Research Assignment # 3
Conceptual Definitions and Hypotheses:
The dependent variable in this study is the partisanship of voters. A partisan voter
is one that is a consistent supporter of a certain party in elections, and in this study we
would be measuring the partisanship of voters in presidential elections. So the people
would be asked if they vote consistently for a certain party in presidential elections.
There are many things that can affect a person’s partisanship, but in this study we
are looking at religious variables, and have narrowed down to five characteristics of a
person that considers himself religious, that could explain why a certain he has partisan
ties towards a certain party. The five independent variables are denomination, religious
orthodoxy, religious commitment, race, and sexual orientation.
Religious orthodoxy is the main independent variable in this study. Religious
orthodoxy is generally regarded as to how conservative or liberal a person is in their view
of religion, no matter what denomination or sect they affiliate themselves with.
Orthodoxy can be more strictly viewed and measured by finding out a how strict a person
adheres to the tenets of the religion. The hypothesis is that the more conservative a person
is, then the more likely that person is likely to have partisan Republican ties.
Denomination is the rival independent variable in the research study.
Denomination, in this study, is defined as to which religious category people define
themselves. The hypothesis is that Protestants are more likely to be partisan Republican,
and Jews and Catholics are more likely to be partisan Democrats.
Religious commitment is another variable that could possibly affect a voter’s
partisanship. Religious commitment is how often a person participates in the services or
activities of their respective religions. The hypothesis is that as religious commitment
increases, a person is more likely to be partisan Republican.
Race is another variable that is being tested in this study. Race is measured as the
racial group in which a person defines himself. The hypothesis is that blacks are more
likely to be partisan Democrats and whites are more likely to be partisan Republicans.
The other races are not being intently studies in this study.
The last variable is sexual orientation. Sexual orientation is used in this study to
find out whether a person is heterosexual or homosexual, or bisexual. They hypothesis
for this variable is that heterosexuals are more likely to be partisan Republicans, and
people of other orientations are more likely to be partisan Democrat.
Operational Definitions:
The dependent variable for the study is the partisanship level of the respondent.
The question is ordinal and measures the level of partisanship. “In presidential elections,
how do you typically vote? 1. Always Republican, 2. Usually Republican, 3. Either
Way, 4. Usually Democrat, 5. Always Democrat.” I think the good thing about this
measure is that it has different levels and lots of voters are not strictly Republican or
Democrat, but lean towards those parties, so they should be counted as well. The bad
part of the measure is that it doesn’t cover Independent parties or anything that is not
Republican or Democrat.
Religious orthodoxy can be measured by an ordinal level question as well. The
question would be “How strict do you follow the moral and ethical standards mandated
by your religion? 1. Very strict, 2. Somewhat strict, 3. Somewhat loosely, or 4. Very
loosely.” From looking at other studies, orthodoxy is very hard to measure exactly. This
question is a very solid representative fact of a person’s orthodoxy though. To
completely find out a person orthodoxy, there would probably have to be a whole line of
questioning consisting of five or six questions.
Denomination can be measured as a nominal level question. The measure would
be, “What religious denomination are you? 1. Protestant, 2. Catholic, 3. Jew, or 4.
Other.” This question loses a lot of variability by just having the “other” option instead of
many choices. But, in this study we are mostly concerned with Protestants, Catholics,
and Jews; so it’s not too bad a thing I don’t think.
Religious commitment in this study is measure by another ordinal level question.
The measure is “How often do you participate in religious activities of your religion? 1.
Weekly, 2. Monthly, 3. Bi-Annually, 4. Annually, or 5. Less than once a year.” I think
that there is a lot of variability between people who participate at least once a year, so
that’s why I had four options that measured within a year. I think the weakness is that
there is not an option of “Daily.” I think there would be found even greater variation
within that option.
Race can be measured as a nominal level question. “What is your race? 1. White,
2. Black, 3. Other.” In this study we are mainly measuring the difference between whites
and blacks, and that’s why there are only three options. However, we are most likely
losing a lot of variability with these few options, and should include more categories.
Sexual orientation can also be measured with a simple nominal level question.
“What is your sexual orientation? 1. Heterosexual, or 2. Other.” I assume that all the
people who are not heterosexual will vote similarly, so there’s no need to have any more
categories except for those two. I think it is a good measure of orientation, even though
respondents who are not heterosexual might not like it because there is not a strictly
defined category that lists their orientation.
Detailed statement of the study:
This study will be done on the individual level because we are trying to find out
how individual people vote in presidential elections. The population to be studied would
be voting aged Americans across the country. I think this will best be done by exit polls
after a presidential election, and here is the rationale. People that are partisan are the
same people that vote in elections, typically. Usually, if people feel very strongly for a
party, they are not going to miss voting on Election Day. And the main point of this
study is to measure people that are partisan, so I think it works out very well. Exit
polling would be perfect for this study in my opinion. It would be very valid in
measuring exactly what I am trying to find out in the study.
The way that exit polls are done is by multi-stage cluster sampling. This is done
by randomly selecting cities across the country. Then, within those cities, randomly
picking out precincts to be studied. Then, within those precincts, randomly pick the
people to be subjects for the study. Although, since there are several levels of random
selection in this study, I think that there will still be a high level of reliability in the
subjects that are chosen. There would be at least 1000 subjects chosen for the study as
well, so I think that would do a lot to help the reliability of the study as well and to prove
its authenticity.
Assessment of the Measures:
Religious orthodoxy is definitely the worst measure in the study. As I mentioned
earlier, there really needs to be a whole line of questioning to adequately measure a
person’s orthodoxy. The more I look at orthodoxy, the more I see that it is a very
complicated issue, and that within different religions, orthodoxy might be defined as
different things. I think that not only is my measure very lacking in its attempt at
measuring orthodoxy, but all the measures I’ve seen in other studies are very lacking as
well. So, that is not a good thing when the weakest measure is the one that is supposed to
be measuring your main hypothesis.
I think the question measuring partisanship would be the best measure among all
of them. Initially I was just planning on asking whether a person was partisan towards
Republican, Democrat, or neither. Then I thought about there probably being a large
block of voters that were not exactly measured within those choices. They probably lean
significantly towards one side or the other, but have on occasion voted for the other party
if there was a particularly good candidate for the other side. So, I think this measure does
a really good job of measuring the level of partisanship within American voters.
Real-life Implications:
If my main hypothesis is shown to be accepted by the data I think it would change
the way a lot of people have been looking at religion in regards to how if effects the
partisanship of voters. Traditionally, people have thought that denomination has been the
most significant factor when thinking about religion, so most experts have treated that as
the most important factor when considering how they should run political campaigns and
how to change people’s vote choice. So, I think that this would change somewhat, how
campaigners seek to reach the religious population and how they can bring their
candidates more in-line, ideologically, with whatever population they are seeking office.
I believe that if the main hypothesis is shown to be true, then it will show the huge
differences within denomination, and that there are huge levels of variability within these
denominations. I think this type of thing can be seen in the Protestant Religious Right,
and how significantly their views and levels of partisanship differ from other groups
within the Protestant denomination.