paper draws heavily upon my own research experience and it expresses my personal reflections on the contributions of survey research. It is not meant as a comprehensive review of the field.

References

Abramson, Paul R, Aldrich, John H., Paolino, Phil, and Rohde, David W. 1992. “‘Sophisticated’ Voting in the 1988 Presidential Primaries.” American Political Science Review 86(March): 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Achen, Christopher H., and Shively, W. Phillips. 1995. Cross-Level Inference. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Adams, Greg D. 1997. “Abortions: Evidence of an Issue Evolution.” American Journal of Political Science 41(3): 718–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Almond, Gabriel, and Verba, Sidney. 1963. The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Boston: Little, Brown.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Iyengar, Shanto. 1995. Going Negative: How Attack Ads Shrink and Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Barnes, Samuel H., and Kaase, Max. 1979. Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 1988. Presidential Primaries and the Dynamics of Public Choice. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry M., 1991. “Constituency Opinion and Congressional Policy Making: The Reagan Defense Buildup.” American Political Science Review 85 (June): 457–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 1993. “Messages Received: The Political Impact of Media Exposure.” American Political Science Review 87(June): 267–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Board on Physics and Astronomy, Committee on Elementary-Particle Physics, Commission on Physical Science, Mathematics, and Applications, National Research Council. 1998. Elementary-Particle Physics: Revealing the Secrets of Energy and Matter. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
Brady, Henry E., and Ansolabehere, Stephen. 1989. “The Nature of Utility Functions in Mass Publics.” American Political Science Review 83(March): 143–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, Henry E., and Kaplan, Cynthia. 1995. “Civil Society and Political Participation in Estonia and the United States: A Comparative Test of the Civic Voluntarism Model.” Presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Brady, Henry E., and Sniderman, Paul M. 1985. “Attitude Attribution: A Group Basis for Political Reasoning.” American Political Science Review 79(December): 1061–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cain, Bruce, Fiorina, Morris P., and Ferejohn, John A. 1987. The Personal Vote: Constituency Service and Electoral Independence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Andrea. 1999. “Linking Participation and Policy: Senior Citizen Activism and the American Welfare State.” Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E. 1966. Elections and the Political Order. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Campbell, Donald T. 1975. “‘Degrees of Freedom’ and the Case Study.” Comparative Political Studies 8:178–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Donald T., and Stanley, Julian C. 1963. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward G. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmines, Edward G., and Stimson, James A. 1980. “The Two Faces of Issue Voting.” American Political Science Review 74(March): 78–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Citrin, Jack, and Green, Donald Philip. 1990. “The Self-Interest Motive in American Public Opinion.” In Research in Micropolitics, ed. Long, Samuel. Stamford, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Collier, David. 1993. “The Comparative Method.” In Political Science: The State of the Discipline, ed. Finifter, Ada. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Collier, David, and Levitsky, Steven. 1997. “Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research.” World Politics 49(April): 430–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, David, and Mahon, James E. Jr. 1993. “Conceptual ‘Stretching’ Revisited: Adapting Categories in Comparative Analysis.” American Political Science Review 87(December): 845–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Ideology and Discontent, ed. Apter, David. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E., Clausen, Aage R., and Miller, Warren E. 1965. “Electoral Myth and Reality: The 1964 Election.” American Political Science Review 59(June): 321–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E., Clausen, Aage R., and Pierce, Roy. 1986. Political Representation in France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimock, Michael A., and Jacobson, Gary C. 1995. “Checks and Choices: The House Bank Scandal's Impact on Voters in 1992.” Journal of Politics 57(4): 1143–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Eckstein, Harry. 1975. “Case Study and Theory in Political Science.” In Handbook of Political Science, ed. Greenstein, Fred and Polsby, Nelson W. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Etheredge, Lloyd S. 1978. A World of Men: The Private Sources of American Foreign Policy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fenno, Richard F. 1990. Watching Politicians: Essays on Participant Observation. Berkeley: Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California.Google Scholar
Finkel, Steven E., Sigelman, Lee, and Humphries, Stan. 1999. “Democratic Values and Political Tolerance.” In Measures of Political Attitudes, ed. Robinson, John P., Shaver, Phillip R., and Wrightsman, Lawrence S. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1977. “An Outline for a Model of Party Choice.” American Journal of Political Science 21(3): 601–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Franklin, Charles H. 1991. “Eschewing Obfuscation? Campaigns and the Perception of U.S. Senate Incumbents.” American Political Science Review 85(December): 1193–1214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, Alexander L. 1979. “Case Studies and Theory Development: The Method of Structured, Focused Comparison.” In Diplomacy: New Approaches in History, Theory, and Policy, ed. Lauren, Paul Gordon. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Gerber, Elisabeth R. 1998. Interest Group Influence in the California Initiative Process. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California.Google Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1989. “The Structure of Attitudinal Tolerance in the United States.” British Journal of Political Science 19(October): 562–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1992. “Alternative Measures of Political Tolerance: Must Tolerance Be ‘Least-Liked’?” American Journal of Political Science 36(May): 560–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L. 1998. “A Sober Second Thought: An Experiment in Persuading Russians to Tolerate.” American Journal of Political Science 42(July): 819–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, James L., Duch, Raynond M., and Tedin, Kent L. 1992. “Democratic Values and the Transformation of the Soviet Union.” Journal of Politics 54(May): 329–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Donald P., and Shapiro, Ian. 1994. Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Heinz, John P., Laumann, Edward O., Nelson, Robert L., and Salisbury, Robert H. 1993. The Hollow Core: Private Interests in National Policy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hibbs, Douglas A., Rivers, Douglas, and Vasilatos, Nicholas. 1982. “The Dynamics of Political Support for American Presidents among Occupational and Partisan Groups.” American Journal of Political Science 26(May): 312–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Highton, Benjamin. 1998. “Parties, Candidates, and Issues in U.S. Senate Elections.” Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald. 1977. The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles among Western Publics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald, Basanez, Miguel, and Moreno, Alejandro. 1998. Human Values and Beliefs: A Cross-Cultural Sourcebook. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald R. 1987. News that Matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jackman, Robert W. 1985. “Cross National Statistical Research and the Study of Comparative Politics.” American Journal of Political Science 29:161–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, M. Kent, van Deth, J. et al. , 1990. Continuities in Political Action: A Longitudinal Study of Political Orientations in Three Western Democracies. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Richard, Blais, Andre, Brady, Henry E., and Crete, Jean. 1992. Letting the People Decide: Dynamics of a Canadian Election. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, Richard, Blais, Andre, Gidengil, Elisabeth, and Nevitte, Neil. 1996. The Challenge of Direct Democracy: The 1992 Canadian Referendum. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
Jowell, Roger, Brook, Lindsay, and Dowds, Lizanne, eds. 1993. International Social Attitudes: The 10th BSA Report. Aldershot, England: Dartmouth.Google Scholar
Kaplan, Cynthia, and Brady, Henry E.. 1997. “The Communist Party on the Eve of Collapse.” In Legacy of the Soviet Bloc, ed. Zancak, Jane Shapiro and Kim, Ilpyong J. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R. 1983. “Diversity and Complexity in American Public Opinion.” In Political Science: The State of the Discipline, ed. Finifter, Ada W. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R., and Palfrey, Thomas R., eds. 1993. Experimental Foundations of Political Science. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary. 1997. A Solution to the Ecological Inference Problem: Reconstructing Individual Behavior from Aggregate Data. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kish, Leslie. 1975. “Representation, Randomization, and Control.” In Quantitative Sociology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur. 1994. “Shortcuts versus Encyclopedias: Information and Voting Behavior in California Insurance Reform Elections.” American Political Science Review 88(March): 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKuen, Michael B., Erikson, Robert S., and Stimson, James A. 1989. “Macropartisanship.” American Political Science Review 83(December): 1125–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, William G. 1992. The Changing American Mind: How and Why American Public Opinion Changed Between 1960 and 1988. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClosky, Herbert. 1964. “Consensus and Ideology in American Politics.” American Political Science Review 54(June): 361–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClosky, Herbert, and Zaller, John. 1984. The American Ethos: Public Attitudes Toward Capitalism and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Warren E., and Shanks, J. Merrill. 1996. The New American Voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E. 1963. “Constituency Influence in Congress.” American Political Science Review 57(March): 45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Motz, Lloyd, and Hane, Jefferson. 1995. The Story of Astronomy. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muller, Edward N. 1979. Aggressive Political Participation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Mueller, John E. 1973. War, Presidents, and Public Opinion. New York, Wiley.Google Scholar
Mueller, John E. 1994. Policy and Opinion in the Gulf War. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I., and Shapiro, Robert Y. 1992. The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans' Policy Preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panek, Richard. 1998. Seeing and Believing: How the Telescope Opened Our Eyes and Minds to the Heavens. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Piazza, Thomas, and Sniderman, Paul M. 1998. “Incorporating Experiments into Computer Assisted Surveys.” In Computer Assisted Survey Information Collection, ed. Couper, Mick P., Baker, Reginald P., Bethlehem, Jelke, Clark, Cynthia Z.F., Martin, Jean, Nicholls, William L. II, and O'Reilly, James M. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Piazza, Thomas, Sniderman, Paul M., and Tetlock, Philip E. 1990. “Analysis of the Dynamics of Political Reasoning.” Political Analysis 1:99–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popkin, Samuel L. 1991. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Robert P. 1995. “Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital.” Journal of Democracy 6(January): 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riker, William H., ed. 1993. Agenda Formation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, John P., Shaver, Phillip R., and Wrightsman, Lawrence S., eds. 1999. Measures of Political Attitudes. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rosenstone, Steven J., and Hansen, John Mark. 1993. Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Tierney, John T. 1986. Organized Interests and American Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Verba, Sidney. 1979. Injury to Insult: Unemployment, Class, and Political Response. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sears, David O., Hensler, Carl P., and Speer, Leslie K. 1979. “Whites' Opposition to ‘Busing’: Self-Interest or Symbolic Politics?” American Political Science Review 72(June): 369–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seyd, Patrick. 1996. Labour and Conservative Party Members 1990-92: Social Characteristics, Political Attitudes, and Activities. Hants, England: Aldershot.Google Scholar
Seyd, Patrick, and Whiteley, Paul. 1992. Labour's Grass Roots: The Politics of Party Membership. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Shanks, J. Merrill 1999. “Political Agendas.” In Measures of Political Attitudes, ed. Robinson, John P., Shaver, Phillip R., and Wrightsman, Lawrence S. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda, and Somers, Margaret. 1980. “The Uses of Comparative History in Macrosocial Inquiry.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 22(2): 174–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Tom W., and Heany, K. 1995. Who, What, When, Where, and Why: An Analysis of Usage of the General Social Survey, 1972-1993. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M. 1993. “The New Look in Public Opinion Research.” In Political Science: The State of the Discipline II, ed. Finifter, Ada W. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., and Carmines, Edward G. 1997. Reaching Beyond Race. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., and Grob, Douglas B. 1996. “Innovations in Experimental Design in Attitude Surveys.” Annual Review of Sociology 22:377–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., and Piazza, Thomas. 1993. The Scar of Race. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., and Theriault, Sean M. 1999. “The Structure of Political Argument and the Logic of Issue Framing.” Presented at the International Society of Political Psychology, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Brody, Richard A., and Tetlock, Philip E. 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Glaser, James M., and Griffin, Robert. 1991. “Information and Electoral Choice.” In Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology, ed. Sniderman, Paul M., Brody, Richard A., and Tetlock, Philip E. Cambridge; Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Fletcher, Joseph F., Russell, Peter H., and Tetlock, Philip E. 1996. The Clash of Rights: Liberty, Equality, and Legitimacy in Pluralist Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Tetlock, Philip E., Glaser, James M., Green, Donald Philip, and Hout, Michael. 1989. “Principled Tolerance and the American Mass Public.” British Journal of Political Science 19(January): 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stouffer, Samuel Andrew. 1955. Communism, Conformity, and Civil Liberties: A Cross-Section of the Nation Speaks its Mind. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Sullivan, John L., Piereson, James, and Marcus, George E. 1982. Political Tolerance and American Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sullivan, John L., Shaw, L. Earl, McAvoy, Gregory E., and Barnum, David G. 1993. “The Dimensions of Cue-Taking in the House of Representatives: Variation by Issue Area.” Journal of Politics 55(Novcmber): 975–97.Google Scholar
Thomassen, Jacques, Rosenstone, Steven J., Klingemann, Hans-Dieter, and Curtice, John. 1994. “The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems” <www.umich.edu/~nes/cses/papers/stimulus.htm>. Presented at a conference sponsored by the International Committee for Research into Elections and Representative Democracy. Accessed December 2, 1999.Google Scholar
Verba, Sidney, Nie, Norman H., and Kim, Jae-on. 1978. Participation and Political Equality: A Seven Nation Comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Verba, Sidney, Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Brady, Henry E. 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verba, Sidney, Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Brady, Henry E. 1997. “Solving the Puzzle of Rational Participation: Lessons from the Citizen Participation Study.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Walker, Jack L. Jr. 1991. Mobilizing Interest Groups in America: Patrons, Professions, and Social Movements. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfinger, Raymond, and Rosenstone, Steven. 1980. Who Votes? New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Wyman, Matthew. 1994. “Russian Political Culture: Evidence from Public Opinion Surveys.” The Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics 10(1): 25–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar