

























	User-Prepared Data File for Use with the ANES 1996 Time Series Study













































				Citation


File of User-Prepared Data for Use with the ANES 1996 Time Series Study, September 2013; data produced by individual researchers. Variable documentation and data and are the responsibility of the authors.














	Disclaimer regarding User-Prepared Data for Use with ANES Studies

The information in these files has been developed by researchers who are not affiliated with ANES.  They are being provided to the research community as a courtesy.  Any decisions, opinions, findings and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in these materials are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of ANES or its the funding organizations.  Questions about these materials should be directed to the authors and not ANES.  Please note that the ANES does not control and cannot guarantee the relevance or accuracy of these outside materials.



































All variable level documentation provided by the contributors to this file.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. var20130905_levconcep

Variable prepared by Paul Burton of Michigan State University and Dr. William Jacoby, professor of Political Science at Michigan State University. 





























































Documentation for variable var20130905_levconcep
------------------------------------------------

Levels of Conceptualization Coding Typology 

Ideologues - CODED AS "5" 
- "clearly perceived a fundamental liberal-conservative continuum" 
- Not necessarily a language distinction 
- Policy specific views on continuum with an explicit or implied understanding of the conflict along the continuum. 

Near Ideologues - CODED AS "4" 
- 3 types of respondents:
  1st type - Less dynamic and/or less relativistic use of liberal-conservative continuum 
	* View ideological terms as a candidate trait rather than a continuum (labeling). 
	* Identifies policy battles that are in line with the liberal-conservative continuum but does not use  
	  ideological language to describe the policy battles. 
	* Slightly unclear/inconsistent opinions. 
  2nd type - Use of ideological heuristics without supporting policy discussions. 
	* Use of "political swear words" without political context does not merit inclusion in this group 
  3rd type - Policy laden discussions with no use of ideological (abstract) labeling 

Group Benefits - CODED AS "3" 
- "Evaluate the political object in terms of their response to interests of visible groupings in the population" 
- Some will discuss competition between groups within the population. 
- Others will not identify the political competition and only discuss benefits for particular groups. 
- Respondents of this type may seem to recite slogans. 
- Respondents of this type may explicitly indicate that they are expressing views borrowed from their trusted opinion leaders. 
- They want "stuff" 

Nature of the Times - CODED AS "2" 
- Lack "any sense of structure of concepts that might be considered to border on ideology" 
- No discussion of group interest 
- Sparse issue content 
- Isolated and specific issue perceptions, however these opinions are not articulated with any sense of ideology. 
- "Moral cast to evaluations at this level" 
- War vs. peace were a large number of the responses in the original A.V. 

Lack of issue content - CODED AS "1" 
- No policy, issue, or ideological content 
- Focus on candidate traits 
- Pure partisan standings with no reasoning 
- Misinformation 


