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.