Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T02:20:53.698Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Conceptualization and Measurement of Political Tolerance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 1982

James L. Gibson  and
Richard D. Bingham
James L. Gibson
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Richard D. Bingham
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Research on political tolerance has made substantial progress in recent years by improving the measures used to gauge public opinion. Much attention has been devoted to developing indicators that control for group affect. Controls for activity affect have not been pursued as vigorously. Indeed, much of the progress has been along the lines of specifying tolerance for unpopular political minorities rather than tolerance for unorthodox or threatening political activities. More generally, tolerance research has not been sensitive to the variety of contextual factors that determine citizen attitudes in civil-liberties disputes.

A new approach to measuring political tolerance is presented in this article. The measures developed in this approach disaggregate the traditional measures of tolerance (such as Stouffer's (1955) support for “a communist making a speech in your community”). In particular, scales measuring support for freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of political association are presented. As multiple-indicator measures posing conflicts among values, these scales are related to traditional tolerance measures. However, because they reflect the complexity and conflict associated with actual civil-liberties disputes, they will no doubt serve as better predictors of opinions and behaviors in actual disputes.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , September 1982 , pp. 603 - 620
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barnum, David G. (in press). Decision making in a constitutional democracy: public opinion, elite behavior, and public policy in the Skokie free speech controversy. Journal of Politics 44.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1970. Polyarchy: participation and opposition. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Davis, James A. 1975. Communism, conformity, cohorts, and categories: American tolerance in 1954 and 1972–73. American Journal of Sociology 81:491–513.10.1086/226105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jukam, Thomas O. 1979. Measurement of political tolerance and support for democratic liberties. Paper delivered at the 1979 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Kish, Leslie. 1965. Survey sampling. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Lawrence, David G. 1976. Procedural norms and tolerance: a reassessment. American Political Science Review 70:80–100.10.1017/S0003055400264009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClosky, Herbert. 1964. Consensus and ideology in American politics. American Political Science Review 58: 361–82.10.2307/1952868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClosky, Herbert, and Chong, Dennis. 1980. The learning of civil libertarian norms among elites and the mass public. Paper delivered at the 1980 Annual Meeting of the Western Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Muller, Edward N. 1979. Aggresive political participation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Muller, Edward N.; Personen, Pertti; and Jukam, Thomas O. 1980. Support for the freedom of assembly in western democracies. European Journal of Political Research 8:265–88.10.1111/j.1475-6765.1980.tb00574.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunn, Clyde Z.; Crockett, Harry J. Jr.; and Williams, J. Allen Jr. 1978. Tolerance for nonconformity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Prothro, James W. and Grigg, Charles M. 1960. Fundamental principles of democracy: bases of agreement and disagreement. Journal of Politics 22:276–94.10.2307/2127359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rummel, R. J. 1970. Applied factor analysis. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Seligson, Mitchell A., and Caspi, Dan. (in press). Arabs in Israel: political tolerance and ethnic conflict. Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences.Google Scholar
Stouffer, Samuel A. 1955. Communism, conformity and civil liberties. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Sullivan, John L.; Marcus, George E.; Piereson, James E.; and Feldman, Stanley. 1978–1979. The development of political tolerance: the impact of social class, personality and cognition. International Journal of Political Education 2:115–39.Google Scholar
Sullivan, John L.; Piereson, James; and Marcus, George E. 1979. A reconceptualization of political tolerance: illusory increases, 1950s-1970s, American Political Science Review 73:781–94.10.2307/1955404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, John L.; Marcus, George E.; Feldman, Stanley; and Piereson, James E. 1981. The sources of political tolerance: a multivariate analysis. American Political Science Review 75:92–106.10.2307/1962161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verba, Sidney, and Nie, Norman H. 1972. Participation in America: political democracy and social equality. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Walker, Thomas G. 1978. American politics and the Constitution. North Scituate, Mass.: Duxbury Press.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.