Skip to main content
Log in

The meaning of party labels

  • Published:
Political Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To determine the meaning(s) of the concepts “Republican,” “Democrat,” and “Independent,” the most frequently cited attributes of each party label were scaled in terms of their semantic centrality. An analysis of the magnitude scale values demonstrates that the labels “Republican” and “Democrat” have unique cognitive properties which easily discriminate one label from another. The most characteristic and discriminating properties refer to (1) voting, (2) electioneering, and (3) other forms of electoral behavior. Although these two labels have many strong properties over which there is considerable agreement, such consensus is lacking for the fewer and weaker properties which characterize and discriminate the label “Independent.” Whereas “Republican” and “Democrat” are sharply delineated, semantic inversions of one another, the concept “Independent” is ambiguously defined and only weakly distinguishable from other concepts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bishop, G. F., Oldendick R. W., and Tuchfarber, A. J. (1978). “Effects of question wording on political attitude consistency.”Public Opinion Quarterly 42: 81–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, W. D. (1970).Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics. New York: W. W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W., and Stokes, D. (1960).The American Voter. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A. M., and Loftus, E. F. (1975). “A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing,”Psychological Review 82: 407–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • —— and Quillian, M. R. (1969). “Retrieval time from semantic memory.”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 8: 240–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Converse, P. E. (1966). “The concept of a normal vote.” In A. Campbell et al. (eds.),Elections and the Political Order. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith, B., Magleby, D., Nelson, C., Orr, E., Westlye, M., and Wolfinger, R. E. (1977). “The myth of the independent voter.” Paper delivered at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C., September 1977.

  • Lakoff, G. (1972). “Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts.” Paper delivered at the eighth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. Linguistics Department, University of Chicago.

  • Lodge, M., and Tursky, B. (1979). “Comparisons between category and magnitude scaling of political opinion employing SRC/CPS items.”American Political Science Review 73: 50–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • --, and Tursky, B. (1981). “Workshop on the magnitude scaling of political opinion in survey research.”American Journal of Political Science, fourthcoming.

  • Lodge, M., Cross, D., Tursky, B., & Tanenhaus, J. (1975). “The psychophysical scaling and validation of a political support scale.”American Journal of Political Science 19: 611–649.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——, Tanenhaus, J., Cross, D., Tursky, B., Foley, M. A., & Foley, H. (1976a). “The calibration and cross-modal validation of ratio scales of political opinion in survey research.”Social Science Research 5: 325–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——, Cross, D., Tursky, B., Tanenhaus, J., & Reeder, R. (1976b). “The psychophysical scaling of political support in the ‘real world.’”Political Methodology 2: 159–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loftus, G. R., and Loftus, E. F. (1976).Human Memory: The Processing of Information. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie, N. H., Verba, S., and Petrocik, J. R. (1976).The Changing American Voter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., and Wilson, T. D. (1977). “Telling more than we know: Verbal reports on mental processes.”Psychological Review 84: 231–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rips, L. J., Shoben, E. J., and Smith, E. E. (1973). “Semantic distance and the verification of semantic relations.”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13: 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosch, E. (1975). “Cognitive representations of semantic categories.”Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 104: 192–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——, and Mervis, C. G. (1975). “Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories.”Cognitive Psychology 7: 573–605.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——, Simpson, C., and Miller, R. S. (1976). “Structural basis of typicality effect.”Journal of Experimental Psychology 2: 491–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. E., Shoben, E. J., and Rips, L. J. (1974). “Comparison processes in semantic memory.”Psychological Review 81: 214–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, S. S. (1966). “Ametric for the social consensus.”Science 151:530–541.

    Google Scholar 

  • —— (1975).Psychophysics: Introduction to its Perceptual, Neural, and Social Prospects. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, J. L., Pierson, J. E., and Marcus, G. E. (1978). “Ideological constraint in the mass public: A methodological critique and some new findings.”American Journal of Political Science 22: 233–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, J. (1979). “Separating objects of specific and diffuse support: Experiments on presidents and the presidency.” Laboratory for Behavioral Research, Department of Political science, SUNY-Stony Brook. Report No. 15.

  • --, and Foley, M. A. (1979). “‘The words of things entangle and confuse’: Response effects and the ambiguous concept.” Manuscript of the Departments of Psychology and Political Science, SUNY-Stony Brook.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bastedo, R.W., Lodge, M. The meaning of party labels. Polit Behav 2, 287–308 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990483

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00990483

Keywords

Navigation