IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v82y2001i3p494-505.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attitudinal Polarization and Trimodal Distributions: Measurement Problems and Theoretical Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Dennis J. Downey
  • Matt L. Huffman

Abstract

Objective. We present trimodality as a distributional pattern that is relevant to conceptual issues of attitudinal polarization but fits nowhere along the modality‐bimodality continuum. Methods. We use simulated univariate distributions and distributions taken from the 1994 General Social Survey to investigate how commonly used measures track (or fail to track) noteworthy shifts in the distributions. Results. The kurtosis and variance are largely insensitive to important distributional differences, most importantly that between bimodality and trimodality. Conclusions. We argue that the lack of attention to trimodality and the insensitivity of commonly used measures of polarization (kurtosis in particular) to that distributional pattern create a blind spot in our thinking about polarization and can lead to basic misinterpretations of extant patterns in public opinion data.

Suggested Citation

  • Dennis J. Downey & Matt L. Huffman, 2001. "Attitudinal Polarization and Trimodal Distributions: Measurement Problems and Theoretical Implications," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 82(3), pages 494-505, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:82:y:2001:i:3:p:494-505
    DOI: 10.1111/0038-4941.00038
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/0038-4941.00038
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/0038-4941.00038?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Beaton, Anthony A. & Funk, Daniel C. & Ridinger, Lynn & Jordan, Jeremy, 2011. "Sport involvement: A conceptual and empirical analysis," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 126-140, May.
    2. Ugur Ozdemir & Ali Ihsan Ozkes, 2014. "Measuring Public Preferential Polarization," Working Papers hal-00954497, HAL.
    3. Boris Sokolov, 2015. "ttitudinal Polarization Measurement Through (Ordered) Latent Class Analysis," HSE Working papers WP BRP 66/SOC/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    4. Rachel Sullivan, 2005. "The age pattern of first-birth rates among U.S. women: The bimodal 1990s," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 42(2), pages 259-273, May.
    5. Filiberto Toledano-Toledano & José Moral de la Rubia & Miriam Teresa Domínguez-Guedea & Laura A. Nabors & Blanca E. Barcelata-Eguiarte & Eduardo Rocha-Pérez & David Luna & Ahidée Leyva-López & Leonor , 2020. "Validity and Reliability of the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) for Family Caregivers of Children with Cancer," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-24, October.
    6. repec:pri:cpanda:wp24%20-%20evans is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Jae Lee, 2015. "Assessing Mass Opinion Polarization in the US Using Relative Distribution Method," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 124(2), pages 571-598, November.
    8. John H. Evans, 2002. "Have Americans' Attitudes Become More Polarized? an Update," Working Papers 40, Princeton University, School of Public and International Affairs, Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies..
    9. Francisco J. Sarabia-Sanchez & Maria J. Cerda-Bertomeu, 2017. "Place brand developers’ perceptions of brand identity, brand architecture and neutrality in place brand development," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 13(1), pages 51-64, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:82:y:2001:i:3:p:494-505. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.