Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

For more information, click here

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Political Research Quarterly
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Paddock, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Explaining State Variation in Interparty Ideological Differences

Joel Paddock

SOUTHWEST MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY

This article uses two measures of state party ideology—a 1994 survey of state party committee members and a content analysis of state party platforms between 1990 and 1996—to determine variation between states in interparty ideological differences. These interparty ideological differ ences are compared to David Mayhew's scale measuring the historical presence of traditional party organizations in the American states. As hy pothesized, there is a strong tendency for states with histories of tradi tional party organization to have less ideologically polarized parties than those states without such traditions. This association holds up when we control for state-level measures of education, income, mass polarization, electoral competition, and party control. State environments that histori cally encouraged or discouraged the formation of traditional party orga nizations help explain variation in patterns of party activism in the contemporary era.

Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 51, No. 3, 765-780 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/106591299805100310


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?