Институт социологии
Российской академии наук

Журнал: Социологический журнал

Цаллер Д. .
Проблема неустойчивости ответов


Цаллер Джон – американский политолог, специалист по массовым опросам, профессор

Моя книжная полка

        > отложить
      >> посмотреть свою книжную полку
 

Полный текст

Открыть текст

Ссылка при цитировании:

Цаллер Д. . Проблема неустойчивости ответов // Социологический журнал. 2003. Том. 0. № 4. С. С. 5-33.

Рубрика:

ТЕОРИЯ И МЕТОДОЛОГИЯ

Литература:

  1. Zaller J., Feldman S. A simple model of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences // American Journal of Political Sci-ence. 1992. Vol. 36. P. 579-616.
  2. Zaller J. Toward a theory of the survey response. Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C., 1984.
  3. Hochschild J. What's fair? Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1981.
  4. Hastie R., Park B. The relationship between memory and Judgment depends whether the task is memory-based or on-line // Psychological Review. 1986. Vol. 93. P. 937-1025.
  5. Lodge M., McGraw K., Stroh P. An impression-driven model of candidate formation // American Political Science Review. 1989. Vol. 83. P. 399-420.
  6. McGraw K., Lodge M., Stroh P. On-line processing in candidate evaluation: The effects of issue order, issue salience, and sophistication // Political Be-havior. 1990. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 41-58.
  7. Converse P. The nature of belief systems in mass publics // Ideology and Discontent / Ed. by D. Apter. New York: Free Press, 1964. P. 206-261.
  8. Achen C.H. Mass political attitudes and the survey response // American Po-litical Science Review. 1975. Vol. 69. P. 1218-1231.
  9. Dean G., Moran T. Measuring mass political attitudes: Change and uncer-tainty // Political Methodology. 1977. Vol. 4. P. 383-424.
  10. Erikson R. The SRC panel data and mass political attitudes // British Journal of Political Science. 1979. Vol. 9. P. 89-114.
  11. Judd C., Milburn M. The structure of attitude systems in the general public: Comparison of a structural equation models // American Sociological Re-view. 1980. Vol. 45. P. 627-643.
  12. Judd C., Milburn M., Krosnick J. Political involvement and attitude structure in the general public // American Sociological Review. 1981. Vol. 46. P. 660-669.
  13. Feldman S. Reliability and stability of policy positions: Evidence from a five-wave panel // Political Analysis. 1989. Vol. 1. P. 25-60.
  14. Zaller J. Political awareness, elite opinion leadership, and the mass survey response // Social Cognition. 1990. Vol. 8. P. 125-153.
  15. Krosnick J. Attitude importance and attitude change // Journal of Experi-mental Social Psychology. 1988. Vol. 24. P. 240-255.
  16. Lusk C., Judd C. Political expertise and structural mediators of candidate evaluations // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1988. Vol. 24. P. 105-126.
  17. Zaller J. Information, values and opinion // American Political Science Re-view. 1991. Vol. 85. P. 1215-1238.
  18. Niemi R., Westholm A. Issues, parties, and attitudinal stability: A com-parative study of Sweden and the United States // Electoral Studies. 1984. Vol. 3. P. 65-83.
  19. Converse P., Markus G. Plus ?a change… The new CPS panel study // Amer-ican Political Science Review. 1979. Vol. 73. P. 32-49.
  20. Schuman H., Presser S. Questions and answers in attitude surveys. New York: Wiley, 1981.
  21. Zaller J. Analysis of information items in the 1985 pilot study. Report to the NES Board of Overseers. Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan, 1986.
  22. Tourangeau R., Rasinski K. Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement // Psychological Bulletin. 1988. Vol. 103. P. 299-314.

Содержание выпуска

>> Содержание выпуска 2003. Том. 0. № 4.
>> Архив журнала



КОММЕНТАРИИ К ЭТОЙ СТРАНИЦЕ



rss подписаться на RSS ленту комментариев к этой странице
ОСТАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ
Комментарии. Всего [0]: