Search  
Northwestern
More help... IPR
You are here: IPR home page > Publications > Working Papers



Events
   Colloquia
   Policy Briefings
Research Programs
Publications
   Working Papers
   Books
   Newsletters
   Policy Briefs
People
   Faculty Fellows
   Faculty Associates
   Students
   Research Staff
   E-mail/Phone list
Affiliated Centers
   Cells to Society (C2S)
   Q-Center

Media Resources

IPR in the News
   News Archives

IPR Information
   About Us
   Contact Us
   Job Opportunities

Need more help?
   Site Map
   Return to Homepage


 


 

WP-99-07

Deliberative Opinion Change and Consistency:
Citizens in the 1994 Illinois Gubernatorial Election

Jason Barabas

Abstract

Does deliberation lead to improvements in public opinion quality? The answer depends upon what standards are used. I argue that two widely used criteria ­ stability and consistency ­ should be modified for use in deliberation research. When citizens discuss politics we often desire instability after deliberation (through evidence of opinion change) and inconsistency during deliberation (when participants consider multiple viewpoints). In contrast to past work comparing pre- and post-deliberative opinions, here the actual deliberation captured in two focus group discussions during the 1994 Illinois gubernatorial election (N=2,564 statements) is used to predict the probabilities of vote change and candidate choice. I find that consistency operates selectively. Candidate consistency ­ when deliberation matches vote choice and when the deliberative statements themselves tend to favor one candidate ­ decreases the likelihood that citizens change their vote. Issue consistency ­ when deliberation matches voting explanations on a salient issue like crime ­ increases the probability of vote change. These same relationships hold for predicting the probability of voting for the group"s most preferred candidate, but they are inverted for the least preferred candidate. That is, the people who eventually favored the winning candidate deliberated one way. Those in the minority who remained with an unpopular candidate tended to deliberate another way. This means that deliberation influences political opinions differently for different citizens. Statewide public opinion before and after the focus groups strongly suggests that the deliberative processes at work in the focus groups closely mirrored events during the rest of the election.

Jason Barabas, Department of Political Science, Northwestern University



To Order:

Hard copies of IPR working papers cost $5.00 each (international orders are $10 each). We only accept checks drawn on U.S. bank and payable in U.S. funds. Checks or money orders should be made payable to Northwestern University and sent to the following address:

Publications Department - WP Orders
Institute for Policy Research
2040 Sheridan Rd., Evanston, IL 60208-4100.

For information, call 847-491-8712 or email ipr@northwestern.edu. Please note that we do not accept credit cards.