1.1 Burawoy (2005)
Academic audience Extra-academic audience
Instrumental knowledge Professional Policy
Reflexive knowledge Critical Public
1.2 Hedström & Swedberg (1998)
Situational Mechanism macro-to-micro. Individual actor exposed to specific social situation affects
person in particular way.
Action-Formation Mechanism micro. Specific combination of individual desires, beliefs & action
opportunities specific action.
Transformational Mechanism micro-to-macro. Individuals interact mechanism individual actions
transformed into collective outcome – intended or unintended.
1.3 Merton
Paradigm/approach: social-scientific perspective. Cannot be empirically tested (e.g. Marxism).
Empirical generalisations: well-known associations in need of theoretical explanation.
Middle-range theories: middle ground between paradigms & empirical generalisations can be empirically
tested & provide interpretation/allow deducing hypotheses.
1.4 Sartori (1969)
Overlapping cleavages:
Neutralisation: if some cleavages are less significant than others. Deflected/domesticated.
Reinforcing: if all cleavages are felt equally intense. Intensified/exasperated.
1.5 Van der Brug (2003)
Internal political efficacy: ability to understand (and participate in) politics
External political efficacy: responsiveness of political system (or political actors/institutions)
Sociocultural model: immigration perceived threat for low income/education competition for
jobs & housing anti-immigration.
Protest vote model: lack of trust/connectedness/discontent with mainstream parties cynical
towards politics protest against system.
Political cynicism, (low) political efficacy
Policy model: vote for parties with similar ideas affect public policies (immigration, crime).
1.6 Van Ingen & Van der Meer (2016)
1. Schools of democracy: associations learning environments experience with dissimilar others
overarching identities & tolerance. Active members enhance civic skills & obtain higher levels of efficacy to
further engage in politics. Socialisation effects:
Active involvement: undertaking activities with fellow members. Contact with other members crucial.
Passive involvement no effect on likelihood of becoming politically involved.
Repeated interactions/prolonged involvement : become acquainted association. Socialisation starts
when individual becomes involved in conversations increases over time.
De-socialisation effect: citizens stop participating in associational life skills & contact no longer maintained
socialisation effects may erode. Not necessarily disappear completely.
2. Pools of democracy: members more politically engaged before joining involvement in associations partly
determined by political factors. Selection effects:
Selective entry: underlying resources (education/time/money) & personality traits
(pro-sociality/outgoing/assertive) stimulate citizens to undertake civic/political activities.
Selective exit: politically engaged citizens less likely to leave.
1
, 2. Lecture
Whose opinion is public opinion?:
Not everybody asked (sampling method) not equal chances not everybody represented.
Not everybody participates. even when people are invited, they would be less likely to participate.
Not only individuals, also social groups less likely. Social issue.
Not everybody answers. Not everyone answers everything. Especially political questions.
2.1 Bolsen, Druckman & Cook (2014)
Two motivations in opinion formation process:
1. Directional: motivated to arrive at particular conclusion consistent with party identification. More
value to consistent information than contradictory information. Seek information confirming existing
beliefs & view evidence consistent with prior opinions as stronger. Attitude conformation bias
(confirming prior beliefs), disconfirmation bias (dismiss inconsistent information) & prior attitude
effect.
(Partisan) Motivated reasoning: partisan effects operate as perceptual screen. Political
endorsement process information thoroughly finding reasons to believe/argue. Involves
cognitive effort to defend valued pre-commitments affirm existing opinion. Added
evidence may boost certainty & strength of opinion.
2. Accuracy: evaluate information ‘accurate’ belief or opinion. Consider available information,accurate’ belief or opinion. Consider available information,
alternative perspectives having to explain other’s opinions generates motivation to form accurate
opinion.
Cue theory: endorsements related to heuristic (shortcuts) follow endorsement & ignore
content. Use party endorsements to spend less cognitive effort when asked to evaluate
political information. Minimises costs involved in opinion formation.
Cross-partisan endorsement: policy supported by members from different parties. Signal intra-party
disagreement. Conflict in unified group. Undermines partisan identity & partisan motivated reasoning.
Polarised context: nearly all members of each party vote together.
Consensus bipartisan sponsorship: all members of both parties support policy. Increasing likelihood of partisan
motivated reasoning individuals focus on endorsement of their party.
2.2 De Koster, Achterberg & Ivanova (2016)
Knowledge/information-deficit model: educating people by providing information about issue overcome
lack of knowledge more positive attitudes towards this issue.
Framing: develop conceptualisation of issues/reorient thinking about them. Interpretation of everyday life.
Vary across different backgrounds groups re-interpret knowledge available using wider cultural
predispositions as frames. Same information does not mean same to everyone.
Frames: filter how information is processed. Internalised by individuals. Different social groups different
frames same information viewed & judged in different ways different responses distribution of
information will not necessarily lead to more support.
Punitiveness: more punitive likely to have less favourable opinion of suspended sentences.
Restorative justice: compensating victim for harm caused by offence.
Rehabilitating: de-criminalising offenders.
2.3 Laurison (2015)
Four mechanisms for political abstention of less educated:
Subjective/social competence/low social status: internal & external efficacy not feeling competent
enough/low feelings of entitlement. Subjective sense of place in the world feel less
entitled/expected to have political opinions & expressing those.
Satisficing effects: tired of survey, no longer interested in matching real opinions to survey options.
Pick answers that appear satisfactory to interviewer DK if offered, if not: neutral/plausible answer.
2
Academic audience Extra-academic audience
Instrumental knowledge Professional Policy
Reflexive knowledge Critical Public
1.2 Hedström & Swedberg (1998)
Situational Mechanism macro-to-micro. Individual actor exposed to specific social situation affects
person in particular way.
Action-Formation Mechanism micro. Specific combination of individual desires, beliefs & action
opportunities specific action.
Transformational Mechanism micro-to-macro. Individuals interact mechanism individual actions
transformed into collective outcome – intended or unintended.
1.3 Merton
Paradigm/approach: social-scientific perspective. Cannot be empirically tested (e.g. Marxism).
Empirical generalisations: well-known associations in need of theoretical explanation.
Middle-range theories: middle ground between paradigms & empirical generalisations can be empirically
tested & provide interpretation/allow deducing hypotheses.
1.4 Sartori (1969)
Overlapping cleavages:
Neutralisation: if some cleavages are less significant than others. Deflected/domesticated.
Reinforcing: if all cleavages are felt equally intense. Intensified/exasperated.
1.5 Van der Brug (2003)
Internal political efficacy: ability to understand (and participate in) politics
External political efficacy: responsiveness of political system (or political actors/institutions)
Sociocultural model: immigration perceived threat for low income/education competition for
jobs & housing anti-immigration.
Protest vote model: lack of trust/connectedness/discontent with mainstream parties cynical
towards politics protest against system.
Political cynicism, (low) political efficacy
Policy model: vote for parties with similar ideas affect public policies (immigration, crime).
1.6 Van Ingen & Van der Meer (2016)
1. Schools of democracy: associations learning environments experience with dissimilar others
overarching identities & tolerance. Active members enhance civic skills & obtain higher levels of efficacy to
further engage in politics. Socialisation effects:
Active involvement: undertaking activities with fellow members. Contact with other members crucial.
Passive involvement no effect on likelihood of becoming politically involved.
Repeated interactions/prolonged involvement : become acquainted association. Socialisation starts
when individual becomes involved in conversations increases over time.
De-socialisation effect: citizens stop participating in associational life skills & contact no longer maintained
socialisation effects may erode. Not necessarily disappear completely.
2. Pools of democracy: members more politically engaged before joining involvement in associations partly
determined by political factors. Selection effects:
Selective entry: underlying resources (education/time/money) & personality traits
(pro-sociality/outgoing/assertive) stimulate citizens to undertake civic/political activities.
Selective exit: politically engaged citizens less likely to leave.
1
, 2. Lecture
Whose opinion is public opinion?:
Not everybody asked (sampling method) not equal chances not everybody represented.
Not everybody participates. even when people are invited, they would be less likely to participate.
Not only individuals, also social groups less likely. Social issue.
Not everybody answers. Not everyone answers everything. Especially political questions.
2.1 Bolsen, Druckman & Cook (2014)
Two motivations in opinion formation process:
1. Directional: motivated to arrive at particular conclusion consistent with party identification. More
value to consistent information than contradictory information. Seek information confirming existing
beliefs & view evidence consistent with prior opinions as stronger. Attitude conformation bias
(confirming prior beliefs), disconfirmation bias (dismiss inconsistent information) & prior attitude
effect.
(Partisan) Motivated reasoning: partisan effects operate as perceptual screen. Political
endorsement process information thoroughly finding reasons to believe/argue. Involves
cognitive effort to defend valued pre-commitments affirm existing opinion. Added
evidence may boost certainty & strength of opinion.
2. Accuracy: evaluate information ‘accurate’ belief or opinion. Consider available information,accurate’ belief or opinion. Consider available information,
alternative perspectives having to explain other’s opinions generates motivation to form accurate
opinion.
Cue theory: endorsements related to heuristic (shortcuts) follow endorsement & ignore
content. Use party endorsements to spend less cognitive effort when asked to evaluate
political information. Minimises costs involved in opinion formation.
Cross-partisan endorsement: policy supported by members from different parties. Signal intra-party
disagreement. Conflict in unified group. Undermines partisan identity & partisan motivated reasoning.
Polarised context: nearly all members of each party vote together.
Consensus bipartisan sponsorship: all members of both parties support policy. Increasing likelihood of partisan
motivated reasoning individuals focus on endorsement of their party.
2.2 De Koster, Achterberg & Ivanova (2016)
Knowledge/information-deficit model: educating people by providing information about issue overcome
lack of knowledge more positive attitudes towards this issue.
Framing: develop conceptualisation of issues/reorient thinking about them. Interpretation of everyday life.
Vary across different backgrounds groups re-interpret knowledge available using wider cultural
predispositions as frames. Same information does not mean same to everyone.
Frames: filter how information is processed. Internalised by individuals. Different social groups different
frames same information viewed & judged in different ways different responses distribution of
information will not necessarily lead to more support.
Punitiveness: more punitive likely to have less favourable opinion of suspended sentences.
Restorative justice: compensating victim for harm caused by offence.
Rehabilitating: de-criminalising offenders.
2.3 Laurison (2015)
Four mechanisms for political abstention of less educated:
Subjective/social competence/low social status: internal & external efficacy not feeling competent
enough/low feelings of entitlement. Subjective sense of place in the world feel less
entitled/expected to have political opinions & expressing those.
Satisficing effects: tired of survey, no longer interested in matching real opinions to survey options.
Pick answers that appear satisfactory to interviewer DK if offered, if not: neutral/plausible answer.
2
