Mind the Gap: Why Large Group Deficits in Political Knowledge Emerge—And What To Do About Them

Mind the Gap: Why Large Group Deficits in Political Knowledge Emerge—And What To Do About Them Large group differences in political knowledge raise strong concerns about lasting inequities in U.S. politics. I argue such gaps emerge when factual questions operate unevenly across diverse populations, thereby inflating actual knowledge differences between groups. I illustrate this by revisiting the large knowledge deficit often observed among Latinos relative to Whites. Using a survey with traditional factual questions (e.g., what office is held by John Roberts?) and new Latino-themed items (e.g., what office is held by Marco Rubio?), I show that Whites are more likely than Latinos to correctly answer many conventional questions due to item features that are unrelated to people’s level of knowledge (i.e., item bias). Latino-themed questions, however, do not display these extraneous characteristics. Consequently, Whites and Latinos have equal odds in correctly answering these latter items, provided they have the necessary knowledge level. I also show how such item quality differences matter in practical terms. Accordingly, I establish that using a scale of unbiased items reduces the Latino-White knowledge deficit from 31 to 8 %, with the latter gap more fully explained by individual differences in established correlates of political knowledge. I then show that uneven item performance distorts inferences about knowledge’s influence on mass opinion. I discuss the implications of these results for political knowledge’s conceptualization and measurement in an increasingly diverse U.S. polity. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Political Behavior Springer Journals

Mind the Gap: Why Large Group Deficits in Political Knowledge Emerge—And What To Do About Them

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/mind-the-gap-why-large-group-deficits-in-political-knowledge-emerge-7Ld74Uy6ae
Publisher
Springer US
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 by Springer Science+Business Media New York
Subject
Political Science and International Relations; Political Science; Sociology, general
ISSN
0190-9320
eISSN
1573-6687
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11109-014-9298-9
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Large group differences in political knowledge raise strong concerns about lasting inequities in U.S. politics. I argue such gaps emerge when factual questions operate unevenly across diverse populations, thereby inflating actual knowledge differences between groups. I illustrate this by revisiting the large knowledge deficit often observed among Latinos relative to Whites. Using a survey with traditional factual questions (e.g., what office is held by John Roberts?) and new Latino-themed items (e.g., what office is held by Marco Rubio?), I show that Whites are more likely than Latinos to correctly answer many conventional questions due to item features that are unrelated to people’s level of knowledge (i.e., item bias). Latino-themed questions, however, do not display these extraneous characteristics. Consequently, Whites and Latinos have equal odds in correctly answering these latter items, provided they have the necessary knowledge level. I also show how such item quality differences matter in practical terms. Accordingly, I establish that using a scale of unbiased items reduces the Latino-White knowledge deficit from 31 to 8 %, with the latter gap more fully explained by individual differences in established correlates of political knowledge. I then show that uneven item performance distorts inferences about knowledge’s influence on mass opinion. I discuss the implications of these results for political knowledge’s conceptualization and measurement in an increasingly diverse U.S. polity.

Journal

Political BehaviorSpringer Journals

Published: Jan 10, 2015

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve Freelancer

DeepDyve Pro

Price
FREE
$49/month

$360/year
Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed
Create lists to
organize your research
Export lists, citations
Read DeepDyve articles
Abstract access only
Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles
Print
20 pages/month
PDF Discount
20% off