Samenvatting
Summary Course Politics and Society
Summary Course Politics and Society Tilburg University Sociology Master
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 56 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 56 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
1 beoordeling
Door: thomstrijbos • 5 jaar geleden
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Summary CoursePolitics and Society in
Comparative Perspective
Robin van Woensel
1
,Meeting 2: Ideologies
Achterberg, P., & Houtman, D. (2009) Ideologically Illogical?: Why Do the Lower-Educated Dutch
Display so Little Value Coherence?
→ European data rather than American data. Many sociologists and political scientists have tried to find
out how political values are organized into one, two or even more dimensions. They found that there are
two dimensions; an economic dimension of egalitarianism vs. laissez-faire (equality) and a cultural one
of authoritarianism vs. libertarianism (freedom). According to this strand of research, egalitarian values
are just as likely (or unlikely) to be combined with authoritarian values as with libertarian ones. In other
words, knowing someone’s values on economic matters does not lead to a correct prediction of what
one will think about cultural matters. There is no or very little coherence between the two value
dimensions.
Yet, research clearly demonstrates that there are important differences in value coherence between social
strata; more value coherence exists among elites. Among elites, political values are more consistently
ordered into a single dimension of progressiveness vs. conservatism.
Two Explanations for Value Coherence
First hypothesis: while for the public at large there is no coherence between egalitarian and
authoritarian values, the degree to which these values are organized coherently increases with
educational level. (Accepted). In order to explain these difference in (in)coherence between the higher
and lower educated, we put forward two explanations.
Political Competence and Ideological Beliefs
The first theory, which has been popular since the 1960s, focuses on political competence for explaining
differences in ideological coherence. In a study of ”don’t know” answers, Bourdieu (1984) showed that
the degree to which people can answer political questions in a questionnaire depends on level of
education, illustrating that the higher educated make sense of a broader range of questions and have the
ability to answer those questions. One’s cognitive ability (Carmines and Stimson 1982), political capital
(Bourdieu 1984), or political competence (Jackson and Marcus 1975) is thus said to ensure a coherent
ideological worldview. Ideological coherence depends on political competence, while political
competence itself depends on educational level (Bartle 2000; Converse 1964). Thus, our second
hypothesis is that value incoherence among the lower educated is caused by their low level of political
competence (Rejected).
Social Position, Economic and Cultural Insecurity
Although political competence is central to Converse’s theory, he suggests that interests are also likely
to affect ideological (in)coherence. The central argument is that for a sound understanding of the origins
of egalitarianism and authoritarianism it is necessary to supplement these two types of values with a
distinction between two types of social position: one’s economic (class) position and one’s cultural
position – or one’s economic and one’s cultural capital. Empirical evidence shows that egalitarianism
can be attributed to the strength of one’s economic position. If a person is in a weak position (which
means: low level of education, low income, high risk of unemployment) and suffers from economic
insecurity, he or she is more inclined to be pro-welfare state, pro-state intervention in the economy, pro-
financial redistribution and have egalitarian values. A preference for laissez-faire values can then be
attributed to a strong economic position.
Yet, unlike egalitarianism, authoritarianism is not caused by one’s economic position. In this case, it is
not economic interests that are decisive, but one’s cultural interests related to the amount of cultural
capital one possesses. As cultural capital increases, people decreasingly hold conservative or
2
,authoritarian values on cultural matters pertaining to individual freedom and cultural diversity: those
with little cultural capital reject libertarian values and hold conservative ones.
Although the higher educated prefer laissez-faire economic values and libertarian cultural ones, an
important, but rarely noted, observation is that differences between the higher and lower educated in
authoritarianism are greater than in egalitarianism. The fact that the higher educated hold stronger
libertarian views pertaining to cultural issues, but barely hold laissez-faire values pertaining to economic
matters, suggests that economic interests only lead to egalitarianism when people are in an economically
insecure position. We thus expect that the economic insecurity of the lower educated leads to egalitarian
values, but that the economic security of the higher educated does not lead to laissez-faire values.
Following this logic, the consequences of economic (in)security for economic values differ for the
higher and lower educated, whereas the consequences of cultural insecurity for cultural values are
basically similar. Their culturally insecure position leads the lower educated to authoritarian values, and
their economically insecure position leads them to egalitarianism. Hence, for the lower educated an
incoherent ideological profile emerges. As their culturally secure position leads the higher educated to
libertarian values and their economically secure position does not lead them to laissez-faire values, a
coherent ideological profile is more likely for this category. The crucial third hypothesis that may be
derived from this theory is: ideological incoherence can mainly be found among the lower educated
because they are in an economically and culturally insecure position (Accepted).
Results
We can safely draw the conclusion that there are two independent value dimensions among the public
at large: one cultural and the other economic. Whether one is progressive on one dimension has nothing
to do with how one positions oneself on the other. In other words: being authoritarian does not
necessarily lead to any laissez-faire values whatsoever. Knowing someone’s cultural values, there is no
way of predicting what he or she will think about economic redistribution and vice versa.
Educational Level and Value Coherence
3
, While for the public at large there is no coherence between egalitarian and authoritarian values, it
increases with educational level. The next section explores how these differences in value coherence
can be explained.
Value Coherence, Political Competence and Insecurity
Two conclusions may be drawn. First, although the higher educated do have more political competence,
this does not lead them to order their values in a more coherent fashion. The second hypothesis, stating
that the political competence of the higher educated is responsible for their higher levels of value
coherence, is therefore rejected.
The second and final explanation is tested in the lower half of the model in Figure 4. It shows that the
lower educated suffer more from economic and cultural insecurity. Although neither type of insecurity
leads people to value coherence, as the paths from economic and cultural insecurity are not statistically
significant, these two types of insecurity do have consequences for value coherence. The strong and
negative effect of the interaction term of economic and cultural insecurity shows that the specific
combination of cultural and economic insecurity leads to value incoherence. The third hypothesis, that
the value incoherence of the lower educated can be attributed to their economically and culturally
insecure position, can therefore be accepted.
Feldman, S. (1988). Structure and consistency in public opinion: The role of core beliefs and values.
American Journal of political science, 416-440.
This paper examines the role of three core beliefs – support for equality of opportunity, economic
individualism, and the free enterprise system – in structuring political beliefs and evaluations.
Much of the research on the structure of public opinion and mass belief systems has followed the lead
of Converse (1964) and adopted a sociological model of belief system constraint (social constraint
perspective). This approach views the development of structure in mass belief system as a function of
social learning. Political attitudes and beliefs are organized into coherent structures by political elites
for consumption by the public. The more people are exposed to these structures and the better they
comprehend them, the more likely their beliefs will be systematically organized. The question of this
paper is; Why do people gravitate toward one or the other perspective? Converse himself actually
proposes a theory for this; the psychological constraint. From this perspective, political attitudes and
4
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper xRoobin. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €3,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 56326 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen