Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T01:10:40.066Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can Canadians Take a Hint? The (In)Effectiveness of Party Labels as Information Shortcuts in Canada

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2008

Jennifer L. Merolla ,
Laura B. Stephenson  and
Elizabeth J. Zechmeister
Jennifer L. Merolla*
Affiliation:
Claremont Graduate University
Laura B. Stephenson*
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
Elizabeth J. Zechmeister*
Affiliation:
Vanderbilt University
*
Jennifer L. Merolla, Department of Politics and Policy, Claremont Graduate University, 160 East Tenth Street, Claremont, California, USA91711-6168, jennifer.merolla@cgu.edu.
Laura B. Stephenson, Department of Political Science, The University of Western Ontario, 1151 Richmond Street, London, Ontario, CanadaN6A 5C2, lstephe8@uwo.ca.
Elizabeth J. Zechmeister, Department of Political Science, Vanderbilt University, VU Station B #351817, Nashville, Tennessee 37235-1817, liz.zechmeister@vanderbilt.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Abstract. This paper examines the usefulness of Canadian political party labels as information shortcuts. We supplement survey data analysis with the results of an experiment that tested whether knowing a party's position on an issue influenced opinion expression. We find that, contrary to findings in other countries, among our subject pool, Canadian political parties are not consistently useful as information cues. The Liberal party cue is hardly useful, and while the Conservative party cue can be effective, it appears to push partisans toward a more liberal stance on selected opinions. Only the NDP cue appears to influence opinions in the expected direction. These mixed findings run counter to foundational works on party labels as information shortcuts (mostly focused on US politics) and, instead, are consistent with previous scholarship on Canadian politics.

Résumé. Cet article examine l'utilité des étiquettes politiques des partis canadiens comme sources d'information sommaire. Nous analysons des données d'enquête ainsi que les résultats d'un sondage visant à déterminer si le fait de connaître la position d'un parti sur une question donnée influençait l'expression des opinions. Contrairement aux résultats obtenus dans d'autres pays, nous constatons chez les sujets observés que les étiquettes des partis politiques canadiens ne sont pas uniformément utiles comme sources d'information sommaire. L'étiquette du Parti libéral s'avère à peine utile, tandis que l'étiquette du Parti conservateur, peut-être plus efficace, semble inciter les partisans à une position plus libérale. Seule l'étiquette du NPD semble influencer les avis dans la direction prévue. Ces conclusions mixtes contredisent des travaux fondamentaux sur le même sujet (portant pour la plupart sur la politique aux États-Unis) et confirment plutôt les études antérieures sur la politique canadienne.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , September 2008 , pp. 673 - 696
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 2008

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

Barry, Brian. 1975. “The Consociational Model and Its Dangers.” European Journal of Political Research 3(4): 393–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bélanger, Éric and Stephenson, Laura B.. 2007. “Parties and Partisans: The Nature(s) of Partisanship in Canada's Fourth Party System.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois.Google Scholar
Blais, André, Gidengil, Elisabeth, Nadeau, Richard and Nevitte, Neil. 2002. Anatomy of a Liberal Victory. Peterborough, ON: Broadview.Google Scholar
Blais, André, Gidengil, Elisabeth, Nevitte, Neil, Fournier, Patrick and Everitt, Joanna [principal investigators]. Canadian election study, 2004 [computer file]/Final version. Montréal, Quebec: Université de Montréal. Faculté des artes et des sciences. Département de science politique [producer and distributor].Google Scholar
Blais, André, Nadeau, Richard, Gidengil, Elisabeth and Nevitte, Neil. 2001. “The Formation of Party Preferences: Testing the Proximity and Directional Models.” European Journal of Political Research 40(1): 81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E. and Stokes, Donald E.. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward G. and Stimson, James A.. 1980. “The Two Faces of Issue Voting.” The American Political Science Review 74(1): 78–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carty, R. Kenneth. 2006. “The Shifting Place of Political Parties in Canadian Public Life.” IRPP Choices 12(4): 3–13.Google Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., Jenson, Jane, LeDuc, Lawrence and Pammett, Jon H.. 1980. Political Choice in Canada. Abr. ed.Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.Google Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., Jenson, Jane, LeDuc, Lawrence and Pammett, Jon H.. 1984. Absent Mandate: The Politics of Discontent in Canada. Toronto: Gage.Google Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., Jenson, Jane, LeDuc, Lawrence and Pammett, Jon H.. 1991. Absent Mandate: Interpreting Change in Canadian Elections. 2nded.Toronto: Gage.Google Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., Jenson, Jane, LeDuc, Lawrence and Pammett, Jon H.. 1996. Absent Mandate: Canadian Electoral Politics in an Era of Restructuring. 3rded.Toronto: Gage.Google Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., Kornberg, Allan and Stewart, Marianne C.. 2004. “Referendum Voting as Political Choice: The Case of Quebec.” British Journal of Political Science 34(2): 345–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, Harold D. and Stewart, Marianne C.. 1987. “Partisan Inconsistency and Partisan Change in Federal States: The Case of Canada.” American Journal of Political Science 31(2): 383–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coan, Travis G., Merolla, Jennifer L., Stephenson, Laura B. and Zechmeister, Elizabeth J.. 2008. “It's not Easy Being Green: Minor Party Labels as Heuristic Aids.” Political Psychology 29(3): 389–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conover, Pamela Johnston and Feldman, Stanley. 1989. “Candidate Perception in an Ambiguous World: Campaigns, Cues, and Inference Processes.” American Journal of Political Science 33(4): 912–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Ideology and Discontent, ed. Apter, David. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Cross, William and Young, Lisa. 2002. “Policy Attitudes of Party Members in Canada: Evidence of Ideological Politics.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 35(4): 859–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutler, Fred. 2002. “The Simplest Shortcut of All: Sociodemographic Characteristics and Electoral Choice.” The Journal of Politics 64(2): 466–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Druckman, James N. 2001a. “Using Credible Advice to Overcome Framing Effects.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 17(1): 62–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, James N. 2001b. “On the Limits of Framing Effects: Who Can Frame?” The Journal of Politics 63(4): 1041–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fournier, Patrick. 2002. “The Uninformed Canadian Voter.” In Citizen Politics: Research and Theory in Canadian Political Behaviour, ed. Everitt, Joanna and O'Neill, Brenda. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Funk, Carolyn. 1997. “Implications of Political Expertise in Candidate Trait Evaluations.” Political Research Quarterly 50(3): 675–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gidengil, Elisabeth, Blais, André, Everitt, Joanna, Fournier, Patrick and Nevitte, Neil. 2006. “Is the Concept of Party Identification Applicable in Canada? A Panel-Based Analysis.” Paper presented at the ECPR 34th joint sessions of workshops, Nicosia, Cyprus.Google Scholar
Gidengil, Elisabeth, Blais, André, Nevitte, Neil and Nadeau, Richard. 2004. Citizens. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
Green, Donald, Palmquist, Bradley and Schickler, Eric. 2002. Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Grofman, Bernard, Merrill, Samuel, Brunell, Thomas L. and Koetzle, William. 1999. “The Potential Electoral Disadvantages of a Catch-All Party: Ideological Variance among Republicans and Democrats in the 50 States.” Party Politics 5(2): 199–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, Ailsa. 2005. “Are Three Parties Better than Five? A Mapping of Ideological Space in Canadian Politics, 1980–2000.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, London ON.Google Scholar
Hinich, Melvin J. and Munger, Michael C.. 1994. Ideology and the Theory of Political Choice. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobolt, Sara Binzer. 2007. “Taking Cues on Europe? Voter Competence and Party Endorsements in referendums on European Integration.” European Journal of Political Research 46(2): 151–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howe, Paul. 2003. “Electoral Participation and the Knowledge Deficit.” Electoral Insight 5(2): 20–25.Google Scholar
Huckfeldt, Robert, Levine, Jeffrey, Morgan, William and Sprague, John. 1999. “Accessibility and the Political Utility of Partisan and Ideological Orientations.” American Journal of Political Science 43(3): 888–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenson, Jane. 1975. “Party Loyalty in Canada: The Question of Party Identification.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 8(4): 543–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenson, Jane. 1976. “Party Strategy and Party Identification: Some Patterns of Partisan Allegiance.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 9(1): 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Richard, Blais, André, Brady, Henry E. and Crête, Jean. 1992. Letting the People Decide. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Richard, Blais, André, Gidengil, Elisabeth and Nevitte, Neil. 1996. The Challenge of Direct Democracy: The 1992 Canadian Referendum. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Richard, Fournier, Patrick and Jenkins, Richard. 2000. “Party Location and Party Support: Unpacking Competing Models.” The Journal of Politics 62(4): 1145–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, Kim Fridkin. 1994. “Does Gender Make a Difference? An Experimental Examination of Sex Stereotypes and Press Patterns in Statewide Campaigns.” American Journal of Political Science 38(1): 162–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kam, Cindy D. 2005. “Who Toes the Party Line? Cues, Values, and Individual Differences.” Political Behavior 27(2): 163–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kam, Cindy D. and Franzese, Robert J. Jr. 2007. Modeling and Interpreting Interaction Hypotheses in Regression Analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Kam, Cindy D., Wilking, Jennifer R. and Zechmeister, Elizabeth J.. 2007. “Beyond the ‘Narrow Data Base’: Another Convenience Sample for Experimental Research.” Political Behavior 20(4): 415–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kay, Barry J. 1977. “An Examination of Class and Left-Right Party Images in Canadian Voting.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 10(1): 127–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, Jeffrey W. 2001. “When Parties and Candidates Collide: Citizen Perception of House Candidates' Positions on Abortion.” Public Opinion Quarterly 65(1): 1–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuklinski, James H., Quirk, Paul J., Jerit, Jennifer, Schwieder, David and Rich, Robert F.. 2000. “Misinformation and the Currency of Democratic Citizenship.” The Journal of Politics 62(3): 790–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lau, Richard R. and Redlawsk, David P.. 2001. “Advantages and Disadvantages of Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Making.” American Journal of Political Science 45(4): 951–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavine, Howard, Lodge, Milton, Polichak, James and Taber, Charles. 2002. “Explicating the Black Box through Experimentation: Studies of Authoritarianism and Threat.” Political Analysis 10(4): 343–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layman, Geoffrey C. and Carsey, Thomas M.. 2002. “Party Polarization and ‘Conflict Extension’ in the American Electorate.” American Journal of Political Science 46(4): 786–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LeDuc, Lawrence, Clarke, Harold D., Jenson, Jane and Pammett, Jon H.. 1984. “Partisan Instability in Canada: Evidence from a New Panel Study.” American Political Science Review 78(2): 470–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodge, Milton and Hamill, Ruth. 1986. “A Partisan Schema for Political Information Processing.” American Political Science Review 80(2): 505–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupia, Arthur and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know? New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McKelvey, Richard D. and Ordeshook, Peter C.. 1985. “Elections with Limited Information: A Fulfilled Expectations Model Using Contemporaneous Poll and Endorsement Data as Information-Sources.” Journal of Economic Theory 36(1): 55–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKelvey, Richard D. and Ordeshook, Peter C.. 1986. “Information, Electoral Equilibria, and the Democratic Ideal.” The Journal of Politics 48(4): 909–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meisel, John. 1973. Working Papers on Canadian Politics. Exp. ed.Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's.Google Scholar
Merolla, Jennifer, Stephenson, Laura and Zechmeister, Elizabeth. 2007. “La Aplicación de los Métodos Experimentales en el Estudio de los Atajos Informativos en México.” Política y Gobierno 14(1): 117–42.Google Scholar
Nadeau, Richard and Blais, André. 1990. “Do Canadians Distinguish Between Parties?” Canadian Journal of Political Science 23(2): 317–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuman, W. Russell. 1986. The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Electorate. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nevitte, Neil, Blais, André, Gidengil, Elisabeth and Nadeau, Richard. 2000. Unsteady State: The 1997 Canadian Federal Election. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin and Shapiro, Robert. 1992. The Rational Public. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popkin, Samuel L. 1994. The Reasoning Voter. 2nded.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rahn, Wendy M. 1993. “The Role of Partisan Stereotypes in Information Processing about Political Candidates.” American Journal of Political Science 37(2): 472–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ranney, Austin. 1962. The Doctrine of Responsible Party Government. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Ray, Leonard. 2003. “When Parties Matter: The Conditional Influence of Party Positions on Voter Opinions about European Integration.” The Journal of Politics 65(4): 978–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scarrow, Howard A. 1965. “Distinguishing Between Political Parties—The Case of Canada.” Midwest Journal of Political Science 9(1): 61–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffner, Brian F. and Streb, Matthew J.. 2002. “The Partisan Heuristic in Low-Information Elections.” Public Opinion Quarterly 66(4): 559–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, David. 1986. “College Sophomores in the Laboratory: Influences of a Narrow Data Base on Social Psychology's View of Human Nature.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51(3): 515–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniderman, Paul. 2000. “Taking Sides: A Fixed Choice Theory of Political Reasoning.” In Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality, ed. Lupia, Arthur, McCubbins, Mathew D. and Popkin, Samuel L.. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., Brody, Richard A. and Tetlock, Philip E.. 1991. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somin, Ilya. 1998. “Voter Ignorance and the Democratic Ideal.” Critical Review 12(4): 413–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squire, Peverill and Smith, Eric R. A. N.. 1988. “The Effect of Partisan Information on Voters in Nonpartisan Elections.” The Journal of Politics 50(1): 169–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, H. Michael. 1987. “Ideology and Unstable Party Identification in Canada: Limited Rationality in a Brokerage Party System.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 20(4): 813–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, Marianne C. and Clarke, Harold D.. 1998. “The Dynamics of Party Identification in Federal Systems: The Canadian Case.” American Journal of Political Science 42(1): 97–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomz, Michael and Sniderman, Paul. 2004. “Political Brand Names: Signaling and Constraint in Mass Belief Systems.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Wattenberg, Martin P. 1982. “Party Identification and Party Images: A Comparison of Britain, Canada, Australia and the United States.” Comparative Politics 15(1): 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, John R. and Niemi, Richard G.. 1983. “Perceptions of Candidates' Issue Positions.” Political Behavior 5(2): 209–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar