Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:27:11.821Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Where is the Schema? Critiques

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Milton Lodge ,
Kathleen M. McGraw ,
Pamela Johnston Conover ,
Stanley Feldman  and
Arthur H. Miller
Milton Lodge
Affiliation:
State University of New York, Stony Brook
Kathleen M. McGraw
Affiliation:
State University of New York, Stony Brook
Pamela Johnston Conover
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Stanley Feldman
Affiliation:
State University of New York, Stony Brook
Arthur H. Miller
Affiliation:
University of Iowa
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
Symposium
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 85 , Issue 4 , December 1991 , pp. 1357 - 1380
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1991

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.)

References

Abelson, R. P., Kinder, Donald, Peters, M., and Fiske, Susan. 1982. “Affective and Semantic Components in Political Person Perception.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42:619–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, John R. 1983. The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brody, Richard A. 1985. “Candidate Evaluations and the Vote.” In Political Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R., and Sears, David O.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E., and Stokes, Donald E. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Carlston, Donald C. 1980. “Events, Inferences, and Impression Formation.” In Person Memory, ed. Hastie, Reid, Ostrom, Thomas M., Ebbesen, E. B., Wyer, R. S., Hamilton, D. L. Jr., and Carlston, Donald E.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Collins, Allen, and Quillian, M. Ross 1969. “Retrieval Time from Semantic Memory.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 8:240–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, Pamela J., and Feldman, Stanley. 1984. “How People Organize the Political World: A Schematic Model.” American Journal of Political Science 28:95–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, Pamela J., and Feldman, Stanley. 1986. “The Role of Inference in the Perception of Political Candidates.” In Political Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R. and Sears, David O.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Conover, Pamela J., and Feldman, Stanley. 1989. “Candidate Perception in an Ambiguous World: Campaigns, Cues, and Inference Processes.” American Journal of Political Science 33:912–40.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. 1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Ideology and Discontent, ed. Apter, David. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Crocker, Jennifer, Hannah, Darlene B., and Weber, Renee. 1983. “Person Memory and Causal Attributions.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44:55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1959. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Edelman, Murray. 1971. Politics As Symbolic Action. Chicago: Markham.Google Scholar
Erber, Ralph, and Lau, Richard R. 1990. “Political Cynicism Revisited: An Information-processing Reconciliation of Policy-based and Incumbencybased Interpretations of Changes in Trust in Government.” American Journal of Political Science 34:236–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, Karl A., and Simon, Herbert A. 1984. Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports As Data. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Fazio, Russell H. 1989. “On the Power and Functionality of Attitudes: The Role of Attitude Accessibility.” In Attitude Structure and Function, ed. Pratkanis, Anthony R., Breckler, Steven J., and Greenwald, Anthony G.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Fazio, Russell H. 1990. “A Practical Guide to the Use of Response Latency in Social Psychological Research.” In Research Methods in Personality and Social Psychology, ed. Hendrick, Clyde and Clark, Margaret S.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Fazio, Russell H., and Williams, Carol J. 1986. “Attitude Accessibility As a Moderator of the Attitude-Perception and Attitude-Behavior Relations: An Investigation of the 1984 Presidential Election.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51:505–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiorina, Morris. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fishbein, Martin, and Azjen, Icek. 1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior. Reading, MA: Addteon-Wesley.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan. 1986. “Schema-based Versus Piecemeal Politics: A Patchwork Quilt, but Not a Blanket, of Evidence.” In Political Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R. and Sears, David O.HiUsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan T., and Linville, Patricia W. 1980. “What Does the Schema Concept Buy Us?” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 6:543–57.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan T., and Taylor, Shelley E. 1984. Social Cognition. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan T., and Pavelchak, Mark A. 1986. “Category-based Versus Piecemeal-based Affective Responses: Developments in Schematriggered Affect.” In Handbook of Motivation and Cognition, ed. Sorrentino, Richard M. and Higgins, E. ToryNew York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Graber, Doris A. 1976. “Press and TV As Opinion Resources in Presidential Campaigns.” Public Opinion Quarterly 40:285–303.Google Scholar
Graber, Doris A. 1980. Mess Media and American Politics. Washington: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
Graber, Doris A. 1984. Processing the News. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Hamill, Ruth, and Lodge, Milton. 1986. “Cognitive Consequences of Political Sophistication.” In Political Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R., and Sears, David O.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hamill, Ruth, Lodge, Milton, and Blake, Frederick. 1985. “The Breadth, Depth, and Utility of Class, Partisan, and Ideological Schemata.” American Journal of Political Science 29:850–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hastie, Reid. 1984. “Causes and Effects of Causal Attribution.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46:44–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hastie, Reid. 1986. “A Primer of Informationprocessing Theory for the Political Scientist.” In Political Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R. and Sears, David O.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hastie, Reid, and Carlston, Donald E. 1980. “Theoretical Issues in Person Memory.” In Person Memory, ed. Hastie, Reid, Ostrom, Thomas M., Ebbeson, E. B., Wyer, R. S., Hamilton, D. L. Jr., and Carlston, Donald E.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hennessy, Bernard. 1972. “A Headnote on the Existence and Study of Political Attitudes.” In Political Attitudes and Public Opinion, ed. Nimmo, Dan D. and Bonjean, Charles M.New York: David McKay.Google Scholar
Herstein, J. A. 1981. “Keeping the Voters Limits in Mind: A Cognitive Process Analysis of Decision Making in Voting.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40:843–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, E. Tory, and King, Gillian. 1981. “Accessibility of Social Constructs: Informationprocessing Consequences of Individual and Contextual Variability.” In Cognition, Social Interaction, and Personality, ed. Cantor, Nancy and Kihlstrom, John F.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Jervis, Robert. 1976. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Judd, Charles M., and Krosnick, Jon A. 1989. “The Structural Bases of Consistency among Political Attitudes: Effects of Political Expertise and Attitude Importance.” In Attitude Structure and Function, ed. Pratkanis, Anthony R., Breckler, Steven J., and Greenwald, Anthony G.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kelley, Stanley, and Mirer, Thad. 1974. “The Simple Act of Voting.” American Political Science Review 61:572–91.Google Scholar
Kiesler, C. A., Collins, B. E., and Miller, N. 1969. Attitude Change: A Critical Analysis of Theoretical Approaches. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald. 1986. “Presidential Character Revisited.” In Political Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R., and Sears, David O.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R., Peters, M. D., Abelson, R. P., and Fiske, Susan T. 1980. “Presidential Prototypes.” Political Behavior 2:315–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krosnick, Jon A. 1989. “Attitude Importance and Attitude Accessibility.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 15:297–308.Google Scholar
Lau, Richard R. 1986. “Political Schemata, Candidate Evaluations, and Voting Behavior.” In Political Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R. and Sears, David O.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lau, Richard R., and Sears, David O., eds. 1986. Political Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lippmann, Walter. 1922. Public Opinion. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lodge, Milton, and Hamill, Ruth. 1986. “A Partisan Schema for Political Information Processing.” American Political Science Review 80:505–19.Google Scholar
Lodge, Milton, McGraw, Kathleen M., and Stroh, Patrick. 1989. “An Impression-driven Model of Candidate Evaluation.” American Political Science Review 83:399–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodge, Milton, and Stroh, Patrick. N.d. “Inside the Mental Voting Booth: An Impression-driven Model of Candidate Evaluation.” In Current Approaches in Political Psychology, ed. Iyengar, Shanto and McGuire, James. Duke University Press. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Lusk, Cynthia M., and Judd, Charles M. 1988. “Political Expertise and the Structural Mediators of Candidate Evaluation.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 24:105–26.Google Scholar
McGraw, Kathleen M., Lodge, Milton, and Stroh, Patrick. 1990. “On-line Processing in Candidate Evaluation: The Effects of Issue Order, Issue Salience, and Sophistication.” Political Behavior 12:41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGraw, Kathleen M., and Pinney, Neil. 1990. “The Effects of General and Domain-specific Expertise on Political Memory and Judgment Processes.” Social Cognition 8:9–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGraw, Kathleen M., Pinney, Neil, and Neumann, David. 1991. “Memory for Political Actors: Contrasting the Use of Semantic and Evaluative Organizational Strategies.” Political Behavior 13:165–89.Google Scholar
Markus, Gregory, and Converse, Philip E. 1979. “A Dynamic Simultaneous Equation Model of Electoral Choice.” American Political Science Review 73:1055–70.Google Scholar
Miller, Arthur H. 1986. “Partisan Cognitions in Transition.” In Political Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R., and Sears, David O.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Miller, Arthur H. 1990. “Public Judgments of Senate and House Candidates.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 15:525–42.Google Scholar
Miller, Arthur H., and Miller, Warren E. 1976. “Ideology in the 1972 Election: Myth or Reality?” American Political Science Review 70:832–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Arthur H., Wattenberg, Martin, and Malanchuk, Oksana. 1986. “Schematic Assessments of Presidential Candidates.” American Political Science Review 80:521–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Warren E., and Levitin, T. 1976. Leadership and Change. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.Google Scholar
Minsky, Marvin. 1975. “A Framework for Representing Knowlege.” In The Psychology of Computer Vision, ed. Winston, Patrick H.New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Nimmo, Daniel, and Savage, Robert L. 1976. Candidates and Theory Images. Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear.Google Scholar
Ostrom, Thomas M. 1989. “Interdependence of Attitude Theory and Measurement.” In Attitude Structure and Function, ed. Pratkanis, Anthony R., Breckler, Steven J., and Greenwald, Anthony G.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I. 1978. Choices and Echoes in Presidential Elections. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I., and Jones, Calvin C. 1979. “Reciprocal Effects of Policy Preferences, Party Loyalties, and the Vote.” American Political Science Review 73:1071–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, John. 1982. “Contingent Decision Behavior.” Psychological Bulletin 92:382–402.Google Scholar
Peffley, M. A., and Hurwitz, J. 1985. “A Hierarchical Model of Attitude Constraint.” American Journal of Political Science 29:871–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pratkanis, Anthony R., Breckler, Steven J., and Greenwald, Anthony G. 1989. Attitude Structure and Function. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, Anthony R., and Greenwald, Anthony G. 1989. “A Sociocognitive Model of Attitude Structure and Function.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 22.Google Scholar
Robinson, Michael J., and Sheehan, Margaret A. 1983. Over the Wire and on TV. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, David, and Norman, David. 1983. “Representation in Memory.” In Handbook of Experimental Psychology, ed. Atkinson, R., Herrnstein, R., Lindzey, Gardner, and Luce, R.New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, David, and Ortony, Andrew. 1977. “The Representation of Knowledge in Memory.” In Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge, ed. Anderson, Richard, Spiro, Rand, and Montague, William. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony. 1987. The Mind of Man: Modeb of Human Understanding. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sears, David O., Huddie, Leonie, and Schaffer, Lynitta G. 1986. “A Schematic Variant of Symbolic Politics Theory As Applied to Racial and Gender Equality.” In Political Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R. and Sears, David O.Hillsdale, NI: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Shabad, Goldie, and Andersen, Kristi. 1979. “Candidate Evaluations by Men and Women.” Public Opinion Quarterly 43:19–35.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul, Brody, Richard A., and Tetlock, Philip E. 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., and Tetlock, Philip E. 1985. “Public Opinion and Political Ideology.” University of Chicago. Typescript.Google Scholar
Stokes, Donald E. 1966. “Some Dynamic Elements of Contest for the Presidency.” American Political Science Review 60:19–28.Google Scholar
Taylor, Shelly E. 1981. “The Interface of Cognitive and Social Psychology.” In Cognition, Social Behavior, and the Environment, ed. Harvey, James. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Taylor, Shelly E., and Crocker, Jennifer. 1981. “Schematic Bases of Social Information Processing.” In Social Cognition, ed. Higgins, E. Tory, Herman, C. Peter, and Zanna, Mark P.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. 1986. “Justice and Leadership Endorsement.” In Political Cognition, ed. Lau, Richard R. and Sears, David O.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Wattenberg, Martin. 1984. The Decline of American Political Parties, 1952–1980. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wildavsky, Aaron. 1987. “Choosing Preferences by Constructing Institutions: A Cultural Theory of Preference Formation.” American Political Science Review 81:3–21.Google Scholar
Wyer, Robert S., and Srull, Thomas K. 1989. Memory and Cognition in Its Social Context. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Zajonc, Robert. 1984. “On the Primacy of Affect.” American Psychologist 39:117–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zanna, Mark P., and Rempel, John K. 1989. “Attitudes: A New Look at an Old Concept.” In The Social Psychology of Knowledge, ed. Bar-Tel, Daniel and Kruglanski, Arie W.New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.