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 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

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