Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The purpose of this study is threefold. First, the concept of proselytism as a communicative construct is explicated. Proselytism is an intentional asymmetric communication process during which a source presents a persuasive message in favor of the adoption of or change in religious ideology. Second, empirical data support the hypothesis that religious beliefs have 4 dimensions: descriptive, evaluative, prescriptive, and conviction strength. Lastly, the hypothesis that descriptive beliefs moderate the relation between manipulated proselytism and perceived proselytism is supported. Implications of including the moderating effect of perceptual filters on the use of manipulations in future and similar experiments is discussed.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The paper presents consequential refinements of the widely accepted finding that beliefs about the causes of income are associated with preferences for income redistribution.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Presenters will share findings pertaining to the epistemic beliefs and beliefs regarding to the nature of mathematics and science of preservice elementary teachers at a Research I institution.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Despite the explosion of synthesizing theoretical work on social movements published in the past decade, most social movements scholars acknowledge that we still know little about the role of public opinion vis-à-vis social movement phenomena. We attempt to address this gap in the social movements literature by examining the structure of beliefs about environmental problems held by members of the general public with varying relationships to the environmental movement. In particular, we investigate three moderators of belief consistency found to be significant within the belief systems literature: political or psychic involvement, educational attainment, and issue salience or centrality. In doing so, we utilize the concept of social movement “orbits” (i.e., self-reported relationship to a social movement) measured in public opinion polls with a question asking respondents to identify themselves as “activists,” “sympathetics,” “neutrals,” and “opponents” with respect to a movement—the environmental movement in this particular case.

We argue that self-identified orbit provides a reasonable measure of relationship to the environmental movement, and verify this by documenting the correlation between the orbit measure and self-reported measures of pro-environmental behaviors and beliefs. Having verified self-reported “activism” as a valid measure of involvement with the environmental movement, we then draw upon the belief systems literature (applied to social movements by Carol Mueller and colleagues two decades ago but largely neglected by social movements scholars since then) to predict that self-identified environmental activists will have more consistent beliefs regarding environmental problems than those only sympathetic, neutral, or opposed to the environmental movement.

The belief systems literature also suggests that educational attainment is a moderator of belief consistency, and we predict that the highly educated will have more consistent beliefs regarding environmental problems than those with lesser education. Finally, the belief systems literature suggests that an increase in issue salience leads to increased consistency in the belief systems of the mass public. Thus, we predict that the general public will have more consistent beliefs regarding environmental problems during a time of heightened issue salience for environmental problems than during a time of greatly reduced issue salience for environmental problems.

We test our hypotheses utilizing data from the Gallup Organization’s “Earth Day Polls” conducted in April 2000, March 2001, and March 2002, each employing nationally representative samples of approximately 1000 U.S. adults. Our primary dependent variable (individual belief consistency) is a composite measure created from a multi-item question that measures the extent to which respondents worry about nine environmental problems. Our independent variables are self-identified relationship with the environmental movement (the “orbit” item), educational level, and year of survey. We utilize several items included only in the April 2000 Earth Day poll to provide empirical verification of the orbit item as a measure of relationship to the environmental movement. That is, we examine the degree of correlation between self-identified orbit and several self-reported measures of pro-environmental behaviors and beliefs.

In multiple regressions predicting levels of individual belief consistency, we test the effects of orbit, educational attainment, and year, while controlling for political ideology, income, residence, sex, and age. Our year variable serves as a rough measure of three different socio-political contexts, across which the salience of environmental problems is expected to vary: (1) April 2000 (the 30th anniversary of Earth Day); (2) March 2001 (the rise of the anti-environmental George W. Bush administration); (3) March 2002 (the repercussions of September 11th and the “war on terrorism” supposedly crowd out environmental issues from the national political agenda).

We find that our orbit item is moderately correlated with several indices of pro-environmental behaviors and beliefs, thus verifying its use as a reasonable proxy for personal involvement in the environmental movement. In all of our multiple regression models predicting environmental problem belief consistency, the effect of the orbit item is significant and in the predicted direction.

Indeed, it is regularly the most powerful predictor of environmental problem belief consistency in all our models. Our measure of educational attainment fails to have a significant effect on belief consistency in almost all models. Finally, the environmental problem belief consistency of the general public decreased only slightly between 2000 and 2002, and this change only barely achieves statistical significance in our models. That is, environmental problem belief consistency appears to be quite robust across a period of relatively high salience for environmental issues (April 2000) to one of relatively low salience for environmental issues (March 2002).

In sum, the orbit item is the most robust indicator of environmental problem belief consistency of all of the relevant variables we examine. Furthermore, purported shifts in the larger social context (at least as measured here) do not significantly influence the effect of the orbit item on belief consistency. While our examination is limited to orbits of opinion concerning the environmental movement in this study, we argue that other scholars may use the orbit measure with other social movements. Thus, future research on identification and involvement with social movements need not be limited to intensive studies of known-groups of activists (as were those of Mueller, et al.), but can employ large-scale samples of the general public to examine differences in movement-related beliefs and behaviors among various self-identified orbits of the public. Such a methodological strategy will not only offer a nice complement to the typical practice of examining members of social movement organizations, but also provides a more efficient means of examining the complex links between social movements and public opinion.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Research into the public's perceptions of homosexual candidates has, in large part, been limited to examination of voter bias against homosexuals, which is then transferred, theoretically, to gay candidates. This paper takes an alternative approach to public reactions to gay candidates -- examining the potential of candidate homosexuality as an information shortcut for voters. Like research into gender and race, this study looks at the potential stereotypes voters hold of gay candidates, and how those assumptions affect their impressions and their choices in hypothetical elections. National experimental survey data demonstrate that voters assume gay male candidates are promoters of a gay rights agenda. Voters then choose between gay and straight candidates based on their own personal support for, or opposition to, gay issues.