Political Sophistication and Policy Reasoning: A Reconsideration

principles and policy preferences is conditional on political sophistication, dominates the study of public opinion. This article argues that the sophistication-interaction theory does not hold to the degree the consensus claims. Specifically, it challenges the proposition that sophistication promotes the use of domain-specific beliefs and values. Analysis of 1984, 1986, 1987, 1988, and 1990 NES data yields two compelling findings. First, a series of confirmatory factor analyses indicate that beliefs about equal opportunity, self-reliance, and limited government in the social welfare domain and about militarism and anticommunism in the foreign policy domain are structured coherently and equivalently in the minds of citizens at different levels of sophistication. Second, structural equation model results demonstrate that political sophistication does not systematically enhance the impact these principles have on policy preferences. The conventional wisdom in public opinion research holds that the ability to deduce specific policy preferences from abstract principles is conditional on political sophistication. Research shows that sophistication strengthens the relationship between liberal-conservative orientations and issue positions (Delli Carpini and Keeter 1996; Sniderman, Brody, and Tetlock 1991; Zaller 1992). However, the consensus makes the far broader claim that sophistication promotes reliance on all abstract beliefs and values. According to Zaller, “the impact of people’s value predispositions always depends on whether citizens possess the contextual information needed to translate their values into support for particular policies” (1992, 25). Delli Carpini and Keeter posit that “the greater the store of information, the more often citizens will be able to connect their values with concrete matters of politics” (1996, 229). Luskin maintains that “[t]here are many reasons to think sophistication important, but perhaps its greatest importance lies in its conditioning of the relationship between values and policy and candidate preferences, which can be expected to be tighter among the more sophisticated” (2002, 220). This article examines critically whether the sophistication-interaction model of public opinion holds Paul Goren is Assistant Professor of Political Science, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-3902 ([email protected]). I thank Peter Bentler, Cotton Casino, Rick Herrera, Jim Jaccard, Tim Johnson, Pat Kenney, David Kimball, George Knight, Kathleen Knight, Howie Lavine, Roger Millsap, Jeff Mondak, Tom Nelson, Paul Sniderman, and the three anonymous reviewers for their comments and assistance on this project. I assume responsibility for any remaining errors. to the degree the consensus claims. I draw upon the work of Feldman (1988) and Hurwitz and Peffley (1987) to argue that political sophistication will neither affect the absorption of domain-specific principles from the broader political environment, nor strengthen the impact these principles have on policy preferences. My analysis of data from five National Election Study surveys yields two compelling findings. First, I demonstrate that beliefs about equal opportunity, self-reliance, and limited government in the social welfare domain and about militarism and anticommunism in the foreign policy domain are structured coherently and equivalently in the minds of citizens at different levels of sophistication. Second, I show that individuals are, for the most part, equally adept at grounding policy preferences in these principles. Simply put, all citizens hold genuine core beliefs and values and rely more or less equally on these when taking positions on many specific issues. Theoretical and Empirical Background The domain-specific approach to the study of public opinion posits that everyone holds and uses abstract principles American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 48, No. 3, July 2004, Pp. 462–478 C ©2004 by the Midwest Political Science Association ISSN 0092-5853