Where Is the Schema? Going Beyond the “S” Word in Political Psychology

1991 American Political Science Review 163 citations

Abstract

I show that restrictive registration laws do not dissuade individuals with lower levels of education from voting any more than individuals with higher levels of education. This finding contradicts the result reported in Wolfinger and Rosenstone's classic analysis of turnout. I show that their conclusion was actually an artifact of the methodology they employed. Examining predicted probabilities generated by a nonlinear model such as probit or logit may produce spurious results when used to determine interactive effects between two independent variables. By respecifying the model of turnout to explicitly include terms to test interactive hypotheses and reanalyzing the data from the 1972 Current Population Survey (as well as data from the 1984 survey), I show that in fact, no such substantive interactive effect between registration laws and individuals' level of education exists at the micro level.

Keywords

TurnoutSchema (genetic algorithms)Spurious relationshipLogitPopulationProbit modelProbitEconometricsPsychologyVotingTest (biology)Social psychologyComputer sciencePoliticsPolitical scienceStatisticsSociologyMathematicsLawDemographyMachine learning

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

Publication Info

Year
1991
Type
article
Volume
85
Issue
4
Pages
1393-1405
Citations
163
Access
Closed

External Links

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

163
OpenAlex

Cite This

Jonathan Nagler (1991). Where Is the Schema? Going Beyond the “S” Word in Political Psychology. American Political Science Review , 85 (4) , 1393-1405. https://doi.org/10.2307/1963952

Identifiers

DOI
10.2307/1963952