Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T14:31:29.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Regime Support in Canada: A Comment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2009

Michael M. Atkinson ,
William D. Coleman  and
Thomas J. Lewis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In their article, ‘Some Correlates of Regime Support in Canada’, (this Journal, VIII (1978), 199–216), Allan Kornberg, Harold D. Clarke and Lawrence LeDuc set out to describe ‘the distribution and foundations of public support for the political regime in Canada’ (p. 199). Using the 1974 National Election Study as their data base and regression analysis as their primary technique, they attempt to identify the correlates of regime support and come to grips with the problem of causal sequence.

Type
Notes and Comments
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , July 1980 , pp. 402 - 410
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

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

1 Citrin, Jack, McClosky, Herbert, Shanks, J. Merrill and Sniderman, Paul M., ‘Personal and Political Sources of Alienation’, British Journal of Political Science, V (1975), 1–31, pp. 4–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Shanks, Merrill and Citrin, Jack, ‘The Measurement of Political Alienation: Strategic and Methodological Issues’, a paper presented at a conference on political alienation, Iowa City, 01 1975.Google Scholar

3 See the appendix to their article for details on the construction of this variable.

4 With only four possible scores on the Liberal party identification variable a perfect correlation is only possible in the unlikely event of all scores on the dependent variable falling into four of the possible 101 categories of 0–100. In this instance responses were distributed across 27 of the possible 101 categories.

5 By squaring the initial correlation of ·42 we see that it accounts for only ·18 of the common variance whereas the square of ·61 is ·36. By using a statistically superior variable as an indicator of feelings toward the Liberal party the explained variance is doubled.

6 The standard deviation for the partisan object support variable is 12·4 whereas it is 22·4 for the dependent variable and varies between 22·2 and 27·3 among the component variables.

7 It should be noted, however, that were we to include these indicators the results would be almost identical since feelings toward party, candidate and leader are highly correlated.

8 For Liberals, the new mean is 39·9°, for Conservatives 39·1°, for New Democrats 39·1°, for Social Credit, 41·7° and for Independents 45·5°. In the case of Independents their index includes thermometer ratings of all parties.

9 Although this coefficient is statistically significant, the relationship now accounts for just over 1 per cent of the total variance.

10 The authors construct a Guttman scale of participation but do not report the exact component variables in the scale; nor do they report the coefficients of reproducibility or scalability.

11 Among independents, the low support scores are concentrated in those who never participate electorally. These may be strongly alienated individuals who have dropped out of the political system.

12 Québécois, Le Parti, Official Program of the Parli Québécois, 1978 edn (Montreal, 1978). pp. 8–9.Google Scholar

13 Easton, David, A Systems Analysis of Political Life (New York: John Wiley, 1965), Chap. 12.Google Scholar