Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lerner, R.
Right arrow Articles by Rothman, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1991 World Association for Public Opinion Research

ELITE VS. MASS OPINION: ANOTHER LOOK AT A CLASSIC RELATIONSHIP*

Robert Lerner, Althea K. Nagai and Stanley Rothman

Abstract

This paper extends Converse's classic comparison of the relative constraint of élite and mass belief systems first by analyzing ideological consistency on several independent dimensions of liberalism and then by examining consistency among different élite groups. We find that élite attitudes are more consistent than mass attitudes on the collectivist liberalism dimension but not on the expressive individualism dimension, thus requiring a partial modification of Converse's ‘law’. We also find that élites dealing professionally with ideas and values (e.g., religious leaders, leading journalists, and movie makers) have more consistent belief systems than governmental élite groups, while business leaders and military leaders exhibit the least degree of constraint. The kind of education élites receive appears to play a role in determining the degree of constraint they exhibit. Those élites with undergraduate and graduate education in the social science and humanities show considerably greater ideological constraint than those who studied the physical sciences and in applied fields.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.