70-26,356
RUSHTON, Willard Travis, 1934- A TEST OF THE VALUE CONCEPT: THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN VALUE COMMITMENTS AND POLITICAL PRE FERENCE.
The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1970 Sociology, general
University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan A TEST OF THE VALUE CONCEPT s THE RELATIONSHIPS
BETWEEN VALUE COMMITMENTS AND
POLITICAL PREFERENCE
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By
Willard Travis Rush ton B.S., Mo Sc.
******
The Ohio State University 1970
Approved by
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author would like to recognize the following individuals for their contribution to the present study®
First, a debt of gratitude is owed to Dr® A® R. Mangus for his guidance and support through most of the author's graduate study®
To Dr® G® Howard Phillips, Chairman, and Drs® Raymond Sletto and
Russell Dynes, members of the author's reading and examing committees, the author wishes to acknowledge helpful comments and criticisms®
To M s s Madelin Olds, Friend and colleague, the author wishes to express his thanks for help in the collection of the data used in the study®
And finally, the author wishes to express publicly his apprecia tion and thanks to his wife and children who endured®
ii VITA
Nov* 13s 1931* 0000 B o m - Ashtabula* Ohio
I960 * * * «' « o 0 * B.S*» Th© Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas* College Station* Texas
196k e © « * ® © « * M» Ses* The Ohio State University* Columbus* Ohio
196^ © 0 0 ©' ©' o © * Research Assistant* Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, The Ohio State University* Columbus* Ohio
1965 © o: o’ ®‘ o 0 a # Assistant Instructor* Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology* Th© Ohio State University* Columbus* Ohio
1965 ©oooooao Instructor* Department of Agricultural Eoonomics and Rural Sociology* Th© Ohio State University* Columbus* Ohio
1966 © * * • • , * © Teaching Assistant* Department of Sociology and Anthropology* The Ohio State University* Columbus* Ohio
1966 - 1969 Instructor* Department of Psychology* Sociology* and Education* Del Mar College* Corpus Christl* Texas
1969 « 1970 « © ©' © © Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Sociology* and Education* Del Mar College* Corpus Christ!* Texas
iii PUBLICATIONS
"A Systematic Conceptualization of"Farm Management," i-rith. E® T® Shaudys® Journal of P a m Economics,, Vol® **9® No® 1, Part I, February, 1967®
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Fields Rural Sooiology
Studies in Rural Sociology® Professors A® R® Mangus and Everett Rogers
Studies in Research Methods and Statistics® Professors Robert Bullock and Kent Sofredrlan
Studies in Social Psychology® Professors Enrico Quarantelli, Leon Warshay, and A® R® Mangus
Studies in Sociological Theory® Professors Rosooe Hinkle and Leon Warshay
Studies in Sociological Organization® Professors Eugene Haas, Christen Jonassen, and Dean Knudsen
iv TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
VITA ......
LIST OF TABLES ......
LIST OF FIGURES......
Chapter
I* INTRODUCTION......
Statement of the Problem Assumptions and Definitions Specifics of th® Study Organization of the Study
II o THE CONCEPT OF VALUE IN SOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS . 0 „
Concepts in General Philosophies of Soience Identifying Values The Value Concept Summary
i n . METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURES AND THE IDENTIFICATION OF VALUE CLUSTERS ......
Collection of Opinion Statements Collection of Final Data Identification of Attitude Clusters Identification of Value Clusters Summary
IV. VALUE COMMITMENTS AND POLITICAL PREFERENCE . . . .
Review of Literature Hypotheses and Findings Analysis of the Findings Summary Chapter Page
V. SUMMARY* EVALUATION, AND CONCLUSIONS...... 105
Summary Evaluation Conclusions
APPENDIX
I* 113
II* W-6
III•••••••••••••••••••••••••«•• 160
WORKS CITED •••»••••••«*•«•••**••••• 169
vi LIST OF TABLES
Table Pag©
1® Implications of Viewing Values as Objects of Orientation and as Internalised Standards a®®®®®®®®®®®® 22
2® Number of Returned Preliminary Questionnaires „ by Ethnic Group .s®®®®.®...... • ® ® « ® ® 30
3® Sample Characteristics ...... 34
4. Concern for Humanity Factors Relevant Data . ® • ® ® ® ® J6
5® Political and Economic Conservatism Factors Relevant Data o e ® o ® o ® ® ® . ® ® ® o ® ® 0 o o e ® ® ® ® ® 3?
6 ® Concern About Authority Factors Relevant Data • ® « ® ® 39
7® Authoritarian Conservatism Factors Relevant Data ® ® ® ® 41
8 ® Political Non-Intervention Factors Relevant Data ® • , • 4-3
9® Moral-Religious Factors Relevant Data oe®®®®®®® 44
10® Concern For Society Factors Relevant Data ® • ® • • ® • 46
11® Puritan Ethic Factors Relevant Data e®.®®.®.®® 47
12® Original Factor 9 and 10s Relevant Data ®®e®®®®® 48
13® Anti-Communisms Relevant Data e®*®*®®®®®®®® 49
14® Analysis of Three Value Factors s Relevant Data • • ® • . 51
15® Coefficients of Correlation Between th© Three Value Factors • • ...... 53
16® Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of Value Factors® Total Sample and by Presidential Preference ® ® ® « • • 69
17® Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Conservatism Scores by Presidential Preference •®®®»®»®®®® 70
vii Table Pag®
18. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Concern for Society Scores by Presidential Preference . ® . . ® . 0 71
19® Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Political Mon® Intervention Scores by Presidential Preference ® ® ® 0 72
20o Parameters of the Original Humphrey Sample and the Random Sub-Sample on Three Values oo®.....®.® 76
21o Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of Value Factors of Configuration Sample by Presidential Preference ® « ® • 77
22. Cumulative Predictive Accuracy of Conservatisms Concern for Society* and Political Non-Intervention Values • . 81
23® Frequenoy and Percentage Distributions of Nixon and Humphrey Supporters in th® Most Predictive Sub-set of Selected Predictive Factors ..e0eo...... 82
2^-0 Frequency and Percentage Distributions of Nixon and Humphrey Supporters Within the Democratic Party in the Most Predictive Sub-set of Selected Predictive Factors ® « « • ® ...... 83
25® Cumulative Predictive Accuracy of Non-Value Factors ® ® ® 85
26® Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of Value Factors by Political Party Affiliation...... 87
27® Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Conservatism Scores by Political Party Affiliation ...... 88
28® Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Concern for Society Scores by Political Party Affiliation . . • • • 89
29® Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Political Non- Intervention Scores by Political Party Affiliation ® • 90
30® Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Conservatism Scores of Individuals Indicating Candidate Philosophy as Most Important Criteria* by Presidential Preference 9^
31 o Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Conservatism Scores of Individuals With at Least Some College Education* by Presidential Preference...... 96
viii Table Page
32. Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of the Conservatism Value Factor by Ethnicity and Presidential Preference 98
330 Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Anglo-American Conservatism Scores by Presidential Preference ® * 0 99
3^a Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Negro and Mexican American Conservatism Saores by Presidential Preference...... 100
350 Significance of the Differences Between Mean Conservatism Scores of Ethnic and Minority Groups and by Presidential Preference 101
36. Items in the Conservatism Value Factor . . a . . . . . 161
37o Items in the Political Non-Intervention Value Factor o 16^
38 a Items in th® Concern for Society Value Factor a a a « • 165
ix LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Pag®
1. Location of the Twelve Selected Preoincts in Corpus Christi9 Texas ...... 32
2 0 Schematic of Factors Impinging on Candidate Preference 53
3« Predictive Configurations of Presidential Preference Using Value Commitment Scores as Criteria . • • • • 78
4» Predictive Configurations of Presidential Preference Using Non-Value Factors as Criteria ...... 84
x CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Statement of th© Problem
A recent article by Blake and Davis has called into question th© adequacy of value as an explanatory concept In sociology* They have suggested that values should be 11» • * abandoned as causal agents* * •" in sociology and that 0 ® should "* * * recognize them frankly as sheer constructs by -which wo attempt to fill in the subjective linkages in th® analysis of social causation*" They have also stated that "Insofar as an Investigator uses norms or values as explanatory principles for concrete behavior,, he therefore tends to b© explaining the known by th© unknown* th© specific by the unspecific o1'^
Kolb* on the other hand* has stated that the "interpretative" sociologist who is interested in explaining and understanding*
* * o is willing to let the concept [of value ] stand or fall on the proposition that it does help in explaining and under- standing social action* and that proof of this lies in the fact that certain testable predictions concerning action « can be mad© by means of it that cannot be made without it*
Judith Blake and Kingsley Davis* "Norms* Values* and Sanctions*" in Handbook of Modern Sociology« ed* by Robert E* L* Faris (Chicago: Rand McNally and Company* 196*0 * pp«> 46lJf63*
^William L* Kolb* "The Changing Prominence of Values in Modem Sociological Theory*" in Mod e m Sociological Theory in Continuity and Change* ed* by Howard Becker and Alvin Boskoff (New York: Holt* Rine» hart and Winston* 1957)# Po 101®
1 The prime purpose of the present study,, from a theoretical per spective, was to test the hypothesis that the value concept has some utility for predicting social behavior. To test this hypothesis, the present study included the following empirical purposes; (1) to develop and test an inductive method of identifying values, (2) to identify the values of individuals in Corpus Christi, Texas, and
(3) to determine the relationships between individuals8 value commit ments and two aspects of their political preference; the choice of a
Presidential candidate in the 1968 election and political party affilia tion,, To supplement the research design the following topics were included in this study; (1) an examination of the value concept in sociological theory, and (2) an examination of sociological studies of political behavior.
Assumptions and Definitions
The existence of a difference of opinion concerning the value concept is indicative of two underlying problems in sociology. One problem is that a clear consensus has not been reached on the meaning and usage of many sociological terms including value. The other prob lem is that sociologists take differing points of view on the philos ophy of science.
To be specific, the controversy over the value concept stems in part from a confusion or disagreement over the use to which the term value is to be put— in a sense it is a confusion or disagreement over the "nature" of the term. Value has been used in various ways in soci ology. It has been used to refer to objects or ideas which exist in th© culture of a society* Broom and Selznick, for example, define value 3 as "* 0 * anything that is prized or of benefitou In these senses of the term value— either as objects or ideas— any implication of causal or explanatory power is logically unsoundo To say, for example, that education as a value, either in terms of semester hours or degrees or in terras of a general idea of "an education," has some causal effect is to be methodologically naive*
The conception of the term value used in the present study is that values are internalized principles* standards, or criteria of the good* proper, or desirable0 Values conceived of as internalized standards of the individual, rather than external objects or ideas, may be more validly used as part of a causal equation* To continue the educational example, it is more valid to say that a person pursues an education because he defines an education as being congruent with some criterion of the desirable than it is to say that he pursues an education because of the existence of something called education* In neither case can the terms value or education themselves have any causal power* But if conceived of as a personal, internal standard, the term value can be used without a serious distortion of logic*
Aside from the definitional and logical problems discussed above, the question of the meaning and use of the value concept is more sig nificantly rooted in the choice of philosophical viewpoints on the
^Leonard Broom and Philip Selznick, Sociology (4th ed*; New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1968), p. 5^* nature of sciencee It is fairly clear# for example# that the variance in the views of Blake and Davis on the one hand and Kolb on the other can be explained on the basis of the difference between positivistic and pragmatic philosophy# The basic statement of methodological faith assumed in the present study is that values are ‘'real®' in the sense that men do have standards or principles# and do make decisions based on them# Two corollary assumptions which logically follow are that values can be identified and that some degree of commitment to these standards can be measured#
Specifics of the Study
Data used in the present study were collected by student inter viewers from 509 individuals in twelve randomly selected voting pre cincts in Corpus Christ!# Texas the week prior to the National election in November# 1968#
Organization of the Study
The present study is organized in the following manner# Chapter II is a discussion of the value concept in sociology including such topics as the general nature of concepts and an examination of philosophical positions with regard to scientific data# a discussion of values in sociological theory, and the development of an inductive technique with which to identify values# Chapter III is a description of methodo logical procedures and the identification of value clusters# Chapter
IV consists of the formation and testing of hypotheses concerning the predictive relationships between value commitments and political preference# Chapter V is a summary and evaluation of the study# CHAPTER II
THE CONCEPT OF "VALUE” IN SOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
Blake and Davis, in their article referred to in Chapter I, have raised some serious questions concerning the use of the concept of
"value" in sociology* It is convenient to discuss these questions in three separate units although in reality they are overlapping and interdependent* Blake and Davis question the explanatory and pre dictive utility of value at a conceptual level* At a philosophical level, although not specifically stated by Blake and Davis, a question arises concerning the relationship between a particular philosophy of science and the use of the value concept* And, at a methodological level they are critical of attempts to identify and use values empiri cally. In this chapter each of the three problems is discussed in some detail for the purposes of developing both a methodological model for the identification of values and a "position statement" concerning the assumptions of the present study*
Concepts in General
The purpose of this section is to examine the general nature of concepts preliminary to a discussion of the concept of value* Although the value concept is referred to briefly here, a detailed discussion of values is presented in the latter part of this chapter*
5 Th© basis of a science consists of its concepts and its empirical data, and the assumptions and inferences made concerning the relation- ships between the two. In some areas of sciencec empirical data and relationships between them are relatively easy to observe and it is not difficult to agree on concepts that describe these relationships o'1" On the other hand, in the behavioral sciences, which deal more with mean ing than with directly observable phenomena, the relationships between variables are not so readily obvious° Therefore, more assumptions and inferences must be made about these relationshipse The ambiguity of subject matter in the behavioral sciences leads to controversy over the meaning and use of concepts.)
Blake and Davis, as indicated in Chapter I, feel that values should be recognized as ". , . sheer constructs . . • in the analysis of social 2 causation o’1 In the present writer’s opinion, the use of phrases such as "sheer constructs,11 "only a construct," or "merely a concept not a reality" indicates a lack of appreciation of the fact that man lives in 3 a world of symbols, many of which have non-empirical referents and that, in trying to explain concrete social behavior, sociologists must
^For exanple, Ohm's Law in physics is a precise statement about the relationship between electromotive force, current, and resistance. The concepts volt, ampere, and ohm are used to describe and name these real electrical forces and the formula I(amperes) = V(volts) defines their relationship. R(ohms) 2 Judith Blake and Kingsley Davis, "Norms, Values, and Sanctions," in Handbook of Mo d e m Sociology, ed. by Robert £. L. Faris (Chicago! Rand McNally and Company, 1965), p. ^6l. 3 See Glenn M. Vernon, Human Interaction, An Introduction to Sociology (New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1956), pp. 38-W. rely on the use of concepts or constructs which "stand for" non-
empirical phenomena. The discussion below is an attempt to indicate
the nature of the term concept, the problems inherent in th© use of concepts, and th© way in which concepts can properly be used in socio
logical explanation,
Kerlinger defines a concept as ", , , a word that expresses an
abstraction formed by generalization from particulars," He defines a
construct as ", , , a concept [ which has ] been deliberately and con- k sciously invented or adopted for a special scientific purpose,"
Kaplan8s discussion of the meaning of concept is more complex. Terms,
or words, have usages, which means that they are purposely used by
individuals to convey some content of meaning. However, the meaning
of terms is not always clear or specific. Each individual has his own
conception of the meaning of terms, A concept is, in Kaplan8s words,
", • • a family of conceptions,"^ In other words, following both
Kerlinger and Kaplan, a concept is a word or term that expresses some
more or less abstract idea the meaning of which derives from the
shared conceptions and common usages of individuals. The trouble is,
however, that concepts, especially in the behavioral sciences, as
indicated above, are plagued with what Kaplan calls 18functional
k Fred N, Kerlinger, Foundations of Behavioral Research (New Yorks Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc,, 19^), pp» 31-32,
^Abraham Kaplan,* The "T-Tr*-*"**-—— Conduct -TT"Tr 1 ■ M l " of ' H 1 111Inquiry l A I .I — — ' (San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 19°^), pp, ^6»49o ambiguity." This means that there may be very little sharing or overlap
of meaning and usage between individuals.
Kinds of concepts
Kaplan®s discussion of various kinds of concepts has a bearing on
the use of the value concepts Part of the controversy over the value
concept,, it appears, exists because of the lack of specificity as to what use value as a concept is being put* The following discussion briefly summarizes Kaplan®s treatment of kinds of concepts.
The first distinction is between "notational’’ and "substantive” terms about which concepts develops Notational terras are shorthand ways of expressing a more complex idea. The familiar formula for a
straight line (Y = a + bx) contains notational terms which refer to
the relationships between two variables. The terms volt, ampere, and ohm in footnote one are notational terms. As Kaplan says, they ". . .
are fundamentally abbreviations and could be replaced."^
Substantative terms, on the other hand, are based on ". . . a 7 process of conceptualization of the subject matter." This appears to be similar to Kerlinger®s ••generalization from particulars" referred to above. In other words, there is some meaning from the "real world" which is included in the meaning of the concept. To use the value
concept as an example, we see real, concrete behavior patterns and postulate the existence of "values" as "real®" The meaning of the concept of value is more than just an arbitrary symbol— -it has a sub stantive basiso Kaplan distinguishes four kinds of substantive terras which are discussed below®
"Observational terras" are verifiable through direct observation and the referents of the terms are relatively clear® "Indirect observables" are verifiable through indirect observation and ". . « in ferences play an acknowledged part®" The Brownian movement phenomenon is an example® We infer the existence of molecules because we can see their effects in the movement of particles® in a cloud chamber for example® "Constructs" are not verifiable® either directly or indi rectly® but are "® ® ® definable at least in principle by observ ables « • ®" Somehow we "know" but cannot "prove" the existence of Q this kind of substantive concept® "Theoretical terms" are not defin able by observables® Their meaning lies in their relationships with other theoretical terms and only the whole complex of terms is assumed 9 to have an empirical basis®
O Quotes are the author's® not Kaplans® in this sentence.
^This paragraph is taken from Kaplan® above® pp® 5^-57® 10
Uses of concepts
Kaplan concludes, after his discussion of kinds of concepts, that
o e . there really are no difference among the various sorts of terras discriminated,, There are not these several sorts of entities, but rather several ways in which terms serve the purpose of inquiry . . » .
o o o what is important is that these various functions not be confused with one another . . o .
What Kaplan is saying is that there is inherently no ••proper11 usage of a concept® What is necessary, however, is to avoid the indiscriminate shifting from one usage to another at least within the context of one discussion® '‘Volts,1' for example, cannot properly be said to cause anything if the term is being used as a shorthand way of speaking about electromotive force, A '’value" cannot properly be endowed with causal properties if it has been previously agreed that value is a construct which is basically notational in nature. As suggested in Chapter I, one of the difficulties in the use of the value concept has been the failure to specify clearly what conception of the term is being used and the failure to be logically consistent in its use.
Philosophies of Science
Sociologists who use the value concept, as indicated in Chapter I and above, are especially vulnerable to criticism. Criticism is partly the result of the misuse of the term. More important, however, is the fact that a person's "philosophy of science" affects the degree to which
^°Ibid., pp. 59-61o 11
the value concept is admissable as a sociological variable. Put another wav, the use to which concepts are put, and the level at which they are
acceptable in sociological analysis0 is based to a large degree on a
philosophical viex* of the nature of science. Tito points of view0 positivism and pragmatism, are of special significance in this regard.
A third philosophical position, operationisra. may be viewed as an intermediate position.
Positivism
There seems to be general agreement that commitment to a positive istic philosophy requires that a variable must be capable of observa
tion and/or empirical verification to be included in scientific 12 analysis. The position taken by Blake and Davis fits this positiv- istic philosophy closely. For example,, "... the values, sentiments. or motives are always inferred, and hence have no better status for causal analysis than the observable phenomena from which they are inferred." And. as indicated in Chapter I. Blake and Davis refer to values as "sheer constructs" implying that values are not acceptable 13 as sociological variables. That the philosophy of positivism and
^Chapter III describes the operational procedures by which values are identified and defined in the present study. 12 See. for example. Kaplan, op. cit.» pp. 36-39; Don Martindale, The Nature and Types of Sociological Theory (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Conqjany, I960), pp. 52-56; and John H. Randall, Jr.. and Justus Buchler, Philosophy, an Introduction (New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., College Outline Series, 1942), pp. 102-104.
^Blake and Davis, op. cit., pp. 460-461. 12 the acceptance of values as sociological variables are not compatible is clearly stated by Hartman® “Those who obstruct such a science
[of value ] today and regard it as impossible are th© positivists”
Further, those who “© 0 © share in the conviction that a science of ih valu© ia possible © © © cannot be positivists®” Kolb also indicates that positivists regard th© valu© concept as ”superfluous D”^
Pragmatism
Pragmatism obviously has several meanings® However0 th© meaning relevant to the present discussion is as follows: “The 8meaning8 of any judgment consists wholly in th© future experiences © © © predicted by ite”^ More directly relevant is th© following statement by Bates©
To th© scientist, the value of a concept is not determined by whether it ”feels right” or not, but by its utility in helping to understand the behavior in which he is interested© If it works in this sense, he is not likely to worry much about the “reality” of th© phenomena symbolized by the concept©-*-?
ia Robert S© Hartman, “Reply to Professor Meisskopf,” in New Knowl edge in Human Values, ed© by Abraham H. Maslow (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1959)» P» 23^.
^^William L© Kolb, “The Changing Prominence of Values in Modern Sociological Theory," in Modern Sociological Theory in Continuity and Change, ed. by Howard Becker and Alvin Boskoff (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Minston, 1957), pp© 100-101© 16 Arthur 0© Lovejoy, The Thirteen Pragmatisms and Other Essays (Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press, 1963), p© 2<>.
^Alan P© Bates, The Sociological Enterprise (Bostons Houghton Mifflin Company, 1967), p© 17© The statement by Kolb quoted in Chapter I is also clearly a pragmatic 18 one# In other words, the pragmatic position with regard to values
is as followsc The value concepts even though a "value" is not
directly observable, is meaningful and useful if it leads to a better
understanding or prediction of social behavior,,
Operationism
Whereas in positivism the meaning of a concept lies in the empiri
cal verification of it, and in pragmatism the meaning lies in whether
or not the concept is usefulB the meaning of a concept in operationism
is derived from the methodological procedures by which the concept is 19 measured and defined,, To paraphrases a value, in an operationism
senses is what a value scale measures* Since value is a concept which
has non-empirical referentss it is unlikely, as Blake and Davis suggest,
that the operational procedures of any two investigators would lead to 20 the same conception or meaning of the term* The following discussion
concerns some of the methodological problems of identifying and study
ing values*
^Kolb, op. cit.s p. 101.
■^See Kaplan, op* cit*s pp. 39-42; and David Greenwood, The Nature of Science and Other Essays (New Yorks Philosophical Library, Inc., 1959), pp. l£-31. 20 Blake and Davis, op. cit», p. 460. Identifying Values
Methodological problems
Problems in the empirical study of values "boil down" to two basic issues. The first has to do with the "value" of value studies if certain assumptions and definitions are followed. The second problem is that of identifying values in a manner which allows them to be used legitimately as sociological variables.
The "value" of value studies
Value studies, in the opinion of the writer, do not contribute significantly to sociological knowledge if either of two conditions exist. One unacceptable technique is to assume the existence of a
set of values to be used as independent variables. As Leonard states,
". . . the configuration of American values is composed of numer ous . . . items, some of which may be absent or relatively dormant in 21 a particular area or group." Values selected from a list of Ameri- 22 can values such as Williams has proposed ought not to be used as independent variables until it has been demonstrated that they are relevant values for a particular population. To do otherwise is to
anchor empirical findings to unverified assumptions.
21 Olen E. Leonard, "Rural Social Values and Norms," in Rural Sociology, ed. by Alvin L. Bertrand (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1958), p. ^3°
Robin&odx?i Mo Williams,Willisjiisp ux*o Jr., Aworic&^^ociQwAmerican Society 1(2nd ed., rev.? New Yorks Alfred A. Knopf, Inc0, I960), pp. 415-468 A second practice which casts doubt on the utility of value studies is to define and label values in such general terms that they 23 do not fit ”reality*,” J Earlier in this chapter it was pointed out that a substantive concept* as opposed to a notational one* must have the quality that it allows the scientist to 11 cut up” his subject matter into realistic and meaningful categories, If values are to be defined* roughly at this point, as principles by which individuals orient their behavior, then speoiflo labels for values ought to be selected which are capable of being conceptualized by the individual. One wonders* for example* how many people are capable of choosing between behavioral alternatives on the basis of an orientation toward either ”Being,” 24 "Being-in»Becoming,” or "Doing” values. Values at this level can be no more than "sheer constructs” with which sociologists "explain” be havior, And it is not realistic to expect that values conceived of in this very general manner have any utility in helping to make meaning ful predictions about individuals choices,
A conceptual model
Williams has suggested several ways in which values can be identi- 25 fied, •'One important technique suggested is the observance of the
See Blake and Davis, op. cit., p. ^63. Zh Florence Rockwood KLuckhohn, "Dominant and Variant Value Orien tations,” in Personality in Nature, Society, and Culture, ed, by Clyde Kluckhohn and Henry A, Murray (2d ed,; New York: Alfred A, Knopf, Inc.* 1956), p, 3^6. 25 The following discussion is based on Williams, op, cit,, pp, 403-^09, 16 choices individuals make, Th© methodological trap involved her® is the explanation ©f behavior using values inferred from th© behavior.. As suggested above9 values, when used as independent variables, should b© identified independently of th© behavior to bo ©xplalnodo
The other basic method of identifying values, according to
Williams, is to rely on “verbal materialso" This seems to be the only acceptable technique despite some criticism. In their discussion of the problems of identifying values, Blake and Davis suggest that verbal statements may be used to discover values if we make two "ques® tionable" assumptions, Th© assumptions are as follows: (1) ", , , that the values are consciously held , , 0 and (2) ", , . that verbal statements inevitably reflect real values, , , ®" A third qualifica tion is that ", o • we admit [ if statements are reinterpreted to deter- mine values ] that the process of symbollo reinterpretation in itself 26 has no empirical controls, , , , The conceptual model and methodo- logical procedure described below minimize these difficulties,
Blalock has suggested that an empirical test of a theoretical concept may require th© use of a set of specific assumptions and an auxiliary theory. The argument is that theoretical concepts are gen erally not directly measurable and that an auxiliary theory is needed which links these concepts to others more easily measurable. The validity of th® empirical test lies in the acceptability of th®
26B0U1k> and Davis, op, cit,, p, 4-60, 17 27 assumptions in the auxiliary theory0 What follows is an auxiliary theory of values which is the basis for the operational and methodo logical approach of the present study.
There appears to be an important relationship between the concepts opinion,, attitude, and value. For example. Broom and Selznick suggest that values affect 11. . . a wide range of thought and behavior in part by generating attitudes.” Further. "Attitudes are in turn reflected 28 in opinions, which are specific judgments on particular issues."
Turning this order around, Katz suggests that "Opinion is the verbal expression of an attitude, . . and that "When specific attitudes are 29 organized into a hierarchical structure, they comprise value systems.
Newcomb, et. al. also see values as the result of a chain of concepts 30 from drives to motives to attitudes to valuesSherif also sees an important link between value and attitudes. "... values . • . are the affectively charged stimuli that cause the formation of social attitudes. " ^ <
27 'Hubert M. Blalock, Jr., "The Measurement Problem: A Gap Between the Languages of Theory and Research," in Methodology in Social Research, ed. by Hubert M. Blalock, Jr., and Ann Blalock (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1968), pp. 5-27. 28 Leonard Broom and Philip Selznick, Sociology (3rd ed.j New York: Harper and Row, Publichers, Incorporated, 1963)» pp. 275-276.
^Daniel Katz, "The Functional Approach to the Study of Attitudes," Public Opinion Quarterly, XXV, (I960), p. 168.
•^Theodore M. Newcomb, Ralph H. Turner, and Philip D. Converse, Social Psychology (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965), p. ^5®
•^Muzafer Sherif, The Psychology of Social Norms (Torchbook ed.j New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, Incorporated, 1966), p. 128. 17 27 assumptions in the auxiliary theory® What follows is an auxiliary theory of values which is the basis for the operational and methodo logical approach of the present study®
There appears to be an important relationship between the concepts opinion0 attitude* and value® For examples Broom and Selznick suggest that values affect 11 ® ® • a wide range of thought and behavior in part by generating attitudes®11 Further8 "Attitudes are in turn reflected 28 3-n opinions„ which are specific judgments on particular issues®"
Turning this order around* Katz suggests that "Opinion is the verbal expression of an attitude* ® ® ®" and that "When specific attitudes are 29 organized into a hierarchical structure* they comprise value systems®
Newcomb* et® al® also see values as the result of a chain of concepts from drives to motives to attitudes to values®^ Sherif also sees an important link between value and attitudes® "® ® ® values ® . ® are the affectively charged stimuli that cause the formation of social attitudes®"^
27 Hubert M® Blalock* Jr®, "The Measurement Problem: A Gap Between the Languages of Theory and Research*" in Methodology in Social Research* ed® by Hubert M® Blalock* Jr., and Ann Blalock (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1968)* pp® 5-27® oo Leonard Broom and Philip Selznick, Sociology (3rd ed®; New York: Harper and Row, Publichers, Incorporated* 19^3)• pp® 275-276® 29 Daniel Katz, "The Functional Approach to the Study of Attitudes," Public Opinion Quarterly, XXV* (I960), p. 168®
■^Theodore M® Newcomb* Ralph H® Turner* and Philip D« Converse* Social Psychology (New York: Holt* Rinehart and Winston, Inc®* 1965), p. 45.
■^Muzafer Sherif* The Psychology of Social Norms (Torchbook ed.; New York: Harper and Row, Publishers* Incorporated, 1966), p® 128® Although there is a difference of opinion concerning the direction of the relationships of the three concepts— Broom and Selznick and
Sherif feel that values generate attitudes, Newcomb indicates that values are the result of the integration of attitudes, and Katz is somewhat ambivalent but, in the main,, agrees with Newcomb— the assump tion of a theoretical relationship between values, attitudes, and opinions is not questioned. The primary methodological basis of this study rests on the assumption of a relationship between the three concepts.
Based on the assumption of a relationship between opinions, attitudes, and values, the empirical identification of values should proceed in the following way. From many verbal opinions which could be collected from individuals, it is assumed that there is a smaller number of more general and inclusive ideas which may be operationally defined as “attitudes." Further, it is assumed that underlying these attitudes are still more general and inclusive ideas which may be operationally defined as “values,"
The technique with which to identify these more general attitudes and values has been suggested in several empirical studies, Rettig and Pasamanick used factor analysis to identify six moral values from 32 a list of fifty statements of morally questionable behavior. Weinberg
■^Salomon Rettig and Benjamin Pasamanick, “Changes in Moral Values Among College Students: A Factorial Study," American Sociological Review, XXIV, No. 6 (1959), pp. 856-863. and Williams found three independent variables and two dependent vari ables in a factor analysis of statements made in response to anti- 33 Semitic pressure, ^ Both of these studies have shown the utility of factor analysis in identifying meaningful clusters of opinion state ments o However, both suffer somewhat in that the original statements were concerned with a fairly narrow range of idease Scott's research suggested the approach taken in the present study0 According to Scott, open-ended questionnaires should be used because they permit ", 0 , ex pression of a limitless variety of values, so that the researcher can determine empirically just what standards of 'goodness' or 'rightness' 3k are expressed voluntarily by members of any given population,"^ Scott did not use factor analysis in his study but he suggests that it may be appropriate with measures more refined than the content analysis of the open-ended questionnaires he used.
According to Kerlinger, "Factor analysis is a method for deter mining the number and nature of the underlying variables among large 35 numbers of measures," Basically it is a statistical technique, based on correlation coefficients, which clusters together variables
33 Martin S, Weinberg and Colin J. Williams, "Disruption, Social Location, and Interpretive Practices: The Case of Wayne, New Jersey," American Sociological Review, XXXIV, No, 2 (1969), pp, 170-182, 34* William A, Scott, "Empirical Assessment of Values and Ideol ogies," American Sociological Review, XXIV, No, 3 (1959), P» 301, OC ^ Kerlinger, op, cit,, p, 650. 20 which apparently have some underlying similarity of meaning.
Based on the ideas presented above, the theoretical-methodological model used in this study to identify values was as followsFirst, open-ended questionnaires were used to collect opinion statements.
These opinion statements were included in an interview schedule. Re sponses to these opinion statements were factor analyzed into "attitude” clusters. These attitude clusters were factored again into "values."
In the light of the discussion of problems of previous value studies, the advantages of the model used were as follows. First, the use of an open-ended questionnaire to obtain opinion statements pre vents the arbitrary assumption that certain values exist to be measured, and also prevents the "manufacture" of values by building scales which may be responded to. Also, in light of Blake and Davis® critique, if values are to be identified starting with an analysis of opinions then values do not have to be consciously held by individuals. Also, if
Newcomb. Sherif. etc. are correct, verbal statements do reflect real values. And. the human bias in the "process of symbolic reinterpreta tion" is reduced if the reinterpretation Is done by a computer using a
statistical technique.
^ F o r purposes of this study, a "simplifying assumption" was made that the source of the correlations between the variables stems solely from the values of the respondents. As Blalock points out. factor analysis is appropriate for this model. See Blalock, op. cit.. p. 20. 'V? ■"Details of the methodological procedures of the study are in cluded in Chapter III. The Value Concept
The purpose of this section is to clarify and amplify the assump tions and definitions stated in Chapter I. Specifically,, this section includes a discussion of values in sociology for th© purpose of devel oping the conception of th© term value used in this study0
Values in sociology CBSW flR^RVBM SHI^SsSdM
Kolb has traced the value concept in American sociology in a com prehensive paper® The essence of his argument is that the value con cept has had a dual nature in sociological theory® Values have been seen as "objects®'1 including rules or norms which exist in the culture of a group and which individuals must take into account if social action is to be successful,, Values have also been visualized as subjective internalizations of these objects— the incorporation of the rules or norms into the self or personality— or as normative atti tudes® Kolb feels that "® ® ® values exist simultaneously as objects and attitudes; ® • o" Parsons and others also see values as both external and internal®
. ® ® a cultural pattern may be involved in action either as an object of the actor's situation or it may be inter nalized to become part of the structure of his personality® ® ® e particular importance is to be attributed to the internalization of value orientations® ® ® ®-"
The question of conceptualizing values as either internal or ex ternal is intriguing because it leads® in the present author's opinion,
■^Kolb, op® cit.® pp® 93-110® 39 Talcott Parsons and Edward A® Shils, eds®. Toward a General Theory of Action (Cambridges Harvard University Press® 195*0» P® 22® 22 to discussions concerning the relative importance of values and inter ests as motivating forces for social behavior,, Neal has posed the question in the following manner, "On© possible explanation of the function of values and interests • , , assumes that decision makers tend to make choices either in value or interest terras." "The concern here is whether interests constitute for the actor the more dynamic Lq criterion for choice,"
For Neal* the above question was the basis for a hypothesis to be tested® In the present study it serves as the platform from which to make the basic assumptions and definitions to be followed. In the present author's opinion* interests may be subsumed under the heading of values as objects of orientation as the following table indicates,
TABLE 1,— Implications of viewing values as objects of orientation and as internalized standards
Values as:
Objects of orientation Internalized standards
Interests as motivation Self as motivation
Material, social rewards Internal, subjective rewards
External sanctions Internal sanctions
Role playing, game behavior Meaningful, self-fulfilling behavior
Ilq Sister Marie Augusta Neal, Values and Interests in Social Change (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 19^5)» pp. 8-9, Parsons has discussed the essential difference between values as
objects of orientation in a situational context and values as standards
which exist on a cultural level* From his "action frame of reference"
Parsons sees social action occuring in situations to which an actor has
some kind of orientation based on gratification or avoidance motives*
In a given situation an actor has a "® * * 'cathectic' orientation
which means the significance of ego® s relation to the object or objects
in question for the gratification-deprivation balance of his personal
ity*" The actor also has a cognitive orientation "* * * which in its
most general sense may be treated as the 'definition* of the relevant
aspects of the situation in their relevance to the actor's 'interests*'"
And, he also has an evaluative orientation by which he selects alter
native objects, or their meanings, in the situation,**^
Parsons characterizes the cathectic, cognitive, and evaluative
orientations as parts of a more general "motivational orientation®"
But apart from this motivational orientation, Parsons says it is
"* * « necessary to distinguish a 'value-orientation’ aspect* This
aspect concerns * * * the content of the selective standards them
selves*" Parsons distinguishes three value-orientations: cognitive lf.2 standards, appreciative standards, and moral standards*
What Parsons seems to be saying is that in concrete situations
actors are motivated to achieve certain goals and their behavior
in Talcott Parsons, The Social System (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1951). PP. 5-7. ~ 24 revolves around solving "problems" in which they have "interests."
But, overriding these Interests and mediating the more selfish aspects of goal attainment are value-orientations or standards of what are hf'x satisfactory and proper "solutions." Clyde Kluckhohn's discussion of value as "o . . a conception . . > of the desirable which influences the selection from available modes, means, and ends of action."^ stresses the basic difference between standards or principles for behavior and the "desired" alternatives in a situation.
Assumptions and definitions
The basic assumption concerning the value concept in the present study is a pragmatic one. That is, the author's inclination is to accept the view that the value concept is a useful one in sociology because it does help in understanding and predicting social behavior.
The purpose of the present study is to test the validity of this assumption.
At a conceptual level value is seen as a construct. In other words, value is a notational term but one which has substantive mean ing. We cannot "see" a value but we can observe individuals behaving as if they were guided by something we call values.
^Ibid., p. 14.
^Clyde Kluclchohn, "Values and Value-Orientations in the Theory of Action," in Parsons and Shils, op. cit., pp. 395-400, 25
Values may have Important implications for behavior whether they
are viewed as external or internal# As indicated above# individuals may conform to values not because the values are internalized and individuals are committed to them but it is in their interest to do
so. However# in the present study the concern is with internalized
values and the degree of commitment to them# not with the awareness
of external values# 45 46 47 Following Clyde Kluckhohn, Parsons# and Williams# values
are defined in the present study as internalized principles, standards#
or criteria of the good# proper# or desirable# The assumption is that
individuals internalize# and become committed to# certain standards of what is good# proper# or desirable and then react to objects# issues#
ideas# or other individuals in terras of these standards# As Williams indicates# " ® » # 'education is good because it increases economic 48 efficiency,' # # #" In this example education is desired and
economic efficiency is the desirable or the value#
The operational definition of value used in the present study is
as follows# Values are represented by the labels given to the clusters
^ I b i d # # p. 395*
Parsons# op# cit## p. 12.
^ S e e Williams# op# cit», p# 410, and also Williams, "Individual and Group Values," in Social Intelligence for America's Future# ed# by Bertram M# Gross (BostonsAllyn and Bacon, Inc., 1949), pp# 161-167#
^Williams# "Individual and Group Values," loc# cit», p# 166# 26 of opinion statements identified by the factor analysis of attitude clusterso The meaning of the values is inductively determined from the content of the individual opinion statements included in the factorso The factor labels are assumed to represent principles, standards, or criteria as defined above.
Summary
This chapter had as its purposes to develop a methodological model for the identification of values and to present a statement of the assumptions and definitions to be used in the present study.
To provide background material for these two purposes this chapter was divided into three major areass a discussion of concepts, a discussion of three views of the philosophy of science, and a dis cussion of the methodological problems involved in value studies.
Also a discussion of the value concept in sociology was included.
Based on the above discussions, the following assumptions and definitions were used. The first assumption was that a pragmatic position with respect to the value concept is the most acceptable.
Secondly, it was assumed that the term value is best viewed as a construct— a tern that is notational in nature but that is also an important and significant indicator of reality.
Values were defined in this chapter as internalized principles, standards, or criteria of the good, proper, or desirable. It was assumed that individuals become committed to values and react socially in terms of them. Operationally it was assumed that opinions, 27 attitudes, and values are closely related phenomena and that values can best be identified through factor analysis of responses to opinion statements• CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURES AND THE
IDENTIFICATION OF VALUE CLUSTERS
As Indicated in Chapter I# the theoretical purpose of the present study was to test the hypothesis that values have utility for predict ing social behavior# Empirically# the purposes of the study were# first# to identify values of individuals in Corpus Christi# Texas# and second# to test the utility of value commitments as predictors of
Presidential preference and party affiliation# The remainder of this chapter consists of a description of the methodological procedures used and the identification of values to be used as variables in this dissertation#
Collection of Opinion Statements
In Chapter II a conceptual and methodological model for the in ductive identification of values was presented# This model was based on the assumptions that there is a relationship between opinions# attitudes# and values and that factor analysis is an appropriate statistical tool with which to identify value clusters# The first step in the empirical research process was to collect opinion state ments from which to derive attitudes and values.
28 29
Mill©!? has suggested that "focal concern" rather than th© valu© concept is meaningful in understanding the cultural milieu which produces delinquency. "I' The present writer felt that th© Inclusion in an open-ended questionnaire of questions pertaining to focal con cerns was appropriate as a technique to stimulate individuals to male© opinion statements0
Therefore, an open-ended questionnaire was devised which con tained questions on world, national, local, and personal concerns and which also contained fifteen sentence stems to be completed. Copies of this questionnaire were distributed to students in an introductory sociology class at Del Mar College in Corpus Christi. Students were instructed to have the questionnaire filled out by someone of voting age--either parents or other adults. Nineteen questionnaires were returned. After a content analysis, a second form of the questionnaire was devised and given to more students to be completed in the same manner as the first form. Forty-four were returned. Responses were again analyzed and a third form devised. This same process was re peated throughout the summer and early fall of 1968 usingsix forms of the preliminary questionnaire. A total of 212 preliminary question naires from a wide area of Corpus Christi were returned. Table 2 shows th© number of returned questionnaires for each form.
^Walter B. Miller, "Lower Class Culture as a Generating Milieu of Gang Delinquency," Journal of Social Issues. XIV, No. 3 (1968), p. ?. 2 Appendix I contains copies of all forms of the preliminary questionnaire. TABLE 20-.»Number of returned preliminary questionnaires, by ethnic group
Form Total “Anglo" "Latin" Negro
Total 212 W-0 67 5
I 19 17 1 1
II kh 31 11 2
III 19 16 3 0
IV 71 52 18 1
V 28 23 k 1
VI 31 1 30a 0
aForm VI was used in a "Latin" housing project to help correct an ethnic bias in favor of "Anglos*"
An analysis of the preliminary data revealed over ^00 concrete
opinion statements* To minimize any bias, these opinion statements were
listed in order and 150 were chosen at random. The list of 150 state
ments was then checked for duplication* When necessary, substitute
statements were chosen at random. The final interview schedule in
cluded, therefore, 150 randomly selected opinion statements solicited
from 212 individuals. It also included questions of background data
such as age, sex, etc*, and questions concerning political preference 3 and activity.-'
^Appendix II is a copy of the final interview schedule. Collection of Final Data
Since the dependent variable in the study is political prefer
ence,, voting precincts were selected as sampling areas® Twelve of
the sixty-nine precincts in the central area of Corpus Christi were
selected at random from which to gather data® Figure 1 shows the location of the twelve sample precincts®
The procedure for collecting data from within the selected pre cincts was as follows® Students in sociology and government classes
at Del Mar College were assigned,, as part of their required course work, to conduct two interviews® After a training session each
student was assigned to a randomly selected block in one of the
selected precincts from which to obtain the two assigned interviews®
Each precinct was thoroughly covered— interviewers were assigned to almost every street and block in each precinct® A total of 555 inter view schedules were returned®
Since the data was collected by students, the following steps were taken to reduce the possibility of unreliable information®
First, the students were given an incentive in the form of extra credit in their classes for each complete and acceptable schedule turned in® Then, as each schedule was turned in, it was examined for completeness and accuracy. Forty-six schedules were rejected because of inadequate or inconsistent information or because there was some reason to doubt the integrity of the student interviewer®
This left a total of 509 acceptable interview schedules available Fig. 1. Location of the twelve selected precincts in Corpus Christi, Texas
VrojO 33 from which data were used. Table 3 indicates some of the relevant characteristics of the sample. Where reasonably comparable data are available for the general population they are included in paren theses.
Identification of Attitude Clusters
As indicated in Chapter II, the theoretical-methodological model for identifying values called for clustering opinions into attitudes and then clustering again to identify values. Accordingly, the
IBM 709^ computer at The Ohio Stats University Research Center was programmed to analyze the responses of the 509 individuals to the 150 opinion statements included in the interview schedule and to identify k thirty rotated attitude clusters. Individuals were then to be given a single score on each of the thirty attitudes and these data were to be factored again into value clusters. However, after over sixty minutes of computer time only twenty-seven nonrotated factors had been identified, out of which only ten appeared tto be of sufficient strength to justify further analysis.
The computer was programmed, therefore, to identify and rotate only ten factors. These ten rotated factors are the basis of the discussion which follows,
lL The "rotation" of the original factors is done to discover the underlying unity of the factors. Factors stand out much more clearly after rotation. See Fred N. Kerlinger, Foundations of Behavioral Research (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc,, 196*0# pp, 667- 670, The Varlmax rotation solution was used in the present study. See Harry H. Harman, Modem Factor Analysis (2nd ed,, rev,$ Chicagos The University of Chicago Press, 1967), pp, 30^-313* 34
TABLE 3.— Sample characteristics
Character!stic Number Percentage
Total Sample 509 100.00 Ethnic and Racial categories 41 8.06 ( 5.46)aNegro "Anglo" 263 51.66 (58.74)a "Latin 20 5 40.28 (35.70) Educational level Under 6 years 28 5.50 Six to 8 years 69 13.56 Nine to 11 years 88 17.29 Twelve years 153 30.06 One to 2 years college 90 17.68 Three years college 15 2.95 Four or more years college 53 10.41 Age level 21 - 30 114 22.40 31 - 40 109 21.41 41 - 50 148 29.08 51-60 85 16.70 60 and over b 47 9.23 Social class level Upper class 68 13.36 Middle class 221 43.42 Lower class 220 43.22 Sex Male 248 48.72 Female 261 51.28 Occupation Professional 54 10.61 Clerical 42 8.25 Sales 39 7.66 Skilled labor 34 6.68 Semi-skilled labor 73 • 14.34 Unskilled labor 16 3.14 Service 39 7.66 Self-employed 14 2.75 Housewife 168 33.01 Retired, disabled, unemployed 30 5.89
aSource: Selected 19 60 Census data compiled by the Corpus Christi Chamber of Commerce*
•L. Social class is a composite rank assigned by the author based on income, occupation, education, ethnic factors, and area of residence. For each factor, those opinion statements that were loaded, or correlated, at 0,300 or better with a factor Itself were chosen from which to define the underlying content and to determine a label or factor name. The first step in the analysis was to label each factor with a meaningful and identifying terra. After a name was chosen which represented the underlying meaning of most of the opinions, the factors were "purified" by eliminating some of the statements which did not
"fit the pattern"”* and by reversing the respondents' scoring on those statements which were worded in the direction opposite from which the bulk of the items were worded. Respondents were then scored on each of the ten factors and a split-half reliability coefficient was cal culated for each factor,** Discussions of the content of each factor follow.
Factor 1— Concern for humanity
Twenty-four opinion statements were correlated or loaded on this factor at 0,300 or more® As Table 4 illustrates, all but two of the items appeared to have reference to some aspect of man's relationship to his fellow man. Therefore, a label "Concern for humanity" was given to this factor and this label is the notational term assumed in the present study,
'’These statements were eliminated on the assumption that they did not "fit the pattern" and that their high factor loadings might very well have been spurious correlations,
^See N, M« Downie and R, Wo Heath, Basic Statistical Methods (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1959)» pp. 192-19^ for a discussion of split-half reliability and the Spearman-Brown correlation technique. TABLE 4 o— Concern for humanity factor; relevant data
Original Factor No® Item Noo Loading Opinion Statement
1 80 «679 We seem to be losing our faith in our fellow mans 2 77 *657 People seem to be losing respect for each other® 3 132 a 574 There is very little humanity in the world anymore*, 4 74 a 552 No one seems to care about people anymore® 5 86 a 547 People seem to be losing their moral obliga tion to our society® 6 133 »535 Too many people think only of themselves® 7 125 o527 We seem to be losing our morality in this country® 8 146 a 518 People are too hypocritical® 9 121 a49 7 There is too much corruption in every phase of American life® 10 124 o443 Family life is breaking doim in American society® 11 148 a43l There is a lack of honesty in dealings between people of different ethnic groups®
12 130 o417 There seems to be no sense of community in Corpus Christi anymore® 13 32 a 390 All people are bigots in one form or another® 14 9 a 385 Our country is not safe to live in anymore® 15a 129 .379 The trouble with Corpus Christi is that there is too little long-range planning® 16 6 .3 77 People show no basic concern for others® 17 149 o376 Materialism turns people into mindless® money making machines® 18 10 6 a 375 Whites think they are better than ’'Latins" or Negroes® 19 126 a 361 The political situation in this country gives me doubts about my family's future® 20 131 a 355 Too many people go to church but don't follow God's laws® 37
TABLE 4*— .Continued
Original Factor No* Item No* Loading Opinion Statement
21 118 *349 Americans are too soft* 22a 65 *3^8 The greatest problem in Corpus Christi is the lack of employment opportunities* 23 82 *312 Parents aren't concerned enough about their children. 24 128 o303 There is too much emphasis on social status in this country*
Split-half reliability = 0*875
^tera not retained*
Factor 2— .Political and economic conservatism
Twenty-three opinion statements were loaded at 0*300 or more on
this factor* Table 5 indicates that all the opinion items refer to
some aspect of political and economic conservatism and this is the
label given to this factor*
TABLE 5°--Political and economic conservatism factors relevant data
Original Factor No. Item No. Loading Opinion Statement
1 66 -*633 The Federal government is interfering too much with private enterprise. 2 5 -.624 The Supreme Court needs to be revised and given less power. 3 3 -.623 We need to give government back to the people. 4 13 -.610 We need a change in the political administra tion of this country. 5 134 -.609 Our federal government has too much power. 6 14 - 5 8 3 We should appoint new judges to the Supreme Court. TABLE 5.--Continued
Original Factor No. Item No. Loading Opinion Statement
7 11 -.540 We need to return to a more conservative philosophy of government. 8 1 »o539 The Supreme Court should stop making laws and start interpreting them. 9 4 -o532 This country is getting closer to a social istic state. 10 7 -.528 We need a president who will stop trying to give everyone a free ride. 11 18 -.481 The Supreme Court seems to be swayed by the minority0 and does not consider the majority. 12 8 -.461 We should stop giving handouts and make people work for what they get. 13 140 -.440 Big government destroys Initiative and citizen ship. 14 59 »0426 The Supreme Court has tied the hands of our police officers. 15 67 -.423 Our government is too liberal. 16 126 -.368 The political situation in this country gives me doubts about ray family’s future. 17 105 -.364 The states should have control of their own destiny. 18 145 -<,349 The government is taking too much of my money. 19 68 -*339 People on welfare don’t appreciate what they receive. 20 69 -.324 The war on poverty is helping the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. 21 63 - o316 The United States is bearing too much of a burden in maintaining the balance of power in the world. 22 114 -.307 The trouble with our economy is that both government and individuals are living on credit above their means. 23 64 -.305 Courts are being too lenient with first offenders.
Split-half reliability = 0.900 Factor 3— -Concern about authority
Twenty-one items met the criteria of 0#300 factor loading and were included in the analysis of this factor,. The underlying content of this factor is less obvious than most of the other factors# After several attempts at labeling which included terms like "dependence on authority#" and "self-determination#" the term "concern about authority" was selected to represent the factor,, There appears to be implicit in all but two of the opinion statements some concern about power rela tionships 0 Family, religious# and political authority questions are included and# although most of the items tend to be authoritarian in nature# there are enough nonauthoritarian statements included to suggest that this factor is not merely an authoritarian one#
TABLE 60— Concern about authority factors relevant data
Original Factor NOe Item No9 Loading Opinion Statement c*- 0 i 1 89 e Children should be dealt with more firmly and strictly# 2 87 **#5^8 Parents need to teach their children respect for others# 3 123 -«53^ Parents should regain their place as heads of the family# k 93 -o^93 We should strictly follow the constitution of this country# 5 98 -0^72 It’s a shame that so many people are hungry in this world when so much food is wasted#
6 103 -M 5 Too many young people attack our government’s policies but they don’t offer a solution to our problems# 7 95 -> 3 0 We should let other countries have governments of their choice# 40
TABLE 60— Continued
Original Factor No. Item No. Loading Opinion Statement
8 142 -.426 The church should not take sides politically. 9 61 -.424 My greatest concern in life is raising my children to responsible adulthood. 10 92 -.407 All countries in the world should help each other and use scientific achievements for peaceful purposes. 11 96 -.388 Many people have forgotten the religious reason for living in this world. 12 76 -.383 Communism is in direct conflict with our way of life. 13 127 -.382 We should have stricter laws on the so-called peaceful demonstrations. 14 137 -.369 We must take a stand against Communist aggres sion. 15a 70 -.359 Negroes today should strive to get better educated to improve themselves. l6a 104 -.329 With the job opportunities of today, there is very little need for anyone to be unemployed. 17 50 -.324 Too many influential people get away with serious crimes. 18 51 -.312 Rioters should be treated as the criminals they are. 19 85 -.303 Communism is an ideology that places the State above the individual and God. 20 147 -.303 We need to teach our children that all people are equal. 21 94 -.302 We should teach people all over the world the danger of Communism.
Split-half reliability a 0.827
®Item not retained. 41
Factor 4— Authoritarian conservatism
This factor included twenty-six opinion statements which were loaded at 0«>3Q0 or better® The underlying theme of these statements
seems to be a dogmaticB authoritarian,, and conservative orientations
This factor is of a different nature than Factor 3» There is only one opinion statement in common and Factor 4 is more clear in its direction of authoritarian!sms
TABLE 7e— Authoritarian conservatism factor; relevant data
Original Factor NOe Item No© Loading Opinion Statement
1 120 .576 We should punish nonconformists0 2 90 s 541 We should win a convincing military victory over the Communists by any meanso -3- 00 N O 3 109 o We should go slower in achieving racial equality,, 4 138 «474 Racial problems exist because some people don’t want to work for a livings 5 84 •465 This world cannot survive unless we get rid of Communisms 6 29 *447 The Negro is trying too fast to get ahead» 7 100 0444 The greatest problem in this country is race riotss 8 48 e440 People should learn to live with racial prejudices -3' CM S O 9 23 a If the constitution was good enough for the people who wrote it, then it should be good enough to live by todays 10 60 .391 Draft dodgers are a pampered bunch of cowards® 11 27 o 382 Every time we protect one person, other people are forced to give up their rights» 12 105 *375 The states should have control of their own destiny0 42
TABLE 7e— Continued
Original Factor No. Item No. Loading Opinion Statement
13 22 o374 Politicians should be more concerned about the needs of their local areas than the needs of the nation as a whole. 14 88 .366 Prayer is the way to solve the Vietnam Problem, 15 25 o357 This country should stop importing foreign goods. 16 91 <>352 We should give foreigh aid only if we can expect payment. 17 45 o351 We could solve the problem of morality if more people would go to church. 18 127 ®339 We should have stricter laws on the so-called peaceful demonstrations. 19 10 .326 Only God can solve the crisis we are in today. 20 104 .324 With the job opportunities of today, there is very little need for anyone to be unemployed. SI O 21 64 © Courts are being too lenient with first offenders. 22 99 .319 We should escalate the war in Vietnam. 23 79 .313 Communism grows because of the ignorance of people. 24 20 .313 We need a stricter control on wages. 25 53 .304 Open housing should only be applied to feder ally constructed buildings and housing areas. 26 21 .304 We should give police more power to enforce laws.
Split-half reliability = 0.875
Factor 5— ‘Political non-intervention
Factor 5 includes nine opinion statements all dealing with the involvement of the United States with other countries,, especially
Vietnam. Two of the items are positive in favor of intervention while 43 seven are non-intervention oriented. Therefore, the scoring on the
two positive items was reversed so that a “strongly agree*1 on the
statement would correspond to a “strongly disagree" on the other state ments. The split-half reliability on this factor is low which may be
an indication of the ambivalence in our society toward the Vietnam war.
Nevertheless, this factor was retained for further analysis.
TABLE 8.— Political non-intervention factor: relevant data s o 8 ° 1 8 Original Factor
Item No. Loading Opinion Statement
i 119 -.677 The United States should not be involved in Vietnam. 2 122 -o601 The United States shouldn't interfere with other countries. 3 139 -o595 The Vietnam war seems to be a worthless cause. 4 112 -.458 Our government is spending too much money on the Vietnam war. 5 55 -.433 As far as Communism is concerned, we should live and let live. 6 19 -.402 We should not interfere in other countries' domestic affairs. 7a 137 .361 We must take a stand against Communist aggression. 8a 94 .317 We should teach people all over the world the danger of Communism. 9 78 -.306 The biggest problem in the world today is the involvement of the United States with other countries.
Split-half reliability = 0.568
aScoring reversed. 44
Factor 6-Moral-religious
As indicated in Table 9e all thirteen opinion statements have some moral or religious theme* Although this factor is similar to the
"Concern for Humanity" factor discussed above, there is only one state ment in common and "Moral-Religious" is the term used to name this factor* y
TABLE 9o— Moral-religious factor; relevant data
Original Factor No* Item No* Loading Opinion Statement
1 38 .612 The trouble with our society is that people have gotten away from God. 2 45 .522 We could solve the problem of morality if more people would go to church. 3 88 ®508 Prayer is the way to solve the Vietnam problem® 4 43 ®505 Only love and charity can solve the problem of peace in the world. o 5 35 0 The future of the world is in doubt because of moral decay. 6 33 .494 There is not enough emphasis in this world on a Supreme Being. 7 39 *486 Christians should help people who are not Christians. 8 54 *463 Sex for sex's sake should not be allowed in movies. 9 96 *463 Many people have forgotten the religious reason for living in this world. 10 47 .461 We need censorship of TV and movies if we plan to maintain a high moral standard. 11 10 .434 Only God can solve the crisis we are in today. 12 125 .413 We seem to be losing our morality in this country. 13 26 .318 We are all responsible for other human beings.
Split-half reliability » 0.83** 45 Factor 7— -Concern for society
Seventeen opinion statements were correlated at 0.300 or better on this factor. Fifteen of them which dealt fairly directly with an idea of concern for society were retained. This factor is not similar to the concern for humanity factor. There is only one opinion in common and the content of factor 7 is oriented more to problems of today* s society in general while factor 1 deals more with interpersonal relationships.
Factor 8— .Puritan ethic
Six of the ten opinion statements in factor 8 are directly re lated to the idea of work and thrift. Therefore, the underlying theme identified by this factor was labeled '‘Puritan Ethic,"
Factor 9 and 10— Not defined
The last two factors identified by the 7094 computer were not clearly definable. Split-half reliability coefficients were lows
0,410 and 0,439 respectively. Table 12 indicates the nature of the factors.
Revised factor 9— •Anti-communism
Seven of the items in factors 9 and 10 clearly deal with an orientation toward communism. Therefore the seven items were included in a revised factor labelled "Anti-communism." Table 13 indicates, the content of factor 9, Even though the split-half reliability was low, this factor was retained for further analysis. 46
TABLE 10o--Concern for society factor: relevant data
Original Factor No. Item No® Loading Opinion Statements
1 52 C o o 596 The federal government should require more educational programs. 2 147 »o536 We need to teach our children that all people are equal. 3 30 -0494 Most people are just too stubborn to accept Negroes® 4 24 -.4 77 The future of America depends upon the educa tion of today® 5 36 -.452 We should support the United Nations so that it can maintain world peace® 6 37 »0434 We need better federal laws to stop inflation® 7 2 -.412 We need more job training for low income people® 8a 150 — 398 Local leaders should represent their area in the city® not be elected at large® 9 97 - 3 9 7 The cause of racial prejudice is ignorance. 10 113 — 371 A lack of education is the cause of poverty. 11 107 -3^7 We should accept minority groups as equals even if it takes legislation® 12 57 —® 341 Parents of today are out of touch with modem trends. 13a 65 -.336 The greatest problem in Corpus Christi is the lack of employment opportunities. 14 61 -335 My greatest concern in life is raising my children to responsible adulthood. 15 78 -332 The biggest problem in the world today is the involvement of the United States with other countries. 16 131 -313 Too many people go to church but don’t follow God’s laws. 17 83 -.311 The problem in this world is a lack of commu nication between countries®
Split-half reliability = 08774
^tera not retained. 47
TABLE 11.— Puritan ethic factor: relevant data
Original Factor No® Item No® Loading Opinion Statement
1 42 ®489 The solution to poverty is more jobs and less welfare. 2 8 ®443 We should stop giving handouts and make people work for what they get. 3 16 .440 We should make people on welfare work on some kind of federal project to earn their money. 4a 31 .427 Political candidates should run on their own merits and not be backed by business. 5 115 .403 Credit is too easy. 6a 59 .388 The Supreme Court has tied the hands of our police officers. 7a 41 o356 To bring about law and order we should revise some of our old laws. 8 114 .325 The trouble with our economy is that both government and individuals are living on credit above their means. 9 91 .317 We should give foreign aid only if we can expect payment. 00 r'v0 10a 85 • Communism is an ideology that places the State above the individual and God.
Split-half reliability = 0.749
^tem not retained® 48
TABLE 12.--Original factors 9 end 10: relevant data
Original Factor No* Item No. Loading Opinion Statement
1 116 04lO It is better for ten guilty men to go free than it is for one innocent man to b© con victed. 2 34 <>357 Communism is not compatible with capitalism and private enterprise,, 3 44 .349 Censorship is of no real value. 4 81 .345 The Red Chinese are planning to take over the world. & CM 5 85 © Communism is an ideology that places the State above the individual and God. 6 76 .311 Communism is in direct conflict with our way of life.
Split-half reliability = 0.410
1 12 .459 This country®s goal should be to spread democracy to Communist countries. 2 101 .427 The Vietnam war seems to be endless. 3 84 .357 This world cannot survive unless we get rid of Communism. 4 55 -.334 As far as Communism is concerned, we should live and let live. 5 75 .324 The economy of this country seems to depend on the Vietnam war. 6 28 .304 It is getting harder and harder to make enough money to meet all my responsibilities.
Split-half reliability a 0.439 TABLE 13«— »Anti~Communi sm: relevant data
Original Factor No. Item No. Loading Opinion Statement
1 12 This country9 s goal should be to spread democracy to Communist countries. 2 34 Communism is not compatible xd.th capitalism and private enterprise. 3 a 55 As far as Communism is concerned, we should live and let live. 4 76 Communism is in direct conflict with our way of life. 5 81 The Red Chinese are planning to take over the world. 6 84 This world cannot survive unless we get rid of Communism. 7 85 Communism is an ideology that places the State above the individual and God.
Split-half reliability = 0.523
aScoring reversed.
Since this set of items was not identified by the computer as a factor, there are no factor loadings.
Identification of Value Clusters
The theoretical-methodological model presented in Chapter II is an inductive model for the identification of values through the clustering of opinion statements into attitudes and then re-clustering attitudes into values. Therefore, the IBM 7Q94 computer was programmed to 50 identify three rotated value factors from the nine attitude factors discussed above®' Table 14 shows the results of the factor analysis®
Table 14- indicates that® of the three rotated factors identified® one factor is significantly 11 stronger” than the others in the sense that It explains considerably mere of tho total variance® Novorthe™ less® all three factors are retained for further analysis® Attitudes that were loaded at .500 or better on the three value factors are in cluded in the discussion below®
Value factor 1— Conservatism
Three attitude factors were loaded at ®500 or better on this value factor® As Table 14 indicates® they weres Political and eco nomic conservatism (®88l)® authoritarian conservatism (®623)® and puritan ethic (®847)® After duplicate opinion statements which were common to more than one attitude factor were removed® the conservatism value factor Included fifty opinion statements with a corrected split- half reliability of ®923®^
7 According to a formula proposed by Fruchter® the maximum number of factors which could be identified from nine variables is five. How ever® Fruchter feels that it is best not to extract the maximum number of factors® See Benjamin Fruchter, Introduction to Factor Analysis (New York: D® Van Nostrand Company® Inc®, 1954), pp. 68-69® Q Opinion statements for each of the value factors are included in Appendix III. There is some overlap of opinion items. Opinion state ment 84 is common to both factor one and two® Statements common to factors one and three ares 10® 45® 88® 126® and 127. Statements common to factors two and three are: 76® 78® 85® 94® and 137e 51 TABLE 1*1.--Analysis of three value factors: relevant data
Attitude Factors Value Factor Loadings 12 3
1 . Concern for humanity o453 .169 .620a 0619 2. Political and economic conservatism .881a .073 .066 .78 5 3. Concern about authority .388 -o205 .651a .616 *1. Authoritarian conservatism .623a o037 .^79 .619 5. Political non-intervention .239 08 56a .1*1*1 .810 6. Moral-religious -.002 -.238 .501a .308 7. Concern for society .005 . 2*1-2 .852a .78*1 8. Puritan ethic .8*i7a -.007 .098 .727 9. Anti-communi sm .431 -.627a .*106 .7*13
Characteristic Values0 3.5388 1.3302 1.1*113 6.010*1
J Proportion of total variance explained by each factor. .3932 .1*178 .1268 .6678
aAttitude factors included in further analysis of value factors.
L O Coramunalities (h ) are the sums of the squares of the factor loadings across factors.
Characteristic values are the sums of the squares of the factor loadings within factors.
Chese data are the ratios of the characteristic values to the order of the matrix (in the present case, nine) and are an indication of the "strength11 of the factors. 52
Value factor 2— Political non-intervention
Two attitude factors, political non-intervention (.856) and anti communism (-.627) were loaded highly on this value factor. One dupli cate opinion statement was deleted and the scoring was reversed on g several items to maintain a consistent scoring pattern,/ The political non-intervention value factor contains fifteen opinion statements with a corrected split-half reliability of ,689*
Value factor 3— Concern for society
Concern for humanity (.620), concern about authority (,651), moral-religious (,501), and concern for society (,852) were the atti tude factors loaded at ,500 or better with this factor. After five duplicate opinion statements were removed the concern for society value factor contained sixty-four opinion statements with a corrected split-half reliability of ,908,
After the three factors were '•purified'1 as described above, co efficients of correlation were calculated with the results indicated in Table 15. The high correlation between the conservatism and concern for society factors indicates some lack of purity or an overlap in the content of meaning in the two factors. This overlap is also indicated by the factor loadings in Table 1^, However, an investigation of the statements in each factor reveals that the two factors are different 10 m meaning,
g ^See Appendix III.
10The political content of the three value clusters is discussed in Chapter IV, 53
TABLE 15.--Coefficients of correlation between the three value factors.
Correlation Coefficients Factor Name
Factor
1 2 3
1, Conservatism 1.000 -0.058 0.616
2. Political Non-intervention 1.000 -0.15**
3, Concern for society 1.000
The maintenance of a consistent point of view as expressed in
Chapter II requires that the value factors identified above be con
ceived of as clusters of opinion statements with an underlying con
ceptual unity. The factor labels of conservatism, political non
intervention, and concern for society are symbolic labels which are
assumed to represent basic and general principles about which individ
uals have some concern and toward which they have some commitment which
is quantifiable. The emphasis of the present study is not that values
"cause" a particular political preference. It is, rather, to test the
hypothesis that a knowledge of value commitments has some predictive
utility. Specifically, the purpose of the present study is to test
the hypothesis that the extent to which an individual defines the con
cepts of conservatism, political non-intervention, and concern for
society as being good, proper, and desirable standards (reflected by
his responses to opinion statements) is predictive of his choice of
Presidential candidates and party affiliation. Summary
The inductive model presented in Chapter II, based on an assumed relationship between opinions, attitudes, and values, was used to identify three value clusters which are used as independent variables in the analysis of political preference. More specifically, opinion statements were collected using open-ended questionnaires containing questions about personal, local, national, and international concerns.
These open statements were included in an interview schedule and, based on the responses to the statements by 509 individuals in twelve ran domly selected voting precincts in Corpus Christi, Texas, were factored into nine attitude clusters. These attitudes were factored again and three value factors of conservatism, political non-intervention, and concern for society were identified. CHAPTER IV
VALUE COMMITMENTS AND POLITICAL PREFERENCE
The purpose of the present study was to test the assumption that the value concept is useful in sociology by attempting to predict the political preferences of individuals with a knowledge of their value commitments® The purpose of the present chapter is to provide the quantitative evidence from which a conclusion concerning the utility of the value concept can be drawn® The analysis of this chapter is devoted to exploring the statistical and predictive relationships between value commitments and the dependent variables of Presidential preference and political party affiliation® Prior to the statistical analysis, however, the present chapter includes a brief review of pertinent literature relating to the factors involved in political preference®
55 56
Review of Literature
Several comprehensive and encyclopedic sources are available which
clearly indicate the factors influencing political choice.^ For this
reasons and because the present study is not primarily intended to be
a study in political sociologys the following review of literature on
the factors related to political preference is brief.
The act of choosing a candidate for whom to vote is based, for most individuals, on the interaction of several important variables and is a
complex phenomenon. Figure 2 is a summary in schematic form of relevant
factors found to be related to candidate preference. It is taken espe
cially from the theoretical model and data presented in Angus Campbell, 2 et. al., The American Voter.
Campbell, et. al., in their theoretical model, use the notion of a
"funnel of causality" with which to organize their research findings.
The dependent variable of candidate preference is located at the narrow
The most comprehensive study is by Angus Campbell, Phillip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes, The American Voter (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., i960). See also, Bernard Berelson, Paul F. Lazarsfeld, and William N. McPhee, Voting (Chicago: The Univer sity of Chicago Press, 195*0» pp« 331-3**7 for a list of 209 research findings concerning voting behavior. See also, Robert E. Lane, Political Life (Glencoe: The Free Press, Inc., 1959); Angus Campbell, Gerald Gurin, and Warren E. Miller, The Voter Decides (Evanston, Ill inois: Row, Peterson and Company, 195*0» Seymour Martin Lipset, Political Man (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1959); and Eugene Burdick and Arthur J. Brodbeck, eds., American Voting Behavior (Glencoe: The Free Press, Inc., 1959)• 2 Angus Campbell, et. al., The American Voter (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., i960), pp. 18-37. end of the funnels Directly above the dependent variable is the
"political core" or the peculiarly political factors which impinge on political preferences Surrounding the political core are other factors which have a bearing on political preferences These factors, for the most part, are assumed to be relevant in a causal sense to political preference only if the process of "political translation" occurs and individuals cognitively associate conditions,, events, situations, or other factors with the political process® Factors surrounding the political core are, however, more or less predictive of, even if they are not causally related to, voter preferences
To be specific, Chapters Three and Four of The American Voter indicate that political attitudes toward candidates, perception of political parties and their performance, and opinions concerning foreign and domestic policy are highly predictive of voter preference.
Statements such as "I like Ike," for example, or "Republicans are responsible for hard times," are excellent indicators of an individ ual’ s choice of political candidatess
Chapter Six of The American Voter indicates that, at a higher and more general level in the political core, the degree of identification with a political party is closely related to political attitudes referred to above and to political preferences The process involved here is that party identification influences political attitudes which, in turn, affect voting preference* However, if political attitudes are in conflict with party positions it is the attitudes which more accu rately predict choices The Social and Personal Factors Political Public Issue Factors Core
Subtle, intricate, Political and specific Social Class Ideology- issues
Group affiliation and identification
Party Identifi "Simple, cation General, Bread and Self- Butter" Interest issues
Political Attitudes
Candidate Preference
•Fig. 2. Schematic of factors impinging on candidate preference. Political ideology,, at a still higher level in the political core* is equated in Chapter Nine of The American Voter with general clusters 3 of attitudes of a political nature0 Measures of political ideology were found to be non-predictive of political preference* especially in terms of domestic policy0 The conclusion of the authors of The American
Voter is that pure self-interest explains political preference better than political ideology does.
In terms of prediction* according to The American Voter„ opinions and attitudes are the most indicative of candidate preference* In other words* what a person says about candidates* parties* or issues reflects closely what he is likely to do in the voting booth* In terms of
"cause*11 what an individual says and who he votes for is closely related to his self-interest* his party preference* and his perception of public issues* Figure 2 indicates that factors farther removed from political preference* either vertically or horizontally* are less efficient pre- k dictors* The reason for this seems to be due partly to the imperfect nature of political translation and political socialization*
Campbell* et* al* refer to political translation simply as the process by which a non-political event becomes a political one* They
\ h e operational and conceptual definition of political ideology in The American Voter is quite similar to the definition of value in the present study. Items in political ideology were identified by Guttman scaling rather than the factor analysis of the present study, h, These are the assumptions and conclusions of the authors of The American Voter and of other studies. Some of these assumptions are tested in the present study* indicate also that the process of translation may either be internal or externalo Internal political translation means that an individual* without outside help* is able to relate a non-political event to a political one0 For example* the individual who links an increase in the prime interest rate to a Republican administration by himself* and regardless of the accuracy of his perception* has translated internallyo
The assumption in The American Voter is that very few individuals trans late internally* especially at a high level of general!ty8 For example* ideology is treated as " © © © a massive bridge that brings perceptions of a variety of non-political events into contact with cognitions of 6 political objects© © © ©" And yet* Campbell* and others* feel ‘that only a few individuals think in ideological terms and that* in fact* we may be reaching an era in which political ideology is almost non-exist- 7 ant©
In the light of the concept of internal translation* the relatively lower predictive power of the factors at the top of Figure 2 is ex plained© Although there is a relationship between social class and political preference* a substantial amount of slippage in prediction
■■■CMiHaM W HHwaanM M
"’Campbell, et© al©* The American Voter* op. cit», pp. 31-32.
6Ibid.* p© 202. 7 'See* for example, Seymour M© Lipset, Political Man* op. cit. Especially see his Chapter XIII* "The End of Ideology?*" pp© 403-^17© See also Daniel Bell* The End of Ideology (Glencoes The Free Press* I960), pp© 369-375o 61 exists because most individuals do not internally make the connection between class and politics— at least not in the Marxian sense of class- consciousness, And at the same time, specific public issues of a subtle and intricate nature have little bearing on political preference simply because a large majority of the electorate lacks the sophistication to translate these issues internally into political issues*
On the other hand, external translation— the translating of non political issues into political ones with the help of others— offers some insight into the relatively better predictability of factors such as group affiliation closer to the narrow end of Figure 2* For example* the complexities of the Taft-Hartley Act are such that it* in itself* is unlikely to arouse political interest* On the other hand* if the economic* political and other implications of this issue are translated for the individual by his labor union he then has the foundation upon which to develop political attitudes favorable to a particular party or candidate,
A considerable amount of evidence indicates that family background is of considerable importance in the development of party preference, O political attitudes* and candidate preference. It appears that in the process of political socialization the family is also translating, as best it can for the younger members* the relationships between issues,
self-interest, and politics, Hyman*s data indicate, for example* that
Q See, for example* Herbert H, Hyman* Political Socialization (Glencoe: The Free Press* 1959)o boys rather than girls and older rather than younger children have more highly developed political orientations,. Also, children from white- collar families have a significantly different kind of orientation than children from blue-collar families®^
Further® Chapter Twelve of The American Voter indicates that membership in secondary groups has an influence on political prefer ence® In general® labor union members# Catholics® Jews® and Negroes tend to vote Democratic® However® this tendency is modified by life situations® identifications with the group® the “political nature" of the group® the success with which the group translates its political standards® and other factors®
In terras of self-interest® The American Voter data in Chapter
Fourteen indicate that economic concerns are readily translated into political attitudes which in turn influence candidate preference®
Chapter Fourteen also indicates that the placement of self-interest in Figure 2 is accurate® " ® ® ® economic outlook must be placed® ® ®® antecedent both to political behavior and partisan attitudes but between them and most of the more remote factors®"^ It is assumed in the present study that issues labelled in Figure 2 as "Simple® general® bread and butter issues®" such as war and peace® taxes® etc®® are
%bid®, pp® 59-67®
10Campbell, et® al®. The American Voter, op. cit.® p® 399® readily seen in terms of an individual's self interest and are easily 11 translatable internally into the political realm.
Up until now the present discussion has attempted to indicate the factors8 both political and non-political, which have been found in various studies to be related to the choice of political candidates.
The assumption has been that individuals more or less critically evaluate candidates before making a choice. Predictability is not perfect, however, partly because some individuals vote non-critically and even non-rationally. Arthur Brodbeck has illustrated the irration ality of voting behavior with his example of the individual who voted on the basis of his "theory41 about the number of letters in the candi dates names. Brodbeck does suggest, however, that this seemingly irrational behavior might be closely related psychologically to an individual's value system and his attempts to maintain his self- . 12 ©s *fc©©iu®
The above discussion is a summary of some of the important factors which impinge on political choice. Figure 2 is intended to indicate that in terms of "cause" or understanding the factors in the political core are relevant in some degree to the choice of candidates. Factors
■^This statement is not intended to imply that issues of war and peace and taxes are simple issues. Rather, the assumption is that individuals see these issues in simplified ways which have a direct bearing on their self-interest— either their pocketbook or their relationship with a soldier in Vietnam, for example. 12 Arthur J. Brodbeck, "The Problem of Irrationality and Neurot- icism Underlying Political Choice," in Burdick and Brodbeck, op. cit.„ pp. 121-135. outside the political core become relevant through the process of political translation and in terms of prediction those factors closest to the dependent variable of candidate preference predict most accu rately* Sometimes the choice of political candidates is made non- rationally,, For this reason prediction of political preference can never be perfect,, This is indicated in Figure 2 by drawing the politi cal core narrower than the space allotted to candidate preference,.
The above review of literature indicates some of the factors found to be related to political preference*, The emphasis of the present chapter now shifts to a discussion of hypotheses to be tested and to the presentation of empirical evidence with which the validity of the hypotheses can be determined*,
Hypotheses and Findings
The major hypothesis concerning values suggested by the above review of literature is as follows! (I) Values more easily trans latable into political terms will be better predictors of political preference than other values,. In order to test this hypothesis* how ever* the following hypothesis must also be tested; (II) Individuals will prefer Presidential candidates and political parties whose positions and philosophy are most congruent with the individuals value commitments. Essentially \diat is hypothesized is that values need not only be translatable into political terms but that they need to be translated into partisan terms if they are to be accurate pre dictors of political preference* To obtain an empirical measure of the ease with which the three values found in the present study might be translated into political terras, the statements in each of the value clusters were checked against the following political criteria 5 (1) reference to any politi cal subdivision or unit or to a specific country, (2) reference to communism, socialism, or any other political philosophy, (3) reference to laws or police, (4) reference to political parties or official political positions, and (5) reference to terms such as "government," 13 "foreign," or "constitution," ^ This analysis indicated that the political non-intervention value is the most clearly political in nature. All fifteen of the opinions in the cluster have political con tent, The conservatism value contains fifty items out of which thirty- two, or sixty-four percent, have political Implications, The concern for society value is the least political with twenty-two of the sixty- four opinions, or roughly thirty-four percent, having reference to 14 political ideas®
Bailey has summarized the political ideology of Democrats and
Republicans as follows
^■•^It is recognized that the analysis of opinions in the three value clusters "atomizes" the values back into their component parts. Theoretically an indication of the political nature of the values should be deducible from the value labels themselves® 14 See Appendix III for opinions in each of the value factors. 15 Thomas A. Bailey, Democrats vs. Republicans, The Continuing Clash (New York: Meridith Press. 19^8). p. 145. 66
DIFFERENCES IN PRINCIPLES
Democrats Republicans
Political Liberal; progressive; Conservative; Philosophy experimental; re standpat; pro formists; tolerant of status quo; intol leftists erant of leftists
Constitutional Broad interpreta Narrow interpreta Interpretation tion; big govem- tion; small govern ment$ weak states' ment; states' rights; strong rights; weak "Con Presidents stitutional" Executives
Social Human rights para Property rights and Philosophy mount; pro-masses; rugged individual pro-"welfare state"; ism emphasized; pro-"have-nots"; anti-welfare; pro- civil rights for "haves"; anti-civil Negroes; pro rights; anti immigrant immigrant
National Economy Managed economy; Private enterprise governmental curbs and free initiative; on trusts and pro-big business; monopoly; low protective tariff; tariff; minimum anti-minimum wage wage
Fiscal Policy Loose money; infla Sound money; frugal tion; free spending ity in government; and lending by Wash balanced budgets; ington; unbalanced low ("soak-the- budgets; high poor") taxes; high ("soak-the-rich") interest rates taxes; low interest rates
Foreign Affairs International!st; Isolationist (except pro-peaceful co Asia); anti-Commu- existence; pro-UN nist; anti-UN An analysis of statements by the Presidential candidates and of news reports concerning the campaign indicates that Bailey's descrip tion of the Republican position* especially on the three categories of political philosophy* constitutional interpretation* and social philos ophy* most closely corresponds to the position taken by Mr* Wallaces
Mre Nixon* during the campaign* took a more middle of the road position while Mr* Humphrey embraced the principles of the Democratic party,
This follows* in general* the sociological principle that leaders of groups tend to epitomize group values,,
A comparison of the statements included in each of the value factors with the principles described by Bailey above* and with the statements and politions of the Presidential candidates* indicates the following conclusions concerning the partisan nature of the value clusters* Although the political non-intervention value is the most politically oriented* it appears to be the least partisan* There is* according to Bailey above* a general conservative tendency toward isolationism except where Communism is concerned* Yet during the campaign it was the liberals who advocated isolationism in the form of withdrawal from Vietnam* Since there seems to be a great deal of ambivalence about our relationships with other countries* especially in Asia* the non-intervention value would appear not to be a good pre dictor of partisan political choice* The conservatism value factor
"^Everett M* Rogers* Social Change in Rural Society (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts* Inc., 1960), p. 83* See also,Bernard Berelson and Gary A. Steiner* Human Behavior (New York: Harcourt* Brace & World* Inc** 19&0 pp. 376 and 379* 68
is the most partisan of the three values# As the label implies, a
large majority of the opinion statements in this cluster are to the
right politically# The partisan nature of the concern for society
value is not clearly discernable# However, the opinions taken as a
whole suggest, intuitively, a slight liberal orientation#
Values and Presidential preference
The following hypotheses are suggested based on the two criteria
of political translatability and political partisanship#
la# The conservatism value will have the most predictive
utility#
lb# Wallace supporters will score highest on this value,
followed by Nixon and then by Humphrey supporters#
2a# The concern for society value will have the next most
predictive utility#
2b# Humphrey supporters will score highest on this value,
followed by Nixon and then by Wallace supporters#
3a» The political non-intervention value will have the
least predictive utility#
3b# There will be no significant differences in the mean
scores of Humphrey, Nixon, or Wallace supporters on
this value.
In response to the question "Who is your choice for President of
the United States?," 482 individuals from the total sample of 509 (95%)
chose one of the three candidates. The following analysis is based on
the responses of these 482 people# Data are presented below in contingency table form indicating frequency and percentage distributions. The chi-square value and con tingency coefficient for each table serve as relative measures of the predictive utility of the value in question.. Critical ratios were calculated to test the significance of the differences between the 17 mean scores of the three sub-samples® Mean scores and standard deviations of the three groups on each of the three values are pre sented below followed by the contingency tables®
TABLE l60— Mean scores and standard deviations of value factors® total sample and by Presidential preference
Presidential Conservatism Non-intervention Concern for Society
preference X std, dev® X std. dev. X std. dev.
Nixon (N=133) 171o880 23.446 41.060 6.673 232.812 27.396
Humphrey (N=3l4) 164.022 25®278 40.427 6.538 242.204 27.125
Wallace (N=35) 187*686 21.249 41.000 7.412 237.057 31.^97
Total (No509) 167*633 25.138 40.621 6.800 239.138 27.753
Potential Range 50 - 250 15 - 75 64 - 320
^Since the direction of the differences between mean scores was predicted above, the probability of Type I error is based on one-tailed tests, unless otherwise noted® 70
TABLE 17®--Frequency and percentage distribution of conservatism scores by Presidential preference
Presidential Preference
Conservatism Nixon Humphrey Wallace Total scores
No. t No. % No. % No. %
Plus one std. dev. or higher 20 15.01* 1*0 12.71* 17 1*8.57 77 15.98
X to plus one std. dev. 58 1*3.61 92 29.30 13 37.12* 163 33.82
X to minus one std. dev. i*5 33.83 129 1*1.08 1* 11.1*3 178 36.92
Minus one std. dev. or lower 10 7.52 53 16.88 1 2.86 61* 13.28
Total 133 100.00 311* 100.00 35 100.00 1*82 100.00 CM cn O X2 = 1*8.1*3 P < .001 d.f. = 6 C = . C.R. (Nixon > Humphrey) = 3*17 P < .0008 C.R. (Wallace > Humphrey =6.12 P < .0001 C.R. (Wallace > Nixon) = 3«81* P < .0001 TABLE 18®--.Frequency and percentage distribution of concern for society scores by Presidential preference
Presidential Preference
Concern for Nixon Humphrey Wallace Total society scores
No® a No. $ No. ft No. %
Plus one std® dev® or higher 15 11.28 59 18.79 4 11.43 78 16.18
X to plus one std. dev® 38 28.57 100 31.85 15 42.86 153 31.74
X to minus one std® dev® 50 37.59 117 37.26 9 25.71 176 36.52
Minus one std. dev® or lower 30 22.56 38 12.10 7 20.00 75 15.56
Total 133 100.00 314 100.00 35 100.00 482 100.00
X2 = 13.82 P < .05 d.f. = 6 C = ®167 C.R. (Humphrey > Nixon) = 3*32 P < .0005 C.R. (Humphrey > Wallace) = 0.93 P > .1762 C.R. (Wallace > Nixon) = 0.73 P > .2327 72
TABLE 19*— Frequency and percentage distribution of political non intervention scores by Presidential preference
Presidential Preference Political non
intervention Nixon Humphrey Wallace Total
scores s 0 No. % No. % . • % No. %
Plus one std. dev. or higher 23 17® 29 44 14.01 7 20.00 74 15.35
X to plus one std. dev. 49 36.84 109 34.71 10 28.57 168 34.85
X to minus one std. dev. 46 34.59 116 36.95 13 37.14 175 36.31
Minus one std. dev® or lower 15 11.28 45 14.33 5 14.29 65 13.49
Total 133 100.00 314 100.00 35 100.00 482 100.00
X = 2.54 P > .80 d.f. = 6 .072 C.R. (Nixon > Humphrey) = 0.65 P > .5156s C.R. (Wallace > Humphrey) = 0.44 P > .6600 C.R. (Nixon > Wallace) = 0.43 p > .6672s
aTwo-tailed test
The data presented above indicate that hypothesis I (that values more easily translatable into political terms will be better predictors of political preference) is not clearly tenable. The political non intervention value is the most political in nature but. as Table 19 indicates, has very little predictive utility. On the other hand, the 73 conservatism and concern for society values -which are in decreasing order of political content are also in decreasing order of predictabil ity,,
Hypothesis II (that individuals will prefer Presidential candidates whose positions and philosophy are most congruent with the individual8 s value commitments) was supported by the data# Of the six specifically predicted relationships tested between value scores and Presidential preference,, four are highly significant and two have no significance*,
Hypotheses based on a combination of political translatability and political partisanship also are supported,, with minor variations,, by the datae The predictive utility of the three valuesB as indicated by the size of the chi-square and contingency coefficient values,, is as hypothesized: conservatism > concern for society > political non intervention 0 Hypotheses la„ 2a„ and 3a are* therefore,, accepted,, The mean scores of the supporters of Wallace,, Nixon,, and Humphrey on the conservatism value were significantly different from each other in the order hypothesized: Wallace > Nixon > Humphrey,, Hypothesis lb is supported# The mean scores of the three sub-groups on the concern for society value were not in the order hypothesized and the only signifi cant difference is Humphrey > Nixon with Wallace supporters in an inter mediate position# Hypothesis 2b is not clearly supported# There are no significant differences in the mean scores of the three groupsp as hypothesis Jb states8 on the political non-intervention value#
Cumulative predictive utility of values
The conclusion reached,, based on the data presented above9 is that value commitments are to some degree associated with Presidential preference*, The chi-square and contingency coefficient values found in
Tables 17* 18* and 19 indicate that,, of the three values* the conserva
tism value has the most promise as a predictive variable while the
concern for society and especially political non-intervention values
are likely to be poor predictors of Presidential preference,, The re lationships presented were* however* zero-order relationships® The present discussion concerns the problem of determining the accuracy with which Presidential preference can be predicted using the three values cumulatively,. Hypothesis III* to be tested below* is as follows;
There is no significant difference in the efficiency of value factors
and non-value factors in predicting Presidential preference,, The pre dictive model used below is the configurational model suggested by lft Stuckert and used by Finley,,
The configurational model is especially useful for studies* such
as the present one* in which at least some of the variables are discrete
since in this case statistical techniques such as multiple correlation or regression are not appropriate,, Essentially the configurational model calls for splitting samples into homogeneous sub-samples according
to some chosen criterion point of an independent variable which has a high predictive utility* calculating the predictive efficiency* split
ting the remainder of the original sample not efficiently predicted into
another set of sub-samples based on another independent variable* and
1ft See Robert P® Stuckert* “A Configurational Approach to Predic tion*" Sociometry* 21* (June* 1958)* pp„ 225-237; and James R® Finley* "Farm Practice Adoption; A Predictive Model*" Rural Sociology® 33 (March* 1988)* pp® 5-18® 75 so on. The process stops when a pre-selected predictive probability value is reached or when the sub-samples become too small for meaning ful analysis®
In the present study two characteristics of the sample data pre vented a clear cut configurational analysis® First* the dependent variable of Presidential preference had three possible alternatives: a preference for either Nixon, Humphrey, or Wallace. This problem is not insurmountable— Stuckert used the three categories of pass, fail, or borderline in one analysis of factors related to success in 19 college<> However, the research design of the present study was basically of a survey nature and the sub-samples based on Presidential 20 preference were not equal in size0 Therefore, the theoretical proba bility of a given individual falling into any one of the three sub samples was not equal. These two problems together created a situa tion in which no real decisions could be made concerning the predictive utility of the three values.
Since the configurational model appears to be neatest with only two alternatives for the dependent variable and with the original theo retical probability of fifty percent of the sample falling in each category, the following steps were taken. First, the thirty-five
19Ibid., p. 232. 20 The size of the sub-samples were as follows: Nixon = 133o Humphrey = 31^» and Wallace = 35. Wallace supporters were removed from the sample,, This appeared to be justified on the basis of the relatively small number and by the fact that thirty of the thirty-five Wallace supporters scored above the mean on the conservatism value and in this sense were already pre dicted,, Second,, a random sample of 133 of the 314 Humphrey supporters was drawn so that the Nixon and Humphrey groups would be of equal size.
Table 20 indicates the accuracy of the sub-sample,,
TABLE 208— Parameters of the original Humphrey sample and the random sub-sample on three values
Mean Std. Dev. Value C.R. Proba bility41 Original sub-sample Original sub-sample
Conservatism 164.022 166.609 25.278 26.198 0.966 .3320
Political non-inter vention 40.797 39.797 6.538 6,506 0.940 .3472
Concern for society 242.204 244.361 27.125 27.976 0.753 .4532
aTwo-tail
Because the mean value scores of the sub-sample did not vary significantly from the original mean scores it was assumed that the sub-sample could be legitimately used in further analysis. The con figuration analysis below is* therefore, based on the responses of
133 Nixon and 133 Humphrey supporters. 77
Although the configuration model allows the use of an arbitrary criterion or cut-off point for any given variable, the present analysis uses the conventional criteria of mean scores and standard deviations.
Table 21 presents the mean scores and standard deviations of the two groups of voters and the mean and standard deviation of the total con figuration sample used as criteria in the analysis.
TABLE 21,— Mean scores and standard deviations of value factors of con figuration sample by Presidential preference
Presidential Conservatism Non-intervention Concern for Society
preference X std, dev. X std, dev. X std. dev.
Nixon (N=133) 171.880 23.446 41.060 6.673 232.812 27.396
Humphrey (N=133) 166,609 26,198 390797 6.506 244.361 27.976
Total (N=266) 169.244 24.953 40.429 6.608 238.586 26.234
Since the conservatism value was shown above to have the most predictive utility it was the first value to be entered into the con figuration model. As Figure 3 indicates, the criterion point which best predicts voter preference is one standard deviation below the mean conservatism score. Thirty-two cases fall below this point,
(Low), out of which twenty-two (or 68,75$) are Humphrey supporters.
Above one standard deviation below the mean (High) there is no clear differentiation in the two groups of voters. Above minus one standard deviation on concern for Above minus one society value. standard deviation N = 208 on conservatism .4904 .5096 value. N = 234 Below minus one standard .5256 .4744 deviation on concern for society value. . N = 26 Total Sample ,8077 .1923 N = 266 (B) .50 *50a
Above minus one standard deviation on concern for society value. Below minus one N = 19 . standard deviation .1579 ,8421 Above the mean on on conservatism (A) political non value. intervention value. N = 32 Below minus one standard N = 8 .3125 .6875 deviation on concern for .375 .625 society value. N = 13 Below the mean on .5385 .4615 political non intervention value. V N = 5 ,80 ,20 (C) Fig. 3. Predictive configurations of Presidential preference using value commitment scores as criteria.
Probability figures are the probability that an individual picked at random from the sub-sample will be a Nixon or a Humphrey supporter, respectively.
^Terminal configuration. CO Both Stuckert and Finley used the predictive value of .850 as a 21 goal. The conservatism value in the present study did not predict
Presidential preference at a level approaching the .850 figures There fore the concern for society value was entered into the configurational model to improve the predictive efficiency,, Again, one standard devia tion below the mean on the concern for society value is the most effi cient criterion point® Figure 3 indicates that of the thirty-two low
scorers on the conservatism value* nineteen are high, above the cri terion point, on the concern for society value* Of these nineteen,
sixteen or 8^.21$ are Humphrey supporters* Since this configuration, labeled A, is reasonably close to the goal of 85 percent, it is ter minated at this point*
Figure 3 also indicates that, of those individuals high on the conservatism value, twenty-six are below the criterion point on the concern for society value and that 80.77 percent of these are Nixon
supporters. This configuration, labeled B, is also terminated at this point.
The addition of the third value of political non-intervention did not increase the accuracy with which the 208 individuals who were high on conservatism and high on concern for society could be predicted.
2 1 Stuckert and Finley, op. cit. 80
However* for those thirteen individuals who were low on conservatism and concern for society* a score below the mean on non-intervention was predictive of a Nixon vote. The small size of this group* however* allows no real confidence in this configuration* labeled C*
The cummulative predictive utility of the conservatism* concern for society, and political non-intervention values is as indicated in
Table 22, Of the total sample of 266* three configurations describe fifty individuals of which forty-one* or 82 percent* are predicted accurately* It must be concluded at this point that values as con ceptualized in this study* are not efficient predictors of Presidential preference* The analysis now turns to the question of to what extent other factors efficiently predict Presidential preference*
Predictive configuration; non-value factors
If* as indicated above* values as conceived in this study are not efficient predictors of Presidential preference* then the question be comes one of trying to determine whether or not other factors are more efficient* Therefore* the configurational analysis below is presented to ascertain the predictive efficiency of non-value factors* Table 23 indicates the factors considered in the analysis and the proportion of
Nixon and Humphrey supporters in the most predictive sub-set of each factor.
Of the selected predictive factors, political party identification is the most efficient* One hundred fourteen individuals claimed to be
Republicans or independents or else claimed no party affiliation* One hundred two of these individuals indicated Nixon support* Therefore, 81
TABLE 22.--Cumulative predictive accuracy of conservatism, concern for society, and political non-intervention values
Number and percentage distribution Cumulative Configuration Number predicted Nixon Humphrey
No. $ No. % No. $ accuracy
A 3 15.79 l6a 8**.21 19 19 8l*.21a
B 21a 80.77 5 19.23 26 82.22a
C 4a 80.00 . 1 20.00 5 50 82„00a
Configuration Definitions
A. Below minus one standard deviation on conservatism and above minus one standard deviation on concern for society. Humphrey support predicted.
B. Above minus one standard deviation on conservatism and below minus one standard deviation on concern for society. Nixon support predicted.
C. Below minus one standard deviation on conservatism, below minus one standard deviation on concern for society, and below mean on polit ical non-intervention. Nixon support predicted.
aNumber predicted accurately. party identification was the first factor entered into the configura
tional model. Since non-Democratio party identification alone pre dicted Nixon support at 89.1*7 percent accuracy, this particular con
figuration was terminated. TABLE 23®-— Frequency and percentage distributions of Nixon and Humphrey supporters in the most predictive sub-set of selected predictive factors
Nixon Humphrey Total Factor
N % N
Age: over 55 31 72.09 12 27.91 43
Party identifi cation: Other than Democrat 102 89.47 12 10.53 114
Educ ation: Above high school graduation 77 77.78 22 22.22 99
Ethnic groups Other than ••Anglo" 26 23.01 87 76.99 113
Income: $11,000 and over 42 87.50 6 12.50 48
C a /%^ a 1 a ! o q c • Upper group 36 81.82 8 13.18 44
Identification with the Democratic party was not so efficient as
a predictor of Presidential preference* Of the 152 Democrats, 121 or
79.61 percent expressed Humphrey support. Consequently Table 24 was
constructed for the 152 Democrats to identify a second variable to be
added to the configuration. 83
TABLE 24 .— Frequency and percentage distributions of Nixon and Humphrey supporters within the Democratic party in the most predictive sub-set of selected predictive factors
Nixon Humphrey Total Factor
N $ N % N
Social class: Lower group 7 9.86 64 90.14 71
Ethnic group: "Latin” and Negro 12 13.04 80 86.96 92
Age: 35 and under 11 15.28 6l 84.72 72
Education: High school grad, or less 11 9.82 101 90.18 112
Occupation: "Blue collar" 6 14.29 36 85.71 42
Income: Under $11,000 22 16.18 114 83.82 136
Education is the most efficient predictive factor to be added to the configuration with 101 (90.18 percent) of the individuals with a high school education or less indicating Humphrey support. The final configuration of non-value factors is indicated in Figure 4. The efficiency of non-value factors is shown in Table 25. Beyond high school graduation N = 39 Democrat party .4872 .5128 identific ation N = 152 .2039 .7961 Total Sample High school N = 266 graduate or less .50 .50a N = 112 . Republican, .0982 .9018° independent, (B) or other party identification N, = 114 •8947 .1053 (A)
Fig. 4. Predictive configurations of Presidential preference using non-value factors as criteria
Probability figures are the probability that an individual picked at random from the sub sample will be a Nixon or a Humphrey supporter, respectively,
^Terminal configuration.
°0ne individual had no education level indicated. 85
TABLE 25o —Cumulative predictive accuracy of non-value factors
Number and percentage Cumulative distribution Number prediction Configuration predicted ______
Nixon Humphrey
No, $ No. accuracy
A 102a 89o4? 12 10.53 114 114 89.47
B 11 9«82 I01a 90.18 112 226 89.82
Configuration Definitions
Ao Republican independents or no party identificatione
Bo Democratic party identification and high school graduation or less©
aNumber predicted accuratelye
Data presented above indicate that two configurations, a Republican, independent, or no party identification, and a Democratic party identi fication combined with high school graduation or less education, account for 226 (84.98 percent) of the individuals in the configuration sample and predict at an accuracy level of 89.82 percent. These non-value factor configurations are obviously more efficient than the value factor configurations which only accounted for fifty cases with an eighty-two percent accuracy. And, obviously, if the goal is to predict
Presidential preference, data on non-value factors are much easier to identify and collect. Therefore, Hypothesis III (that there is no
significant difference in predictive efficiency between value and non- 8 6 value factors) cannot be acceptedo The value concepts as it has been operationalized in the present study* has a very limited utility in predicting Presidential preference and the EL ale© and Davis position is supported®
Values and Party Affiliation
One aspect of hypothesis II* above* concerned the congruence of political party philosophy and individual value commitments® Data are presented below to indicate whether or not value commitments are re- lated to political party affiliation and to provide another measure of the predictive utility of the three values® The following hypotheses are tested:
4©r The predictive utility of the three values will be in the
following order: conservatism > concern for society > polit®
ical non-intervention® (This is the same order hypothesized
and found above)®1
5® Republicans will score higher than Democrats or Independents 22 on the conservatism value®
6® Democrats will score higher than Republicans or independents
on the concern for society value®
7®' There will be no significant differences between Republicans9*
Democrats9 and independents9 scores on the political non
intervention value®
22 Only two respondents claimed affiliation with the American Inde pendent (Wallace) party and sixteen others indicated some other or no party affiliation® The following analysis is* therefore® based on 491 (96®5$) of the total sample of 509® 87
Table 26 shows the mean scores and standard deviations of Republi cans, Democrats, and independents on each of the value factors# Tables
27, 28, and 29 are frequency and percentage distributions, with chi-
squares and critical ratios calculated, for each of the three values#
TABLE 26*— Mean scores and standard deviations of value factors by political party affiliation
Conservatism Non-intervention Concern for society Party
affiliation x std* dev# X std* dev# X std* dev*
Republican (11=3*0 17^ #56 26*27 **0.44 6.89 239 #32 30.17
Democrat (N=333) 166.15 25.63 40*38 6.68 242.21 27.07
Independent (N=124) 168.71 23*28 41*57 6.67 232.06 27.61 88
TABLE 27.-— Frequency and percentage distribution of conservatism scores by political party affiliation
Political Party Affiliation Conservatism
scores Republican Democrat Independent Total
No. $ No. K> No. $ No. $
Plus one std. dev. or higher 7 20.59 49 14.71 19 15.32 75 15.27
X to plus one std. dev. 13 38.24 102 30.63 49 39.52 . 164 33.40
X to minus one std. dev. 11 32.35 131 39.34 44 35.48 186 37.89
Minus one std. dev. or lower 3 8.82 51 15.32 12 9.68 66 13.44
Total 34 100.00 333 100.00 124 100.00 491 100.00
X2 = 6.456 P < .50, > .30 d.f. = 6 C = .114 C.R. (Republican > Democrat ) = 1.782 P < .0375 C.R. (Republican > Independent) = 1.169 P < .1230 C.R. (Independent > Democrat) = 1.016 P < .1562 89
TABLE 28.— Frequency and percentage distribution of concern for society scores by political party affiliation
Political Party Affiliation Concern for
society Republican Democrat Independent Total
scores No* No. No. $> No, i t i
Plus one std. dev. or higher 6 17*65 62 18.62 12 9*68 80 16.29
X to plus one std. dev. 11 32.35 106 31.83 41 33.96 158 32.18
X to minus one std. dev. 11 32.35 124 37.24 42 33.87 177 36.05
Minus one std. dev. or lower 6 17*65 41 12.31 29 23.39 76 15.48 Total 34 100.00 333 100.00 124 100.00 491 100.00
X2 = 13*380 P < .02, > .05 d.f. = 6 C = .164 C.R. (Democrat > Independent) = 3*512 P < .0002 C.R. (Republican > Independent) = 1.267 P < .1038 C.R. (Democrat > Republican) = 0.537 P < .2981 90
TABLE 290--Frequency and percentage distribution of political non intervention scores by political party affiliation
Political Party Affiliation Political non
intervention Republican Democrat Independent Total
scores No. % No. £ No. i No>. $
Plus one std. dev. or higher 5 14.71 50 15.02 23 18.55 78 15.89
X to plus one std. dev. 12 35*29 108 3<.43 47 37.90 167 34.01
X to minus one std. dev. 12 35.29 127 38.14 43 34.68 182 37.07
Minus one std. dev. or lower 5 14.71 48 14.41 11 8.87 64 13.03
Total 34 100.00 333 100.00 124 100.00 491 100.00
X2 = 4.08 P < .70, > .50 d.fo = 6 C ss .089 C.R. (Independent > Democrat) ss 1.676 P < .0950a C.R. (Independent > Republican ) = 0.860 P < .3898 C.R. (Republican > Democrat) = 0.048 P < .9680
aTwo-tailed test 91 Again* data presented indicated that political translatability alone is not sufficient to predict political preference,, Based on the non-significant chi-square values in Tables 27* 28* and 29* the order of predictive utility was concern for society > conservatism > politi cal non-intervention® This was not the order predicted based on political content or the order indicated in hypothesis ^® Hypothesis
I and k were* therefore* not substantiated by these data®
Hypothesis II* in this case the part dealing with the congruence of political party philosophy and value commitmonts* was not olearly substantiated® Except for the relationship between concern for society scores and party affiliation* chi-square values were not significant* indicating that value commitments are not strong factors in the selec tion of a political party affiliation® For this reason no configura tional prediction model was used® However® the data did indicate some specific differences in value Commitments between members of the different parties® These are indicated below®
Data in Tables 26 and 27 indicate that hypothesis 5 was only partially supported® The mean conservatism score of Republicans is significantly higher* as determined by the critical ratio* than that of Democrats® Hypothesis 6 was® in general* supported® Democrats did score higher on the concern for society value than Republicans and independents. The only significant difference® however* was between
Democrats and independents® Hypothesis 7 was supported by the data in
Tables 26 and 29® There were no significant differences in the mean scores of the three groups on the political non-intervention value® 92
However, data indicated that independents tend toward non-intervention
more than Democrats*
Just as in the case of Presidential preference, values appear not
to be efficient predictors of party affiliation* Therefore, the Blake
and Davis position which is critical of the value concept was again
supported by these data*
Analysis of the Findings
The writer is aware of the norm of objectivity in research and of
the obligation to accept empirical evidence even if the results are
disappointing to the researcher* He is also aware that it is consid
ered by some to be in bad form to try to explain away unsubstantiated hypotheses and otherwise disappointing findings* Nevertheless, it is
felt by the writer that it is worthwhile to attempt to identify and discuss some of the reasons why values were not found, in the present
study, to be predictive of political preference* What follows, then, 23 is such an attempt. J
The “funnel of causality11 which is illustrated in Figure 2 of the present chapter indicates that political party identification may intervene between political ideology, or values, and the preference for political candidates. This may be especially true in a state like
23 -'This analysis is concentrated on the relationships between conservatism value commitments and Presidential preference. These were the two variables which were the most strongly related in the original analysis and the attempt here is to sharpen this relation ship by controlling for the influence of their factors. 93
Texas which has a long history of domination by the Democratic party.
It is well known that the southern states typically elect conservative men as their political leaders. Hen like Lester Maddox. George Wallace.
Strom Thurmond, and Allan Shivers, a former Governor of Texas, are well known conservatives and all have been Democrats. But of the four, only
Maddox still retains an identification with the Democratic party.
The point is that in the kind of political situation found in the
South a man* s values may be completely irrelevant when he choses a political candidate. His party loyalty may completely override his 24 values. In other words he may vote for his party's candidate regard less of his own values or of the positions taken by the candidate. The analysis below tests the following hypothesis: (IV) The relationships between conservatism value commitments and Presidential preference will become more pronounced when factors which would tend to diminish party loyalty or tradition are taken into account.
In one test of whether party loyalty or tradition had an inhibit ing effect on the relationship between values and Presidential prefer ence. the respondents in the present study were categorized into three groups based on whether the candidate's party, his philosophy, or his appearance and personality was considered to be most important. Three hundred sixty-nine individuals indicated that to them a candidate* s philosophy was the most important. For these individuals party loyalty and tradition should have the least effect. Table 30 indicates the relationship between the conservatism value and Presidential preference.
24 Table 23 indicates the strong relationship between party identi fication and candidate preference. 94
TABLE 30.— Frequency and percentage distribution of conservatism scores of individuals indicating candidate philosophy as most important criteria, by Presidential preference
Presidential Preference Conservatism
scores Nixon Humphrey Wallace Total
No. $ No. $ No. $ No. $
Plus one std. dev. or higher 19 15*32 19 8.96 15 45.45 53 14.36
X to plus one std, dev. 54 43*55 59 27.83 13 39.39 126 34.15
X to minus one std. dev. 42 33.87 94 44.34 4 12.12 140 37.94
Minus one std. dev. or lower 9 7.26 40 18.87 1 3.03 50 13.55
Total 124 100.00 212 100.00 33 100.00 369 100.00
X2 = 48.43 P < .001 d.f. = 6 C = .341 95 The chi-square and contingency coefficient in Table 30 indicate a
significant relationship between conservatism and Presidential prefer ence,, This relationship is somewhat more pronounced,, based on the contingency coefficients than the zero-order relationship presented in
Table 1? (X^ = C = #302) but there is still no clear cut pre dictive patterns
The difficulty of political translation may be another factor which inhibits the relationship between values and Presidential prefer ence and which may make party tradition more important,. The authors of
The American Voter indicate that a person's political ideology helps him to pull together a variety of events in a society and translate them into political terms„ But they conclude that ideology should be dis- carded» partly because most people do not have a firmly established 25 ideology structures
The relationship between conservatism and Presidential preference is tested below for those respondents in the present study who had at least some college educations The assumption is that the more educa tion a person has the more highly developed his political awareness and ideology should be and the less dependent he should be on party tradi tion when he makes a political choice# Table JL presents the results of this analysis#
^Campbell# et# al#B The American Voter, op# cit#„ pp# 202-205® 96
TABLE 31.— Frequency and percentage distribution of conservatism scores of individuals with at least some college education, by Presidential preference
Presidential Preference Conservatism
scores Nixon Humphrey Wallace Total
No. No. $ No. % No.. ' %
Plus one std. dev. or higher 8 10.39 4 5.97 7 50.00 19 12.03
X to plus one std. dev. 30 38.96 14 20.90 6 42.86 50 31.65
X to minus one std. dev. 29 2 7.66 29 43.28 1 7.14 59 37.34
Minus one std. dev. or lower 10 12.99 20 29.85 0 0.00 30 18.98
Total 77 100.00 67 100.00 14 100.00 158 100.00
X2 = 24.18 P < .001 d.f. a 6 C == .341 There is* as Table 31 indicates,, a significant relationship be
tween conservatism and political preference with the control on educa- 26 tion0 But, as with the control on party loyalty above, conservatism value scores do not isolate a large proportion of the sample with a high predictive accuracy®
A third factor which would tend to diminish the importance of party loyalty and tradition in the relationship between conservative values and voter preference is ethnic and racial minority status®
Negroes and Mexican-Americans (Latins) have been consistently denied
access into the power structure of the basically conservative Demo- 27 cratic party of Texas® For these people a vote for a Presidential
candidate should reflect either their value commitments or their self interests but not party loyalty, at least on the state level® What follows is an analysis of the relationships between conservatism value
scores and Presidential preference with minority status controlled®
26 The results of this table are not completely reliable because three of the twelve cells had an expected frequency of less than five which means that the requirements of chi-square are not met® 27 Negroes and Mexican-Americans have historically voted the Demo cratic ticket in Texas but frequently not by choice and certainly not because of their loyalty to the State party machine. 98
TABLE 32.--Mean scores and standard deviations of the conservatism value factor by ethnicity and Presidential preference
Ethnicity and Presidential preference X stdo dev. No.
Latin 168.31 22.82 194
Anglo • 169.56 26.90 248
Negro 155.75 24.16 40
Latin - Humphrey 167.52 22.97 170
Latin - Nixon 173.71 21.89 24
Negro - Humphrey 154.87 24.25 38
Negro -Nixon 172.50 20.51 2
Anglo - Humphrey 161.70 28.16 106
Anglo - Nixon l ? l M 23.99 107
Anglo - Wallace 187.69 21.25 35 99
TABLE 33.— Frequency and percentage distribution of Anglo-American con servatism scores by Presidential preference
Presidential Preference Conservatism
scores Nixon Humphrey Wallace Total
No. 7><4 No. 1> No. % No. $
Plus one std. dev. or higher 18 16.82 13 12.26 17 48.57 48 19.35
X to plus one std. dev. 46 *1-2.99 31 29.25 13 37.14 90 36.29
X to minus one std. dev. 3^ 31.78 38 35.85 4 11.43 76 30.65
Minus one std. dev. or lower 9 8.41 24 22.64 1 2.86 34 13.71
Total 107 100.00 106 100.00 35 100.00 248 100.00
X2 = 37.91 P < .001 d.f. = 6 C = .364 TAB.E 3*4-0— Frequency and percentage distribution of Negro and Mexican American conservatism scores by Presidential preference
Presidential Preference'
Negro Mexic an-Americ an
Nixon Humphrey Total Nixon Humphrey Total
No. % NO. $ No. i No. i No. $ No.
Plus one std. dev. or higher 0 0.00 1 2.63 1 2.50 2 8.33 26 15.29 28 14.43
X to plus one std. dev. 1 50.00 8 21.05 9 22.50 11 45.83 53 31.18 64 32.99
X to minus one std. dev. 1 50.00 18 47.37 19 47,50 10 41.67 73 42.94 83 42.79
Minus one std. dev. or lower 0 0.00 11 28.95 11 27.50 1 4.17 18 10.59 19 9.79
Total 2 100.00 38 100.00 40 100.00 24 100.00 170 100.00 194 100.00
X (Ethnic groups combined) = 4.46 P < .30 > .20 d.f. = 3 C = .137
*No one in these minority groups expressed a preference for Mr. Wallace. 100 101
TABLE 35«--Significance of the differences between mean conservatism scores of ethnic and minority groups and by Presidential preference
Ethnicity and Difference between Presidential preference mean scores'3 C.R. Pc
Anglo - Latin 1,25 0.528 > .596
Latin - Negro 12.56 3.021 < .003
Anglo - Negro 13.81 3.301 < .001
Latin - Humphrey - Latin - Nixon 6.19 1.289 > .197
Anglo - Humphrey - Anglo - Nixon 9.76 2.719 < .006
Anglo - Humphrey - Anglo - Wallace 25.99 5.750 < .0002
Anglo - Nixon - Anglo - Wallace 16.23 3.800 < .0002
^ h e small size of the Negro - Nixon group made any comparison meaningless•
^See Table 32 for mean scores and standard deviations,
CTwo-tailed test. 102
As the above tables point out, the control for ethnic or racial minority status has the effect opposite of that hypothesized* Rather than minority status strengthening the relationship between conser vatism values and Presidential preference,, it appears to diminish it*
For Anglo-Americans the relationship was stronger than the zero-order relationships while for the minority groups the relationship was not statistically significant* Both the chi-square and the critical ratio values support the conclusion that Anglo-Americans and not the minority groups are more inclined to vote based on their values*
One interpretation of these data is that self-interest* rather than values, is the motivation behind Presidential preference* It may be that minority groups feel that they have "more to lose" if a con servative candidate wins and so they prefer a liberal candidate in spite of their conservative values* The important conclusion, of course, is that once again the value concept appears to have little utility in predicting Presidential preference*
One possible reason why values may have little utility for pre dicting voter preference is the "Madison Avenue" approach to political campaigning* Data are not available in the present study with which to investigate this problem, but it is quite likely that a campaign of slogans, images, and non-position statements effectively removes the critical and evaluative aspects of candidate selection and emphasizes 28 the emotional aspects* In other words, candidates, in the effort to
28 See, for example, Joe McGinniss, The Selling of the President 1968 (New York: The Trident Press, 19&9), pp. 28-30. 103 appeal to as large a number of voters as possible, say very little of a substantive nature and for most people there may not be, in George
Wallace's words, "a dime’s worth of difference,"
Summary
After a review of literature related to voter preference, data of the present study were analyzed with the following results. First, there was not a clear relationship between the political content of the three value clusters and their predictive utility. Second, the relationships between the conservatism and the concern for society value scores and Presidential preference and concern for society and party affiliation were the only statistically significant ones. Con servatism scores were not related to party affiliation. Political non-intervention scores were related to neither Presidential nor party preference.
Third, values were found to have little predictive utility com pared to non-value factors. Using the configurational model developed by Stuckert, three configurations of value scores accounted for only
18.80 percent of the configuration sample with an 82.00 percent accura cy. Two non-value configurations, however, accounted for 8^.96 percent of the configuration sample with an 89®82 percent accuracy.
Fourth, in an attempt to. explore some of the reasons why values were not found to be predictors of political preference, data were controlled for the effects of party loyalty or tradition. In three tests of the relationships between Presidential preference and conser vatism values, controlled for the importance of candidate philosophy to the voter, education, and ethnic or racial status, a stronger association was found. For those individuals who considered the candidate's philosophy to be more important than party or appearance, values appeared to have more effect. For those individuals with post high school educations values had more effect. However, contrary to the hypothesis, the Presidential preference of Anglo-Americans rather than Mexican-Americans or Negroes appeared to be more effected by their values.
It must be concluded, based on the data of the present study, that values are not good predictors of political preference. This may be due to the nature of the value concept as Blake and Davis suggest. Or, as suggested above, it may be that the non-political and emotional nature of political campaigns makes political preference an inappropriate variable with which to test the concept. CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, EVALUATION, AND CONCLUSIONS
The purpose of the present study was to test the hypothesis that the value concept has some utility for predicting social behavior.
Specifically, the study had three empirical goals as follows: (1) to develop and test an inductive method of identifying values, (2) to identify the values of individuals in Corpus Christi, Texas, and (3) to determine the predictive relationships between value commitments and
Presidential preference and party affiliation in the 1968 general elec tion.
The author* s interest in the utility of the value concept was stim ulated by an article written by Blake and Davis which is critical of the value concept as a sociological variable."** The point of view of the present author, based on a pragmatic position as opposed to the positiv ism of Blake and Davis, was, and is, that the value concept is a useful one. More directly, the present author believes that individuals do have values which influence their behavior, and that these values can be identified and measured. The section below is a summary of th'-
"^Judith Blake and Kingsley Davis, •’Norms, Values and Sanctions,” in Handbook of Modern Sociology, ed. by Robert E. L. Faris (Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1964), pp« 456-484.
105 1 0 6 theoretical point of view of the study, the methodological procedures, and the findings concerning the relationship between value commitments and political preference.
Summary
Theoretical Perspective
Value, as viewed in the present study, is considered to be a construct— .a concept for which the meaning is not observable either directly or indirectly but which may be defined inductively or intui tively by ovservable phenomena. Values are not observable but indi viduals may be seen making choices between alternate courses of action and this behavior supports the inference that values exist. The theo retical definition of the value construct used in this study is that values are internalized principles, standards, or criteria of the good, proper, or desirable. Terms such as freedom or equality are not values in the sense of things or entities in themselves. They are values, however, in the sense of principles which individuals use to select from alternative goals or means.
The value concept is considered in this study to be closely linked to the concepts of opinion and attitude. From a theoretical point of view values are seen as very general principles or standards. These standards generate more specific attitudes toward various ideas, events, or individuals. Further, these attitudes lead to specific opinions which are expressed concerning the ideas, events, or individuals. 107
Methodological Procedures
The inductive model for the identification of values is derived from the assumptions in the above paragraph,, It was assumed that opinions could be clustered into more general attitudes and further that attitudes could be combined into value clusters,, The methodo logical procedures for identifying values were as follows* Open- ended questionnaires were used to gather a wide range of opinions from 212 individuals in Corpus Christi, Texas. Randomly selected opinion statements were then included in a final interview schedule and the responses of 509 individuals from twelve randomly selected voting precincts in Corpus Christi were used.
Individuals’ responses to these opinion statements were factor analyzed into nine attitude clusters. The respondents were given
scores on each of the attitudes and these were factored again into the three value clusters of conservatism, concern for society, and politi cal non-intervention. This inductive technique of value identifica tion operationally defines the value concept as a cluster of the opinion statements which are included in closely related attitude clusters. Individual’s were given value commitment scores by summing their responses to opinion statements in each value cluster.
Statistical Findings
The conservatism value and the concern for society value were found to be significantly related to Presidential preference. Chi-
square and contingency coefficient values indicated the general 108 significant relationships,, Critical ratios indicated that the mean score of Wallace supporters on the conservatism value was significantly higher than the mean score of those who preferred Nixon and further that Nixon supporters scored significantly higher on conservatism than
Humphrey supporters D On the concern for society value the mean score of Humphrey supporters was significantly higher than the mean score of
Nixon supporters® The mean score of those who preferred Wallace was in an intermediate position and was not significantly different from the other two mean scores® The political non-intervention value was not related to Presidential preference and the mean scores of the supporters of the three candidates were not significantly different®
Even though two of the values identified in the study were related to Presidential preference,, values were not, in this case, efficient predictors of Presidential preference® Three configurations of values described accurately only a small portion of a configuration sub-sample of Nixon and Humphrey supporters® In general, individuals who are low scorers on the conservatism value and high on the concern for society value tend to be Humphrey supporters® Individuals who score high on the conservatism value and low on the concern for society value tend to be Nixon supporters®
Non-value factors, on the other hand, are extremely efficient pre dictors of Presidential preference® Data of this study indicate that most individuals who claimed either a Republican, independent, or no political party identification preferred Nixon® A smaller proportion 109 of individuals who claimed a Democratic party affiliation were Humphrey supporters. However, approximately ninety percent of those Democrats who had high school or less education preferred Humphrey®
Concern for society was the only value related to party prefer ence® In an attempt to understand the poor predictive utility of values, the relationships between conservatism and Presidential prefer ence were tested controlling for party loyalty® In each of these cases the relationship was increased compared to the zero-order relationship®
However, no claims that values are efficient predictors of Presidential preference can be made based on the data in the present study® There fore, if the utility of the value concept is to be judged according to the standard of prediction, then it must be admitted that value, as operationalized in this study, is not a worthwhile concept in sociology®
Evaluation
The present study rests on a number of assumptions made by the author, any one of -which, if not accepted, invalidates the research.
The basic assumption made is that men do have values and do make deci sions in terms of them® It was also assumed that values can be identi fied and that an individual's commitment to values can be measured.
And on a more concrete level it was assumed that opinions, attitudes, and values are related and that a legitimate technique with which to identify values was to cluster together opinion statements using factor analysis.
If the above assumptions are granted then an adequate evaluation of the study must include a consideration of its weaknesses and 110
strengthso In the author®s opinion* although several things might have
been done differently* there are two weaknesses in the research design,,
First* the collection of opinion statements was not done on a random
basis and therefore the range of opinions from which values were idan-
tlfied may have been restricted. If this were true then the values
identified may only represent the ideas of a non-typical number of
people and more important values may have escaped identification. The
author does not think that this happened in the present study but the
possibility exists and cannot be completely ignored.
A second weakness in the research is the incompatibility of the
requirements of a survey design as opposed to a prediction model.
Because of the need to identify value clusters from the responses of
as random a sample as possible no control could be imposed on who was
to be interviewed. As a consequence, even though the conservatism and
concern for society values were significantly related to Presidential
preference* no clear cut predictive configurations could be identified
because of the extremely un-equal sizes of the Nixon* Humphrey, and
Wallace sub-samples. Theoretically the present study should have
included testing the predictive configurations identified in Chapter IV
on a new group of respondents in which the original probability of a
Nixon* Humphrey, or Wallace preference was approximately equal. How
ever, since values showed so little predictive utility it was decided
not to continue.
It is more difficult to discuss the strengths of one's own work
objectively than it is to discuss its weaknesses. Certainly very little Ill
new information is contained in this study,, Rather, the data support
previous findings in the area of voter preference,, The one area in
which the claim of a contribution to knowledge can be made is the model
used to identify values through the use of factor analysis to cluster
opinion statements,, To the author's knowledge values have not been identified in this way before* And this model appears to be the least
subjective way to identify values. Perhaps the only appropriate evalu
ation of this study that the author should make is that in his opinion
the study was designed and carried out in as straightforward and as
accurate a manner as was possible given the state of his knowledge and
experience and his resources.
Conclusions
The question remains whether or not value is a useful concept in
sociology. Data presented in this study indicate that values are not
efficient predictors of political preference. Therefore, if predic
tive efficiency is the criterion by which sociological concepts are to be judged, this study has added to the evidence which condemns value as a concept.
The question of whether or not value is a useful concept in
sociology appears to revolve more around the choice of criteria by which the concept is to be judged rather than around concrete data.
Those individuals whose values take a positivistic turn are not 'willing
to accept value as a concept because it does not lead to prediction.
On the other hand, other individuals including this author do find the
concept useful because it meets the criteria of explanation and under standing. 112
The findings of this .study can be read by some as proof that value is not a useful concept. However, the author's belief that the value concept is useful has not changed. The dependent variable of political preference, as indicated in the previous chapter, may not be a good choice if one is trying to prove that value is a useful concept. And so because the concrete findings of this study indicate siginficant relationships between values and political preference, but not predictability, the question of the utility of value as a socio logical concept remains unsettled. APPENDIX I
PRELIMINARY QUESTIONNAIRES
113 114
PRELIMINARY I
A STUDY OF THE OPINIONS AND CONCERNS
OF CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENTS
Department of Psychology* Sociology, and Education
Department of Government
Del Mar College
Introduction: This research project is being conducted by students in government and sociology at Del Mar College to find out what issues Corpus Christi residents are concerned about locally, nationally, and on a world-wide basis. We hope you will answer all questions and will try to give answers that accurately reflect the way you feel about the topics suggested by the questions,
DO NOT SIGN YOUR NAME, This questionnaire will be kept completely confidential and you will not be identified in any way. We are only interested in the answers of a large number of people,
I. Background Data
1. Age______2, Sex______
3, Years of school completed (circle one) 123^5678 9 10 11 12 College 1 2 3 4
4, Number of children_ Their ages _
5, Occupation (be specific)______
6, Ethnic status:
"Latin"______^ Negro______"Anglo"
7, Name of the street where you live '______
II. Major Concerns: Please answer these questions as completely and as accurately as you can. 1. a. What do you think is the greatest problem of the world
today?______Why do you consider it to be a problem?
What do you think is the cause of this problem?
What is the best way to solve this problem and who (what person or group) would be able to solve it best?
What other world-wide problem concerns you or causes you to worry?
Why do you consider it to be a problem?
What do you think is the cause of this problem?
What is the best way to solve this problem and who (what person or group) would be able to solve it best? What do you consider to be this country1s greatest problem?
Why do you consider it to be a problem?
'What do you think is the cause of this problem?
What is the best way to solve this problem and who (what person or group) would be able to solve it best?
What is another problem which faces America which concerns you greatly?
Why do you consider it to be a problem?
VOhat do you think is the cause of the problem?
What is the best way to solve this problem and who (what person or group) would be able to solve it best? What do you think is the greatest problem we face in Corpus
Christi today?
Why do you consider it to be a problem?
What do you think is the cause of this problem?
What is the best way to solve this problem and who (what person or group) would be able to solve it best?
What is another problem in Corpus Christi which causes you some concern?
Why do you consider it to be a problem?
What do you think is the cause of this problem? 118
d. What is the best way to solve this problem and who (what
person or group) would be able to solve it best?
7e a® What would you say is the one thing that concerns you most
in your daily life?
b0 Why does this cause you concern?
8» a. Is there anything else that seems to be in your thoughts
frequently that is of concern to you? If so, what is it?
b. Why does this cause you concern?
III. Opinions: Please complete these sentences., There are no right or wrong answers; we are interested in your opinions only.
1. The Federal income tax ___
2* This country1s foreign aid program
3* The government1s “war on poverty" 119
4. The Federal government______
5. The War in Viet Nam
6. Our foreign policy
7® Most government officials
8. Poor people
9o Corpus Christi needs
10« Race riots
11. Negroes today
12. The Church
13* Conservative
14. Liberals
15. Communists 120 PRELIMINARY II
A STUDY OF THE OPINIONS AND CONCERNS
OF CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENTS
Department of Psychology* Sociology* and Education
Department of Government
Del Mar College
Introduction: This research project is being conducted by students in government and sociology at Del Mar College to find out what issues Corpus Christi residents are concerned about locally, nationally, and on a world-wide basis. We hope you will answer all the questions and will try to give answers that accurately reflect the way you feel about the topics suggested by the questions.
DO NOT SIGN YDUR NAME. This questionnaire will be kept completely confidential and you will not be identified in any way. We are only interested in the answers of a large number of people.
I» Background Data
1. Age______2. Sex______
3. Years of school completed (circle one)123^5678
9 10 11 12 College 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
4. Marital status: Married , Single ____, Other____
5. Occupation (be specific) ______
6. Ethnic or racial status: "Latin11____, Negro____, "Anglo"____
7. Name of the street where you live ______
II. Major Concerns: Please answer these questions as completely and as accurately as you can.
1. a. What problem of the world today concerns you most? Why do you consider it to be a problem?
What do you think is the cause of the problem?
What do you think is the best solution to the problem?
What other world-Tiri.de problem concerns you or causes you
to worry? ______;______
What do you think is the cause of the problem?
What do you think is the best solution to the problem?
What problem of the United States concerns you most today?
Why do you consider it to be a problem?
What do you think is the cause of this problem? 122
d. 'What do you think is the best solution to the problem?
4. a. What other problem of America concerns you or causes you
to worry? ______
b* What do you think is the cause of the problem?
' Co 'What do you think is the best solution to the problem?
5. aa 'What would you say is the one thing that concerns you most
in your daily life? ______
bo Why does this cause you concern?
6« a. Is there anything else that seems to be in your thoughts
frequently that is of concern? ______
b„ Why does this cause you concern?
III. Opinions: Please complete these sentences. There are no right or wrong answers. We are interested in your opinions only. 1. Students today ______123
28 Demonstrators
30 My family
Law and order
5® Republicans
60 Democrats
70 George Wallace
8„ Open housing
9„ The Supreme Court
10o President Johnson
11o The Police
12, Rioters
13. Civil rights
l^o Richard Nixon 124
15. My j o b ______
l60 Labor unions
17. Hubert Humphrey
18. I am
19. My children
20. The Church
21. The Federal income tax
22. The war in Viet Ham
23. I'o settle the war in Viet Ham we should
24. Inflation
25. Hippies
26. People on welfare
27. Corpus Christi needs 125
28o This country needs
29o Conservatives
30o Religion
31® This country’s foreign aid program
32, The war on poverty
33® Liberals
3^o Communists
35® Censorship
360 Negroes today
37® Our Foreign policy
38. Most government officials
39® Poor people
hO. The Federal Government 126
41. Race riots
42. Our country needs
43, My greatest concern today is 127
PRELIMINARY III
A STUDY OF THE OPINIONS AND CONCERNS
OF CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENTS
Department of Psychology, Sociology, and Education
Department of Government
Del Mar College
Introduction; This research project is being conducted by students in government and sociology at Del Mar College to find out what issues Corpus Christi residents are concerned about locally, nationally, and on a world-wide basis.. We hope you will answer all the questions and will try to give answers that accurately reflect the way you feel about the topics suggested by the questions..
DO NOT SIGN YOUR NAME: This questionnaire will be kept completely confidential and you will not be identified in any way* We are only interested in the answers of a large number of people.
Background Data
1, A g e ______2, S e x ______
3® Years of school completed (circle one) 123^5^78
9 10 11 12 College 1 2 3^5^78
4, Marital Status; Married______, Single______, Other_____
5, Occupation (be specific) ______
6, Ethnic or racial status; "Latin” , Negro , "Anglo”_____
7, Name of the street where you live ______
II. Major Concerns:
1. a. 'What would you say is the one thing that concerns you most
in your daily life? ______128
b. Why does this cause you concern?
c. Do you see a solution to the problem? Yes _____ No
If so„ what is it? ______
2. a. Is ’there anything else that seems to be in your thoughts
frequently that is of concern? If so. what is it?
b» Why does this cause you concern?
Below are listed some topics that other people have expressed concern about. For each of the topics about which you have some concern please answer the questions.
3. Race Relations
a. what do you think the problem is?______
b. What is the cause of the problem?
c. What do you think would be a good solution?
4. Education
a. What do you think, the problem is?
b. What is the cause of the problem? 129
c. What do you think would be a good solution?
5® h'conomic Concerns
a* What do you think the problem is?
b„ What is the cause of the problem?
c. What do you think would be a good solution?
6. Communism
a® 'What do you think the problem is?
b® what is the cause of the problem?
c. What do you think would be a good solution?
7® Peace
a. What do you think the problem is?
b. ' 'What is the cause of the problem?
c. What do you think would be a good solution? 130
8o Unrest and Violence
a. What do you think the problem is?
b0 What is the cause of the problem?
Co what do you think would be a good solution?
9o Morality
a. What do you think the problem is?
bo What is the cause of the problem?
Co What do you think would be a good solution?
10* Family Concerns
a. What do you think the problem is?
b. What is the cause of the problem?
Co What do you think would be a good solution?
11o America as a Nation
a, What do you think the problem is?
b. What is the cause of the problem? 131 Co What do you think would be a good solution?
120 You as a Person
a. What do you think the problem is?
b« What is the cause of the problem?
Co What do you think would be a good solution?
13o Your Community
a„ what do you think the problem is?
b0 What is the cause of the problem?
c. What do you think would be a good solution?
14. Religion
a. What do you think the problem is?
b. What is the cause of the problem? ______
c. What do you think would be a good solution?
15* Humanity and Human Relationships
a. What do you think the problem is? 132
b. What is the cause of the problem? ______
c. What do you think would be a good solution? ______
Is there something else that is not listed above that concerns you?
If so, please discuss it below. 133
' PRELIMINARY IV
A STUDY OF THE CONCERNS AND OPINIONS
OF CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENTS
Department of Psychology* Sociology* and Education
Department of Government
Del Mar College
Introduction; This research project is being conducted by students in government and sociology at Del Mar College to find out what national and international concerns and opinions Corpus Christi residents have. We hope you will answer all the questions and will try to give answers that accurately reflect the way you feel about the topics suggested by the questions.
DO NOT SIGN YOUR NAME. This questionnaire is completely confidential and you will not be identified in any way. We are only interested in the answers of a large number of people.
!• Background Data
1. A g e ______2. S e x ______
3. Years of school completed (circle one) 123^5678
9 10 11 12 College 123^5678
Marital status: Married____ , Single____ , Other____
5. Occupation (be specific) ______
6. Ethnic or racial status: "Latin" * Negro , "Anglo"_____
7. Name of the street where you l i v e ______
II. Major Concerns:
1. a. What would you say is the one thing that concerns you most
in your daily life? ______
b. Why does this cause you concern? ______13^
c. Do you see a solution to the problem? Yes No
If yes, what is it? ______
III. Political and Economic Concerns:
1. a. What concerns you most about the political situation in
America today? ______
b. Why does this cause you concern?
c. How do you think we can best solve the problem? ______
2. a. What concerns do you have about the election in November?
b. Why does this cause you concern?
c. What do you think the solution is?
3. a. What concerns do you have about the Supreme Court situa
tion? ______
b. Why does this cause you concern?
c. What do you think the solution is? What concerns do you have about the Presidential candidates?
why does this cause you concern?
What do you think the solution is?
What concerns you most about the economic situation in
America today?
Why does this cause you concern?
How do you think we can best solve the problem?
What concerns do you have about inflation?
why does this cause you concern?
what do you think the solution is?
Do you have any other concerns about our economic situa tion?
If so* what are they? ______
What might be some solutions? 'What qualifications or characteristics do you think a
President should have?
Which of the Presidential candidates most nearly meets these qualifications? (check one)
Nixon , Humphrey______, Wa l l a c e ______
What is your philosophy of government? In other words, what should our government stand for and what should its goals be? ______
Which political party most nearly agrees with your philosophy? (check one) American______,
Republican______, Democrat______
What is your philosophy of foreign policy? In other words, what should this country’s attitude and actions be towards other countries?______
Which Presidential candidate most nearly expresses your point of view on foreign policy? (check one)
Humphrey______, Wallace______, N i x o n __
,\hich. political party most nearly expresses your point of view? (check one) Democrat , Republican ,
American 137
PRELIMINARY V
A STUDY OF THE OPINIONS AND CONCERNS
OF CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENTS
Department of Psychology, Sociology, and Education
Department of Government
Del Mar College
Introduction: This research project is being conducted by students in government and sociology at Del Mar College to find out what issues Corpus Christi residents are concerned about. We hope you will answer all the questions and will try to give answers that accurately reflect the way you feel about the topics suggested by the questions.
DO NOT SIGN YOUR NAME. This questionnaire will be kept completely confidential and you will not be identified in any way. We are only interested in the answers of a large number of people.
I. Background data
1. A g e ______2. S e x ______
3,. Years of school completed (circle one) 1 2 3 ^ 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 College 12345678
Marital status: Married____ , Single____ , Other____
5. Occupation
6. Ethnic or racial status:
'’Latin" ______, Negro ______, "Anglo"______
7. Name of the street where you live ______
II• Major concerns
1. a. What would you say is the one thing that concerns you most
in your daily life? ______138
b 0 Why does this cause you concern?
c0 Do you see a solution to this problem? If so, what is it?
A number of people have expressed concern about the following topics# We are interested in your opinions about how these problems could be solved# For each topic listed below, please indicate how you think you would solve the problem#
1. Morality______
2. Vietnam war
3. Communism
Race relations
5. America’s reputation abroad
6. Peace in the world
7# Censorship
8. Drugs and narcotics
9. Inflation 139 10. Riots and demonstrations
11. Man’s humanity to man
12. Our foreign policy
13. Civil rights
14. Political leadership
15. Religion
16. Law and order
17. Youth of today
18. Family
19. A feeling of unrest
20. The draft
21. The generation gap
22. Our community IkO
23. Poverty
2k. The open housing issue
25o Income tax 14-1
PRELIMINARY VI
A STUDY OF THE CONCERNS AND OPINIONS
OF CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENTS
Department of Psychology, Sociology, and Education
Department of Government
Del Mar College
Introduction: This research project is being conducted by students in government and sociology at Del Mar College to find out what national and international concerns and opinions Corpus Christi residents have. We hope you will answer all the questions and will try to give answers that accurately reflect the way you feel about the topics suggested by the questions.
DO NOT SIGN IDUR NAME. This questionnaire is completely confidential and you will not be identified in any way. We are only interested in the answers of a large number of people.
I. Background Data
1. Age ______2. S e x ______
3. Years of school completed (circle one) 123^5673
9 10 11 12 College 12345678
Marital status:__Married____ , Single_____ , Other
5. Occupation (be specific) ______
6. Ethnic or racial status: "Latin”____, Negro____ ,"Anglo"_____
7. Name of the street where you live
II. Major Concerns
1. a. What would you say is the one thing that concerns you
most in your daily life? ______Why does this cause you concern?
Do you see a solution to the problem? Yes ____ No
If yes, what is it? ______
What problem of the world today concerns you most?
Why do you consider it to be a problem?
What do you think is the cause of the problem?
What do you think is the greatest problem we face in
Corpus Christi today? ______
Why do you consider it to be a problem?
What do you think is the cause of this problem?
What problem of the United States concerns you most today?
Why do you consider it to be a problem?
'What do you think is the cause of this problem?
What do you think is the best solution to the problem? 1^3
5. a, What is your philosophy of government? In other words,
what should our government stand for and what should its
goals be? ______
b. 'Which political party most nearly agrees with your philos
ophy? (check one)
American______, Republican______, Democrat______
6. a. what is your philosophy of foreign policy? In other words,
what should this country’s attitude and actions be towards
other countries? ______
b, 'Which Presidential candidate most nearly expresses your
point of view on foreign policy? (check one)
Humphrey , Wallace_____ , Nixon ______
Below are listed some topics that other people have expressed concerns about. For each of the topics about which you have some concern please answer the questions.
Race Relations
a. What do you think the problem is?
b. What is the cause of the problem?
c. What do you think would be a good solution? Bconomic Concerns a. What do .you think the problem is?
b„ What is the cause of the problem?
c. What do you think would be a good solution?
Hum unity and Humlan Relation shins a o What do you think the problem is?
b. What is the cause of the problem?
c. What do you thinlc would be a good solution?
Peace a, What do you thinlc the problem is?
bo What is the cause of the problem?
c. What do you think Ttfould be a good solution?
Unrest and Violence a. .Bnat do you think the problem is? What is the cause of the problem?
'what do you think would be a good solution? APPENDIX II
FINAL INTERVIEW SCHEDULE
146 1*1-7
Precinct No. ____
Interviewer _____
Questionnaire No.
A STUDY OF THE OPINIONS OF
CORPUS CHRISTI RESIDENTS
Department of Psychology, Sociology, and Education
Department of Government
Del Mar College
Introduction; This research project is being conducted by students in government and sociology at Del Mar College as part of their training. We hope you m i l answer all the questions and m i l try to give answers that accurately reflect the way you feel about the statements or questions below. DO NOT SIGN TOUR NAME. Your answers will be kept completely confidential and you m i l not be identified in any way. We are only interested in the answers of a large number of people.
I. Background Data;
1. Age 2. Sex
3. Years of school completed: (Circle one) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 College 12345678
4. Marital Status; Married , Single ____ , Other_____
5. Occupation: (be specific)______
6. Ethnic or racial status: ,,Latin”____ , Negro____ , "Anglo1^
7. Income: (Check one) under $3,000 $9,000 - $10,999 $3,000 - $4,999 311,000 - $12,999 $5,000 - $6,999 $13,000 - $14,999 $7,000 - $3,999 $15,000 & over 148
8« What is the one thing that concerns you most in your dail?/
life?
Why?
II. Political Activity:
1. Who is your choice for President of the United States?
Mixon _____ , Humphrey______, Wallace ______
why? ______
2. How often do you register to vote? Every year______,
Almost every year______, Hardly ever______, Never
3. Did you register to vote this year? Y e s ______, No
a. If no, why not? ______
b. If no, do you wish you could vote this year?
Y e s ______, No _____
4. If yes to No., 3» bow many of thefollowing electionshave you
voted in this year? (Check all that apply) Jan, 9» 'Water District June 1, Runoff Primary Eoard July 13» City Charter & April 6, School Board Hospital District May 4, Party Primary July 27, Bond Issues
Do you plan to vote next week? Yes
Why or why not? ______
6. Do you consider yourself to be: (Check one)
Democrat , Independent , Republican , Other 1^9
7. Is there anyone in Corpus Christi that you listen to or take advice from about political affairs? Yes _____ , No _____
a. If yes, who is it? ______
b. ‘Why do you take his advice? ______
Rank ’the following in the order of their importance for you when you decide to vote for a political candidate. (1 = most important, 2 = next, 3 = least important)
His party
His philosophy or position
______His appearance or personality
Rank the following in order of their importance for you when you decide to vote for a political candidate. (1 = most important, 2 = next, 3 = least important)
What he says he will do for you
What he says he will do for your community or state
What he says he will do for the country
10. Of the items listed below, indicate the three most important to you then you vote. (1 = most important, 2 = next, 3 = third in importance)
Religion This Country
Inflation Peace
Communism _____ Law and Order
Race Relations ____ _ Progress
Family Self Interests
Morality . Security 150
H I * Opinions; Below are opinions given by other residents of Corpus Christi. Please indicate how you feel about each statement by circling one of the numbers at the right of the statement. (5 means that you Strongly Agree, 4 = Agree, 3 = Undecided, 2 = Disagree, and 1 means that you Strongly Disagree with the statement.)
1. The Supreme Court should stop making laws and start interpreting them. 5 4 3 2 1
2. we need more job training for low income people. 5 4 3 2 1
3. We need to give governemnt back to the people. 5 4 3 2 1
4. This country is getting closer to a socialistic state. 5 4 3 2 1
5. The Supreme Court needs to be revised and given less power. 5 4 3 2 1
6. People show no basic concern for others. 5 4 3 2 1
7. We need a president who will stop trying to give everyone a free ride. 5 4 3 2 1
8. We should stop giving handouts and make people work for what they get. 5 4 3 2 1
9. Our country is not safe to live in anymore. 5 4 3 2 1
10. Only God can solve the crisis we are in today. 5 4 3 2 1
11* We need to return to a more conser vative philosophy of government. 5 4 3 2 1
12. This country’s goal should be to spread democracy to Communist countries. 5^321
13. We need a change in the political administration of this country. 5 4 3 2 1
14. We should appoint new judges to the Supreme Court. 5^321 151 15. Political candidates should be more concerned about the country and less concerned about their own personal goals. 5 4 3 2 1
16. We should make people on welfare work on some kind of federal project to earn their money. 5 4 3 2 1
1?. I'-iOst political candidates don't know where they stand. 5 4 3 2 1
18. The Supreme Court seems to be swayed by the minority, and does not consider the majority. 5 4 3 2 1
19. V/e should not interfere in other countries’ domestic affairs. 5 4 3 2 1
20. We need a stricter control on 'Wages. 5 4 3 2 1 21. We should give police more power to enforce laws. 5 4 3 2 1
22. Politicians should be more concerned about the needs of their local areas than the needs of the nation as a whole. 5 4 3 2 1
23. If the constitution was good enough for the people who wrote it, then it should be good enough to live by today. 5 4 3 2 1
24. The future of America depends upon the education of today. 5 4321
25. This country should stop importing foreign goods. 5 4 3 2 1
26. We are all responsible for other human beings. 5 4 3 2 1
27. Every time we protect one person, other people are forced to give up their rights. 5 4 3 2 1
23. It is getting harder and harder to make enough money to meet all my responsibilities. 5 ^ 3 2 1 152 29. The Negro is trying too fast to get ahead. 5 4 3 2 1
30. Most people are just too stubborn to accept Negroes. 5 4 3 2 1
31. Political candidates should run on their own merits and not be backed by business. 5 4 3 2 1
32. All people are bigots in one form or another. 5 4 3 2 1
33* There is not enough emphasis in this world on a Supreme Being. 5 4 3 2 1
34. Communism is not compatible with capitalism and private enterprise. 5 4 3 2 1
35« The future of the world is in doubt because of moral decay. 5 4 3 2 1
360 We should support the United Nations so that it can maintain world peace. 5 4 3 2 1
37. We need better federal laws to stop inflation. 5 4 3 2 1
38. The trouble with our society is that people have gotten away from God. 5 4 3 2 1
39. Christians should help people who are not Christians, 5 4 3 2 1
40® We should listen to the thoughts of the younger generation. 5 4 3 2 1
41. To bring about law and order we should revise some of our old laws. 5 4 3 2 1
42. The solution to poverty is more jobs and less welfare. 5 4 3 2 1
43. Only love and charity can.solve the problem of peace in the world, 5 4 3 2 1
44. Censorship is of no real value® 5 4 3 2 1 153 45® We could solve the problem of morality if more people would go to church. 5 4 3 2 1
46b We should make sure that whites have the same rights as other people. 5 4 3 2 1
47b We need censorship of TV and movies if we plan to maintain a high moral standard. 5 4 3 2 1
48. People should 'learn to live with racial prejudice. 5 4 3 2 1
49. There must be a limit to the freedom of speech. 5 4 3 2 1
50. Too many influential people get away with serious crimes. 5 4 3 2 1
51. Rioters should be treated as the criminals they are. 5 4 3 2 1
52. The federal government should require more educational programs. 5 4 3 2 1
53® Open housing should only be applied to federally-constructed buildings and housing areas. 5 4 3 2 1
54. Sex for sex's sake should not be allowed in movies. 5 4 3 2 1
55® As far as Communism is concerned, we should live and let live. 5 4 3 2 1
56. We should ban known Communists from our country. 5 4 3 2 1
57® Parents of today are out of touch with modem trends. 5 4 3 2 1
58. The whole income tax structure needs to be revised. 5 4 3 2 1
59® The Supreme Court has tied the hands of our police officers. 5 4 3 2 1
60. Draft dodgers are a pampered bunch of cowards. 5 4 3 2 1 15^ 6l. My greatest concern in life is raising my children to responsible adulthood. 5^321
620 I don't believe we®11 ever have peace in the world. 5^321
63. The United States is bearing too much of a burden in maintaining the balance of power in the world. 5 ^ 3 2
Sk0 Courts are being too lenient with first offenders. 5 ^ 3 2
65. The greatest problem in Corpus Christi is the lack of employment opportunities. 5 ^ 3 2
66. The federal government is interfering too much with private enterprise® 5^32
67o Our government is too liberal® 5^32
68. People on welfare don't appreciate what they receive. 5^32
69® The war on poverty is helping the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. 5^32
70. Negroes today should strive to get better educated to improve themselves. 5^32
71. We could have a civil war in this country if we don't settle our race problem soon. 5 ^ 3 2
72. We should quit spending money in other countries and take care of our own problems. 5^32
73® The Vietnam war is a conflict between democracy and communism. 5 ^ 3 2
7^® No one seems to care about people anymore. 5^32
75® The economy of this country seems to depend on the Vietnam war. 5 ^ 3 2
760 Communism is in direct conflict with our way of life. 5 ^ 3 2 77o People seem to be losing respect for each other0 5 ^ 3 2
73o The biggest problem in the world today is the involvement of the United States with other countries. 5^32
79o Communism grows because of the ignorance of people. 5^-32
80. We seem to be losing our faith in our fellow man. 5 ^ 3 2
81. The Red Chinese are planning to take over the world. 5^32
82o Parents aren't concerned enough about their children. 5 ^ 3 2
83o The problem in this world is a lack of communication between countries. 5^32
8^o This world cannot survive unless we get rid of Communism. 5 ^ 3 2
85* Communism is an ideology that places the State above the individual and God. 5^32
86. People seem to be losing their moral obligation to our society. 5 ^ 3 2
87e Parents need to teach their children respect for others. 5 ^ 3 2
88. Prayer is the way to solve the Vietnam problem. 5^32
89<> Children should be dealt with more firmly and strictly. 5^32
90. We should win a convincing military victory over the Communists by any means. 5 ^ 3 2
91e We should give foreign aid only if we can expect payment. 5^32
92. All countries in the world should help each other and use scientific achieve ments for peaceful purposes. 5^32 Wo should strictly follow the constitu tion of this country6
We should teach people all over the world the danger of Conununisnu
W© should let other countries have governments of their choice0
Many people have forgotten the religious reason for living in this world*
The cause of racial prejudice is ignorances
It's a shame that so many people are hungry in this world when so much food is wasteds
We should escalate the war in Vietnam*
The greatest problem in this country is race riots*
The Vietnam war seems to be endless.
My children all seem to have problems that I cannot help them with.
Too many young people attack bur gov ernment1 s policies but they don't offer a solution to our problems.
With the job opportunities of today, there is very little need for anyone to be unemployed.
The states should have control of their own destiny.
‘Whites think they are better than "Latins” or Negroes.
We should accept minority groups as equals even if it takes legislation.
Black and white militants are causing our race problem. 157 109 o We should go slower in achieving racial equality. 5 ^ 3 2
110o The problem with our schools is that teachers don®t work hard enough at their jobs. 5^32 lllo Teachers are underpaid for the amount of work they do. 5 ^ 3 2
112 o Our government is spending too much money on the Vietnam war. 5^32
113. A lack of education is the cause of poverty. 5 ^ 3 2
Uko The trouble with our economy is that both government and individuals are living on credit above their means. 5^32
115. Credit is too easy. 5^32
116. It is better for ten guilty men to go free than it is for on© innocent man to be convicted. 5 ^ 3 2
117. The American people are not dedicated enough to the ideal of personal freedom. 5 ^ 3 2
118. Americans are too soft. 5^32
119. The United States should not be involved in Vietnam. 5^32 120. We should punish nonconformists• 5 ^ 3 2 121. There is too much corruption in every phase of American life. 5^32 122. The United States shouldn®t interfere with other countries. 5^32
123. Parents should regain their place as heads of the family. 5^32
12^0 Family life is breaking down in American sooiety. 5 ^ 3 2
125. We seem to be losing our morality in this country. 5^32 158 126. The political situation in this country gives me doubts about my family® s future 5 4 3 2
127 o We should have stricter laws on the so- called peaceful demons trations 0 5 4 3 2
128o There is too much emphasis on social status in this country. 5 4 3 2
129 O The trouble with Corpus Christi is that there is too little long-range plannings 5 4 3 2
130. There seems to be no sense of community in Corpus Christi anymore0 5 4 3 2
1310 Too many people go to church but don't follow God's lawso 5 4 3 2
132, There is very little humanity in the world anymoreo 5 4 3 2
133» Too many people thinlc only of themselves. 5 4 3 2
13**. Our federal government has too much power. 5 ^ 3 2
135. This country has pursued a domineering policy in protecting other nations against Communism. 5 4 3 2
136. W® should return to a divided Vietnam policy. 5 ^ 3 2
137. We must take a stand against Communist aggression. 5 4 3 2 138. Racial problems exist because some people don't want to work for a living. 5 4 3 2
139 o The Vietnam war seems to be a worthless cause. 5 ^ 3 2
140. Big government destroys initiative and citizenship. 5 4 3 2
141. Civil rights should not just be for Negroes. 5 4 3 2
142. The church should not take sides politically. 5 4 3 2 159 143. Professional people such as teachers and doctors should not goon strike. 5 4 3 2
144. Poor people should stop feeling sorry for themselves. 5 4 3 2
145. The government is taking too much of my money. 5 4 3 2
146. People are too hypocritical. 5 4 3 2
14?. We need to teach our ohildren that all people are equal. 5 4 3 2
148. There is a laok of honesty in dealings between people of different ethnic groups. 5 4 3 2
149. Materialism turns people into mindless. money-making machines. 5 4 3 2
150. Local leaders should represent their area in the city, not be elected at large. 5 4 3 2
1 APPENDIX III
OPINION STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN EACH
OF THE VALUE FACTORS
160 161
TABLE 3 6 a--Items in the conservatism value factor
Original No. Item Noe Opinion Statement
1, 1 The Supreme Court should stop making laws and start interpreting them0
2. 3 We need to give government back to the people.
3# 4 This country is getting closer to a socialistic state.
4. 5 The Supreme Court needs to be revised and given less power.
5. 7 We need a president who will stop trying to give everyone a free ride.
6. 8 We should stop giving handouts and make people work for what they get.
7. 10 Only God can solve the crisis we are in today.
8. 11 We need to return to a more conservative philosophy of government.
9. 13 We need a change in the political administration of this country.
10. 14 We should make people on welfare work on some kind of federal project to earn their money.
11. 16 We should appoint new judges to the Supreme Court.
12. 18 The Supreme Court seems to be swayed by the minority, and does not consider the majority,
13. 20 We need a stricter control on wages.
14C 21 We should give police more power to enforce laws.
15. 22 Politicians should be more concerned about the needs of their local areas than the needs of the nation as a whole.
16. 23 If the constitution was good enough for the people who wrote it, then it should be good enough to live by today. 162
TABLE 36.--Continued
Original No. Item N@© Opinion Statement
17 0 25 This country should stop importing foreign goods.
18. 2? Every time w© protect on© person, other people are forced to give up their rights.
19 0 29 The Negro is trying too fast to get ©head.
20o kZ The solution to poverty is more jobs and lees welfare.
21o We could solve the problem of morality if more people would go to church.
22 0 k8 People should learn to live with racial prejudice.
23. 53 Open housing should only be applied to federally constructed buildings and housing areas.
2^9 59 The Supreme Court has tied the hands of our police officers.
25. 60 Draft dodgers are a pampered bunoh of cowards.
26. 63 The United States is bearing too much of a burden in maintaining the balance of power in the world.
27. 6k Courts are being too lenient with first offenders.
28. 66 The federal government is interfering too much with private enterprise.
29. 67 Our government is too liberal.
30. 68 People on welfare don't appreciate what they receive.
31. 69 The war on poverty is helping the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
32. 79 Communism grows because of the ignorance of people.
33. 8k This world cannot survive unless w© get rid of Communism. y>. 88 Prayer is the way to solve the Vietnam problem. 163
TABLE 3 6 0 -^Continued
Original No. Item No. Opinion Statement
35® 90 We should win a convincing military victory over the Communists by any means.
360 91 W© should give foreign aid only if we can expect payment.
37 « 99 We should escalate the war in Vietnam.
38. 100 The greatest problem in this country is race riots.
39® 104 With the job opportunities of today, ther© is very little need for anyone to be unemployed,.
40. 105 The states should have control of their own destiny.
41. 109 W© should go slower in achieving racial ©quality.
42. 114 The trouble with our economy is that both government and individuals are living on credit above their means.
43. 115 Credit is too easy.
44. 120 We should punish nonconformists.
45® 126 The political situation in this country gives me doubts about my family®s future.
46. 127 We should have stricter laws on the so-called peaceful demonstrations.
47. 134 Our federal government has too much power.
48. 138 Racial problems exist because some people don’t want to work for a living.
49. 140 Big government destroys initiative and citizenship.
50. 145 The government is taking too much of my money. 16^
TABLE 37o-“Items in the political non-intervention value factor
Original Noo Item N©0' Opinion Statement
a lo 12 This country9© goal should he to spread democracy to Communist countrieso
2® 19 We should not interfere In other countries® domestic , affairs®
3®a Communism is not compatible with capitalism and private enterprise®
k 55 As far as Communism is concerned, we should live and let live®
5®a Communism is in direct conflict with our way of life®
6® 78 The biggest problem in the world today is the involvement of the United States with other countries®
7®tt 81 The Red Chines® are planning to take over the world®
8®a 8^ This x*orld cannot survive unless w© get rid of Communism®
9®a 85 Communism is an ideology that places the State above the individual and God®
10®a 9^ We should teach people all over the world the danger of Communism®
11® 112 Our government is spending too much money on the Vietnam war®
12® 119 The United States should not be Involved in Vietnam®
13® 122 The United States shouldn®t interfere with other countries® l^®a 137 We must take a stand against Communist aggression®
15® 139 Th© Vietnam war seems to be a worthless cause®
Scoring reversed 165
TABLE 38o««Items In the concern for society value factor
Original No® Item No© Opinion Statement
1® 2 We need more job training for 1m? income people®
2® 6 People show no basic concern for others®
3® 9 Our country is not safe to live in anymore® bo 10 Only God can solve the crisis we are in today®
5® 2b The future of America depends upon the education of today®
So 26 We are all responsible for other human beings®
7® 30 Most people are just too stubborn to accept Negroes®
8o 32 All people are bigots in one form or another®
9® 33 There is not enough emphasis in this world on a Supreme Being®
10® 35 The future of the world is in doubt because of moral decay®
11® 36 We should support the United Nations so that it can maintain world peace®
12 o 37 We need better federal laws to stop inflation®
13® 38 The trouble with our society is that people have gotten away from God®
1^0 39 Christiana should help people who are not Christians®
15® bl Only love and charity can solve the problem of peace in the world®
16® b5 We could solve the problem of morality if more people would go to church®
17® b7 W© need censorship of TV and movies if we plan to maintain a high moral standard® 166
TABLE 38 © —Continued
Original Noo Item No© Opinion Statement
18o 50 Too many influential people got away with serious crimes©
19o 53. Rioters should be treated as the criminals they are©
20o 52 The federal government should require more educational programs©
21© Sex for sex* 3 sake should not be allowed in movies©
22® 57 Parents of today are out of touch with modem trends©
23© 6l My greatest concern in life is raising ray children to responsible adulthood©
2*f© 7^ No one seems to care about people anymore©
25© 7 6 . Communism is in direct conflict with our way of life©
26© 7 7 People seem to be losing respect for each other©
27© 78 The biggest problem in the world today is the involve ment of the United States with other countries©
28© 80 We seera to be losing our faith in our fellow man©
29® 82 Parents arenft conoemed enough about their children©
30© 83 The problem in this world is a lack of communication between countries©
31® 85 Communism is an ideology that places the State above the individual and God©
3 2 © 8 6 People seem to be losing their moral obligation to our society©
33 ® 87 Parents need to teach their children respect for others© y*0 8 8 Prayer is the way to solve the Vietnam problem©
35® 89 Children should be dealt with more firmly and strictly© 16? TABLE 38 o°=“Continued
Original No© I tom Noo Opinion Statement
360 92 All ©oantriOQ in tho w®Sid snould holp each other and us© scientific achievements fop peaceful purposes©
37o 93 We should strictly follow the constitution of this country©
38© W© should teach people all over the world the danger of Communism©
390 95 We should let other countries have governments of their choice©
40© 96 Many people have forgotten the religious reasons for living in this world©
41© 97 The cause of racial prejudice is ignorance©
42© 98 It® s a shame that so many people are hungry in this world when so much food is wasted©
43© 103 Too many young people attack our government®s policies, but they don®t offer a solution to our problems©
44 „ 106 Whites think they are better than ’’Latins" or Negroes©
45© 107 We should accept minority groups as equals even if it takes legislation©
46* 113 A lack of education is the cause of poverty©
47© 118 Americans are too soft©
48© 121 There is too much corruption in ©very phase of American life©
49© 123 Parents should regain their place as heads of the family© .
50© 124 Family life is breaking down in American society®
51* 125 W© seem to b© losing our morality In this country© 168
TABLE 3 8 0 — Continued
Original No« Item NOo Opinion Statement
52® 126 The political situation in this country gives me doubts about ray family9 s future0
53° 1^7 We should have stricter laws on the so-called peaceful demonstrations•
5^. 128 There is too much emphasis on social status in this country®
55° 130 There seems to be no sense of community in Corpus Christ! anymore®
560 131 Too many people go to churoh but don® t follow God® s laws®
57° 132 There is very little humanity in the world anymore®
58® 133 Too many people think only of themselves®
59° 137 We must take a stand against Communist aggression®
60 ® 142 The church should not take sides politically®
6l® 146 People are too hypocritical®
62® 14-7 We need to teaoh our children that all people are equal®
63® 148 There is a lack of honesty in dealings between people of different ethnic groups®
64'® 14-9 Materialism turns people into mindless® money-making machines® WORKS CITED
169 170
Books
Bailey, Thomas A. Democrats vs. Republicans,, The Continuing Clasho t o York? Meredith Press, 1968®
Bateso Alan P. The Sociological Enterprise0 Boston? Houghton Mifflin Company,°*1967.
Bells Danielo The End of Ideology. Glencoe? The Fro© Press, i960.
Berolson, Bernard; Lazarsfeld, Paul Fo ; and McPhee, William N. Voting. Chicago? The University of Chicago Press,, 195^.
Berolson, Bernards and Steiner, Gary A. Human Behavior. New York? Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 19^.
Broom, Leonards and Selznick, Philip0 Sociology. 3rd ed. New York? Harper and Row, Publishers , Incorporated, 1963.
Broom, Leonard, and Selznickp Philips, Sociology,, **th edQ New Yorks Harper and Row, Publishers, 1968.
Burdick, Eugene, and Brodbeck, Arthur J. edso American Voting Behavior, Glencoe? The Free Press,, Inc., 1959•
Campb©ll8 Angus; Gurin, Gerald; and Miller,, Warren Eo The Voter Decidese Evanston9 Illinois? Row, Peterson and Company, 195^©
Campbell, Angus; Converse, Phillip Eo; Miller, Warren Eo; and Stokes, Donald E. The American Voter. New Yorks John Wiley & Sons, InOe, 1960o
Downie, N e M. and Heath, R. W. Basic Statistical Methods. New York? Harper & Row, Publishers, 1959.
Fruchter, Benjamin. Introduction to Factor Analysis. New Yorks D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 195^.
Greenwood, David. The Nature of Science and Other Essays. New York: Philosophical Library, Inc., 19^9.
Harman, Harry H. Modem Factor Analysis. 2nd ed., rev. Chicago? The University of Chicago Press, 1967.
Hyman, Herbert H. Political Socializationa Glencoe? The Free Press, 1959.
Kaplan, Abraham. The Conduct of Inquiry. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Company, 19^. ' "". 1 7 1
Kerlingor® Fred No Foundations of Behavioral Research, New Yorks Holte Rinehart and Winsion, Inc® ® 196^0
Lane® Robert Eo Political Lifea Glencoe: The Free Press® Inc®® 1959o
Lipset® Seymour Mo Political Man® Garden City® New Yorks Doubleday and Coupany® Inc®, 1959®
Lovejoy, Arthur Oo The Thirteen Pragmatisms and Other Essays® Baltimore s The John Hopkins Press® 19&3©
McGinniss® Joe® The Selling of The President 1968© New Yorks Trident Press® 1969o
Martindale, Don® The Nature and Types of Sociological Theory® Bostons Houghton Mifflin Company® I960®
Neal® Sister Maria Augustao Values and Interests in Social ChangeQ Englewood Cliffs s Prentice-Hall® Inc®, 1965®
Newcomb® Theodore M0 ? Turner® Ralph Ho ? and Converse® Philip Do Social Psychology® New Yorks Holt® Rinehart and Winston® Inc®® 1965®
Parsons® Talcotte The Social System® Glencoes The Free Press® 1951©
Parsons® Talcott® and Shils® Edward A® eds. Toward A General Theory of Actiono Cambridges Harvard University Press® 195^«
Randall® John Ho® and Buchler® Justus® Philosophy® an Introduction New Yorks Barnes and Noble® Inc.® College Outline Series® 19^2.
Rogers® Everett Mo Social Change in Rural Society,, New Yorks Appleton«Century-Crofts, Inc0® I960®
Sherlf® Muzafero The Psychology of Social Norms® Torchbook ed. New Yorks Harper and Row® Publishers® Incorporated® 1966®
Vernon® Glenn Mo Human Interaction® An Introduction to Sociology® New Yorks The Ronald Press Company, 195&*
Williams® Robin Mo® Jr® American Society0 2nd ed®, rev® New Yorks Alfred A0 Knopf® Inc®® I960®
Readings in Anthologies
Blake, Judith® and Davis® Kingsley® '’Norms® Values® and Sanctions." Handbook of Modem Sociology© Edited by Robert E. L© Paris® Chicago; Rand McNally and Company, 19<&® 172
Blalockp Hubert M®, Jr0 "The Measurement Problem; A Gap Between the Languages of Theory and Research®" Methodology In Social Research® Edited by Hubert M® Blalock® Jr® and Ann Blalock® New Yorks McGraw-Hill Book Company® 1968®
Brodbeck® Arthur J® "The Problem of Irrationality and Neuroticism Underlying Political Choice®" American Voting Behavior® Edited by Eugene Burdick and Arthur J® Brodbeck® Glencoes The Free Press® Inc®® 1959®
Hartman® Robert S® "Reply to Professor Welsskopf®" New Knowledge in Human Values® Edited by Abraham H® Maslow, New Yorks Harper
& Rowp Publishersp 1959®
Kluokhohn® Clyde® "Values and Value-Orientations in the Theory of Action®" Toward A General Theory of Action® Edited by Talcott Parsons and Edward A® Stiils® Cambridge; Harvard University Press® 195^o
Kluckhohnp Florence Rockwood® "Dominant and Variant Value Orienta tions®" Personality in Nature® Society® and Culture® Edited by Clyde lOLuckhohn and Henry A® Murray® 2nd ed. New York; Alfred A® Knapf® InCo„ 1956®
Kolb® William L® "The Changing Prominance of Values in Modem Socio logical Theory." Modem Sociological Theory in Continuity and Change®' Edited by Howard Becker and Alvin Boskoff® New York; Holt® Rinehart and Winston® 1957®
Leonard® Olen E® "Rural Social Values and Norms®" Rural Sociology® Edited by Alvin L® Bertrand® New Yorks McGraw-Hill Book Company® Inc® ® 1958®
Williams® Robin M.® Jr® "Individual and Group Values®" Social Intelligence for America^ Future® Edited by Bertram M® Gross® Boston: Allyn and Bacon® Inc,® 1969®
Journal Articles
Finley, James R. "Farm Practice Adoption: A Predictive Model." Rural Sociology. 33 (March® 1968)® 5-18.
Katz® Daniel® "The Functional Approach to the Study of Attitudes." Public Opinion Quarterly® XXV® (I960)® 168®
Miller® Walter B® "Lower Class Culture as a Generating Milieu of Gang Delinquency." Journal of Social Issues® XIV No® 3 (1968), 7® 173
Rettig, Salomon, and Pasamanick, Benjamin. "Changes in Moral Values Among College Students: A Factorial Study." American Socio logical Review. XXEV No. 6 (1959), 856-863.
Scott, William A. "Empirical Assessment of Value and Ideologies." American Sociological Review. XXIV No. 3 (1959), 301.
Stuckert, Robert P. "A Configurational Approach to Prediction." Sociometry. 21 (June, 1958), 225-237.
Weinberg, Martin S., and Williams, Colin J. "Disruption, Social Location, and Interpretive Practices: The Case of Wayne, New Jersey." American Sociological Review. XXXIV No. 2 (1969), 170-182.