UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Measuring the structure and stability of opinion in mass publics Tworzecki, Hubert 1989

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1989_A8 T86.pdf [ 3.51MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0302357.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0302357-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0302357-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0302357-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0302357-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0302357-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0302357-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0302357-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0302357.ris

Full Text

MEASURING THE STRUCTURE AND STABILITY OF OPINION IN MASS PUBLICS By HUBERT TWORZECKI B.A., The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1988 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of P o l i t i c a l Science) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH August, 198 9 (C) Hubert Tworzecki, COLUMBIA 1989 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of P o l i t i c a l Science The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date August 30, 1989  DE-6 (2788) ABSTRACT Th i s t h e s i s examines the s t r u c t u r e and s t a b i l i t y of p u b l i c o p i n i o n i n a sample of Canadian respondents. The data c o n s i s t of a three-wave panel of 1790 cases; the i n t e r v i e w s were conducted i n 1977, 1979 and 1980 as p a r t of the Social Change in Canada p r o j e c t of the I n s t i t u t e f o r B e h a v i o r a l Research of York U n i v e r s i t y . In the f i r s t p a r t of the t h e s i s v a r i o u s t h e o r e t i c a l and me t h o d o l o g i c a l i s s u e s p e r t i n e n t t o the study of mass p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e s are d i s c u s s e d and a r e s e a r c h s t r a t e g y i s proposed. In the second p a r t , f a c t o r a n a l y s i s i s used t o e x t r a c t s t r u c t u r a l i n f o r m a t i o n from the data. I t i s found t h a t the o p i n i o n s of E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g respondents can be d e s c r i b e d i n terms of f o u r fundamental dimensions which are given the t e n t a t i v e l a b e l s of "welfare l i b e r a l i s m , " " n o s t a l g i c conservatism," " p r o - b u s i n e s s , " and " p r o v i n c i a l r i g h t s . " For French-speaking respondents, two dimensions are found: "welfare l i b e r a l i s m " and " p r o t e c t i o n of French-Canadian s o c i e t y . " F i n a l l y , r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s i s performed on f a c t o r - b a s e d s c a l e s t o o b t a i n more i n f o r m a t i o n about the o p i n i o n s t r u c t u r e s . The c e n t r a l f i n d i n g i s t h a t i t i s indeed p o s s i b l e t o use mass survey data t o i d e n t i f y a simple s t r u c t u r e of p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s of the Canadian p u b l i c , and t o t i e t h i s s t r u c t u r e t o the p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l makeup of the country. i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i i LIST OF TABLES i v LIST OF FIGURES v ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF DATA SOURCES v i CHAPTER 1: MEASURING THE STRUCTURE OF PUBLIC OPINION . . . . 1 I. The B i v a r i a t e C o r r e l a t i o n s Method and the Problem of Measurement E r r o r 2 I I . M u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l Methods 5 CHAPTER 2: IDENTIFICATION OF THE FACTORS 11 I. The Data 11 I I . Examination of the O r i g i n a l V a r i a b l e s 12 I I I . C o n s t r u c t i o n of Index V a r i a b l e s 14 IV. F a c t o r E x t r a c t i o n : E n g l i s h Speakers 16 V. F a c t o r E x t r a c t i o n : French Speakers 26 CHAPTER 3: THE FACTORS IN CONTEXT 2 9 I. The Regression Model 29 I I . R e s u l t s 32 I I I . Summary and C o n c l u s i o n s 36 BIBLIOGRAPHY 39 APPENDIX A: VARIABLE CROSS-REFERENCE TABLES 43 APPENDIX B: MISCELLANEOUS TABLES 45 APPENDIX C: QUESTIONNAIRE 4 8 INDEX 53 i v LIST OF TABLES Table I: I n t e r - I s s u e C o r r e l a t i o n s , O r i g i n a l V a r i a b l e s . . . . 12 Table I I : The F i r s t P r i n c i p a l Component; E n g l i s h Speakers . . 17 Table I I I : Average Rotated Loadings; E n g l i s h Speakers . . . . 19 Table IV: The F i r s t P r i n c i p a l Component; French Speakers . . 25 Table V: Average Rotated Loadings; French Speakers 27 Table VI: 1977-81 Average Regression C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the Welfare Liberalism F a c t o r ; E n g l i s h Speakers 33 Table V I I : 1977-81 Average Regression C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the Nostalgic Conservatism F a c t o r ; E n g l i s h Speakers . . . . 34 Table V I I I : 1977-81 Average Regression C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the Pro-Business F a c t o r ; E n g l i s h Speakers 35 Table IX: 1977-81 Average Regression C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the P r o v i n c i a l Rights F a c t o r ; E n g l i s h Speakers 36 Table X: 1977-81 Average I n t e r - I s s u e C o r r e l a t i o n s , O r i g i n a l V a r i a b l e s , E n g l i s h - F r e n c h D i f f e r e n c e s 45 Table XI: T e s t - R e t e s t C o r r e l a t i o n s , O r i g i n a l V a r i a b l e s , E n g l i s h - F r e n c h D i f f e r e n c e s 46 Table X I I : Rotated F a c t o r Loadings (1977, 1979, 1981); E n g l i s h Speakers 47 LIST OF FIGURES F i g u r e 1: S t a b i l i t y of the F i r s t F a c t o r ("Welfare L i b e r a l i s m " ) ; E n g l i s h Speakers 20 F i g u r e 2: S t a b i l i t y of the Second F a c t o r ("Nostalgic Conservatism"); E n g l i s h Speakers 22 F i g u r e 3: S t a b i l i t y of the T h i r d F a c t o r ("Pro-Business"); E n g l i s h Speakers 23 F i g u r e 4 : S t a b i l i t y of the F o u r t h F a c t o r ( " P r o v i n c i a l R i g h t s " ) ; E n g l i s h Speakers 25 F i g u r e 5: S t a b i l i t y of the Second F a c t o r ( " P r o t e c t i o n of French-Canadian S o c i e t y " ) ; French Speakers 28 v i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF DATA SOURCES Thi s data was generated by the S o c i a l Change i n Canada P r o j e c t d i r e c t e d by Tom Atk i n s o n , Bernard B l i s h e n , M i c h a e l O r n s t e i n , and H. Mi c h a e l Stevenson of York U n i v e r s i t y , Toronto. The r e s e a r c h was supported by the S o c i a l Sciences and Humanities Research C o u n c i l of Canada (Grant # S75-0332). The data f i l e s were made a v a i l a b l e by the I n s t i t u t e f o r B e h a v i o r a l Research of York U n i v e r s i t y . N e i t h e r the P r i n c i p a l I n v e s t i g a t o r s nor the d i s s e m i n a t i n g a r c h i v e are r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s p r e s e n t e d here. 1 CHAPTER 1: MEASURING THE STRUCTURE OF PUBLIC OPINION Do most people t h i n k i d e o l o g i c a l l y ? Are the responses they g i v e t o a v a r i e t y of survey q u e s t i o n s governed by a few u n d e r l y i n g dimensions? The present t h e s i s attempts to shed some l i g h t on t h i s i s s u e by examining the s t r u c t u r e and s t a b i l i t y of o p i n i o n s i n a three-wave (1977, 1979, 1981) panel survey of Canadian respondents. I t argues t h a t most members of the mass p u b l i c t h i n k about p o l i t i c s i n a coherent manner, and t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o use survey data to i d e n t i f y with some confidence the major dimensions of o p i n i o n r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h i s coherence. T h i s argument does not r e q u i r e the p u b l i c t o t h i n k " i d e o l o g i c a l l y " i n the sense of p a t t e r n i n g t h e i r thoughts a f t e r some v a r i a n t of l i b e r a l i s m or conservatism. I t r e q u i r e s only t h a t a person's o p i n i o n on one i s s u e be r e l a t e d t o o p i n i o n s on one or more other i s s u e s i n some s t a b l e and non-random way. The e x p e c t a t i o n of f i n d i n g a w e l l - d e f i n e d s t r u c t u r e of o p i n i o n s i n most i n d i v i d u a l s i s founded on a widely known p s y c h o l o g i c a l phenomenon, namely, t h a t people attempt to reduce i n c o n s i s t e n c y i n t h e i r a t t i t u d e s and b e l i e f s because they f i n d i t uncomfortable ( F e s t i n g e r , 1957). But those who attempted to look f o r e m p i r i c a l evidence of b e l i e f coherence have found t h a t responses to o p i n i o n surveys are n o t o r i o u s l y i n c o n s i s t e n t and u n s t a b l e . In the ongoing debate over the s i g n i f i c a n c e of such f i n d i n g s one s i d e puts the blame on the a p p a r e n t l y "vague" minds of the respondents, the other blames the imperfect methodology of survey r e s e a r c h . The purpose of t h i s chapter i s t o o u t l i n e the most important arguments advanced i n t h i s debate, and t o propose 2 a r e s e a r c h s t r a t e g y t h a t takes i n t o account some of the v a l i d p o i n t s made by both s i d e s . 1 I. The B i v a r i a t e C o r r e l a t i o n s Method and the Problem of Measurement E r r o r The s i m p l e s t way of l o o k i n g f o r i d e o l o g i c a l t h i n k i n g i n mass p u b l i c s i n v o l v e s measuring the c o r r e l a t i o n s between responses to i n d i v i d u a l survey q u e s t i o n s . T h i s approach presupposes t h a t the s t r u c t u r e of o p i n i o n i n the sample i s s u f f i c i e n t l y w e l l - d e f i n e d to produce evidence of c o n s i s t e n c y i n aggregate data, and i s t h e r e f o r e best a p p l i e d when the r e s e a r c h e r has a s t r o n g reason t o b e l i e v e t h a t the o p i n i o n s of most i n d i v i d u a l s i n the sample are c o n t r o l l e d by the same, s i n g l e "master a t t i t u d e " such as the respondent's p o s i t i o n on the l i b e r a l - c o n s e r v a t i v e continuum. When P h i l i p E. Converse a p p l i e d t h i s s t r a t e g y t o the study of the American e l e c t o r a t e of the l a t e 1950s, he found t h a t c o r r e l a t i o n s between responses t o survey q u e s t i o n s were e x c e e d i n g l y low (Converse, 1964: 229). He took i n t o account the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t the b e l i e f systems of h i s respondents were too i d i o s y n c r a t i c t o produce h i g h c o r r e l a t i o n s between d i f f e r e n t i s s u e s , and measured the c o r r e l a t i o n s between responses to the same q u e s t i o n s g i v e n i n 1 Much of the l i t e r a t u r e c i t e d i n t h i s t h e s i s i s of m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r . However, a l o t of work d e a l i n g with the more s u b s t a n t i v e aspects of b e l i e f systems and t h e i r impact on n a t i o n a l p o l i t i c s has been done i n Canada and i n other c o u n t r i e s . For some p i o n e e r i n g work on the use of the l e f t - r i g h t dimension by s e l e c t groups of respondents see Laponce (1970, 1972, and 1981); f o r evidence of o p i n i o n s t r u c t u r e s i n the Canadian mass p u b l i c see E l k i n s (1974), Kay (1977) and Lambert (1986); f o r a r e f u t a t i o n of Converse's " n o n a t t i t u d e s " argument u s i n g mass Canadian data see E l k i n s (1982); and f i n a l l y , f o r an example of a f a c t o r - a n a l y t i c approach see the paper by Johnston (1988) upon which many elements of t h i s t h e s i s are based. 3 two year i n t e r v a l s . The magnitudes of these " t e s t - r e t e s t " c o r r e l a t i o n s were a l s o very low, and Converse had t o conclude t h a t " l a r g e p o r t i o n s of an e l e c t o r a t e do not have meaningful b e l i e f s , even on i s s u e s t h a t have formed the b a s i s f o r i n t e n s e p o l i t i c a l c o n t r o v e r s y among e l i t e s f o r s u b s t a n t i a l p e r i o d s of time" and t h a t "where any s i n g l e dimension i s concerned, very s u b s t a n t i a l p o r t i o n s of the p u b l i c simply do not belong on the dimension at a l l " (Converse, 1964: 245). Converse's c o n c l u s i o n s based on t e s t - r e t e s t c o r r e l a t i o n s q u i c k l y came under a t t a c k on m e t h o d o l o g i c a l grounds. I t was p o i n t e d out t h a t c o r r e l a t i o n s between two s e t s of o b s e r v a t i o n s c o u l d not be used to estimate a v a r i a b l e ' s temporal s t a b i l i t y u n l e s s one c o u l d be c e r t a i n t h a t the o b s e r v a t i o n s had p e r f e c t r e l i a b i l i t y , t h a t i s , t h a t they were completely f r e e of measurement e r r o r ( E r i k s o n , 1978: 151) . The r a t i o n a l e behind t h i s argument was simple: any number of f a c t o r s , ranging from q u e s t i o n context and wording to the s k i l l of the i n t e r v i e w e r and the p s y c h o l o g i c a l s t a t e of the respondent at the time of the i n t e r v i e w c o u l d i n t r o d u c e e r r o r i n t o the response. As a r e s u l t , the observed data would not be p e r f e c t l y c o r r e l a t e d with the t r u e , unmeasured a t t i t u d e s . And s i n c e any attempt t o c o r r e l a t e two e r r o r - l a d e n v a r i a b l e s with each other i s guaranteed to r e s u l t i n a s i g n i f i c a n t a t t e n u a t i o n of the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s , i t becomes necessary t o f i n d some way of e l i m i n a t i n g the e r r o r from the data. As Achen puts i t , " t o s s i n g raw a t t i t u d i n a l measures or survey responses i n t o r e g r e s s i o n e quations or c r o s s - t a b u l a t i o n s i s l i k e l y t o l e a d to s e n s i b l e 4 c o n c l u s i o n s only by chance. C o r r e c t i n g f o r measurement e r r o r i n independent v a r i a b l e s alone guarantees u s e f u l r e s u l t s " (Achen, 1982: 9). S e v e r a l methods of e r r o r - c o r r e c t i o n were proposed (Heise, 1969; Achen, 1975; Wiley and Wiley, 1970), but they r e q u i r e d c e r t a i n a r b i t r a r y assumptions to be made about the data. For example, the widely used Wiley-Wiley (1970) method i s based on the premise t h a t t e s t - r e t e s t data can be d e s c r i b e d as a simple Markovian c a u s a l c h a i n with a f i r s t - o r d e r a u t o r e g r e s s i v e f u n c t i o n and p u r e l y random e r r o r s whose v a r i a n c e remains constant from one time t o the next. S e v e r a l s c h o l a r s had used t h i s method on Converse's data and managed t o o b t a i n " c o r r e c t e d " c o e f f i c i e n t s on the order of 0.9 (see, f o r example, E r i k s o n , 1979). But as Achen (1982) p o i n t s out, one c o u l d o b t a i n a completely o p p o s i t e r e s u l t by making the assumption t h a t e r r o r s are s l i g h t l y c o r r e l a t e d over time. T h i s assumption i s not unreasonable because a good case can be made t h a t i n repeated i n t e r v i e w s people may respond i n the same s p e c i f i c way f o r reasons which have l i t t l e t o do with the s t a b i l i t y of t h e i r p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e s . 2 So i f one assumes t h a t the e r r o r s are somewhat c o r r e l a t e d , and t h a t t h i s c o r r e l a t i o n i s due t o a f i r s t - o r d e r a u t o r e g r e s s i v e f u n c t i o n , one can d e v i s e an e r r o r - c o r r e c t i n g model which, i f a p p l i e d to 2 For i n s t a n c e , the respondent may r e p e a t e d l y a v o i d making any "don't know" responses. Grant and P a t t e r s o n suggest t h a t "the procedure used to e l i c i t i n f o r m a t i o n from the respondent [probing] may teach him t h a t "don't know" responses are inadequate ... the norm of "knowing the answer" may be a p p l i c a b l e where, f o r example, the respondent views the i n t e r v i e w s i t u a t i o n as a t e s t of h i s i n t e l l i g e n c e " (Grant and P a t t e r s o n , 1975: 456-57). 5 Converse's data, would reduce the t e s t - r e t e s t c o e f f i c i e n t s from mid-0.40s t o mid-0.20s (Achen, 1982: 12). The u n f o r t u n a t e p a r t i s t h a t we j u s t do not know which e r r o r - c o r r e c t i n g model i s r i g h t . As Achen suggests, "the r a t h e r dreary c o n c l u s i o n f o l l o w s t h a t even i n the most h e a v i l y s t u d i e d case, no c o n f i d e n c e about the e r r o r v a r i a n c e s i s p o s s i b l e " (Achen, 1982: 13). I I . M u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l Methods The most obvious a l t e r n a t i v e t o t e s t - r e t e s t measures i s the study of the s t r u c t u r e of responses o b t a i n e d i n the same wave of a survey. But here too one f a c e s a number of t h e o r e t i c a l and m e t h o d o l o g i c a l problems. As has a l r e a d y been mentioned (see p. 2), Converse's study of i n t e r - i t e m c o r r e l a t i o n s was based on the assumption t h a t a l l respondents i n the sample shared a s i n g l e fundamental dimension of o p i n i o n : the l i b e r a l - c o n s e r v a t i v e continuum. T h i s i s c l e a r l y p r o b l e m a t i c because, as Jackson and Marcus p o i n t out, "to s e l e c t any one dimension, no matter how g e n e r a l l y s u b s c r i b e d to or how ' r e l e v a n t ' i t i s thought to be by the r e s e a r c h e r , w i l l enable only those who use t h i s p a r t i c u l a r dimension t o e s t a b l i s h a h i g h l e v e l of c o n s t r a i n t " (Jackson and Marcus, 1975: 94) . A number of s c h o l a r s have t h e r e f o r e suggested t h a t people's b e l i e f s are s t r u c t u r e d along m u l t i p l e dimensions. A d d i t i o n a l dimensions, d e a l i n g with such i s s u e s as environmental and consumer p r o t e c t i o n , p r i v a t e m o r a l i t y , the s t a t e and r e l i g i o n , and " a l t e r n a t i v e l i f e s t y l e s " have been p o s t u l a t e d t o c o - e x i s t with the t r a d i t i o n a l a t t i t u d i n a l s t r u c t u r e on government i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the economy, s o c i a l s e r v i c e s , and defense (Asher, 1984: 17) . Some have 6 a l s o put forward the hypothesis t h a t the composition of mass b e l i e f systems i s s u b j e c t t o gradual change, and t h a t new dimensions may be c r e a t e d i n response t o changing s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l c i r cumstances. Such changes are thought by some t o account f o r major realignments of p o l i t i c a l systems (Wayman and Stockton, 1983) . Of course the degree of o r g a n i z a t i o n of a t t i t u d e s along each dimension may too be s u b j e c t t o change, e s p e c i a l l y i f th e r e are s u b s t a n t i a l swings i n the degree of p o l i t i c i z a t i o n of the e l e c t o r a t e . Nie, Verba and P e t r o c i k , f o r i n s t a n c e , have found evidence ( d i s p u t e d by many on metho d o l o g i c a l grounds) of i n c r e a s i n g l e v e l of i d e o l o g i c a l c o n s t r a i n t i n the American mass p u b l i c of the l a t e 1960s (Nie, Verba, and P e t r o c i k , 1976: 122-25). As the above d i s c u s s i o n suggests, t h e r e are good t h e o r e t i c a l reasons f o r u s i n g one of the s e v e r a l s t a t i s t i c a l techniques t h a t attempt t o e x t r a c t m u l t i p l e u n d e r l y i n g dimensions from raw data. T h i s t h e s i s w i l l employ f a c t o r a n a l y s i s , which i s probably the best known and the most widely used m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l method. ( C l u s t e r a n a l y s i s and a v a r i e t y of methods which come under the common r u b r i c of m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l s c a l i n g [MDS] would be some of the other choices.) F a c t o r a n a l y s i s attempts t o d e s c r i b e a c o r r e l a t i o n (or covariance) matrix of a set of observed v a r i a b l e s i n terms of a much s m a l l e r set of h y p o t h e t i c a l v a r i a b l e s — the u n d e r l y i n g " f a c t o r s " — which are u s u a l l y computed as weighted l i n e a r combinations of observed v a r i a b l e s (Kim and M u e l l e r , 1978b: 37) . F a c t o r a n a l y s i s can be viewed as a k i n d of e r r o r - c o r r e c t i n g procedure based on the premise t h a t s i n c e no s i n g l e survey q u e s t i o n can be expected t o e l i c i t an e r r o r - f r e e response, i t i s necessary 7 to combine the responses to s e v e r a l s i m i l a r q u e s t i o n s to determine the u n d e r l y i n g a t t i t u d e . In a d d i t i o n , f a c t o r a n a l y s i s has one immense p r a c t i c a l advantage over the most obvious a l t e r n a t i v e ( s e t t i n g the more e x o t i c t echniques a s i d e ) , the b i v a r i a t e c o r r e l a t i o n s method. This advantage l i e s i n the f a c t t h a t the b i v a r i a t e method w i l l always attenuate the magnitudes of the c o e f f i c i e n t s and g i v e a m i s l e a d i n g p i c t u r e of low o p i n i o n c o n s t r a i n t . The reason f o r t h i s becomes apparent i f one keeps i n mind t h a t the v a r i a b l e s f o r which the c o r r e l a t i o n s are computed are measured with e r r o r and are only i m p e r f e c t l y c o r r e l a t e d with the respondent's p o s i t i o n on the u n d e r l y i n g f a c t o r (that i s , t h e i r c o r r e l a t i o n s with the f a c t o r are always l e s s than 1) . Now, f o l l o w i n g the standard p r i n c i p l e s of c a u s a l m o d e l l i n g (Asher, 1983), the c o r r e l a t i o n between two observed v a r i a b l e s can be thought of as a product of the c o r r e l a t i o n s between each observed v a r i a b l e and the u n d e r l y i n g f a c t o r . Simple a r i t h m e t i c t e l l s us t h a t i f two numbers which are l e s s than one are m u l t i p l i e d together, the f i n a l product w i l l be even lower. 3 F a c t o r a n a l y s i s w i l l be u t i l i z e d e x t e n s i v e l y throughout t h i s t h e s i s so i t i s a l s o important t o mention the procedure's l i m i t a t i o n s . F i r s t of a l l , l i k e any "mechanical" e s t i m a t i o n r o u t i n e i t cannot be expected to produce s e n s i b l e r e s u l t s from, say, data which i s incomplete or which excludes some key v a r i a b l e s (The o l d s a y i n g "garbage i n , garbage out" comes t o mind.) The 3 For more on t h i s argument see P e f f l e y and Hurwitz (1985) and Johnston (1988: 66-67). 8 nature of the f a c t o r s produced by the procedure i s t h e r e f o r e completely dependent on the composition of the i n p u t set of v a r i a b l e s , and the "meaning" of the f a c t o r s s hould be t r e a t e d with some c a u t i o n . Second, i n order t o use f a c t o r a n a l y s i s one must assume t h a t the o p i n i o n s t r u c t u r e s of a l l i n d i v i d u a l s i n the sample are so a l i k e t h a t they can be d e s c r i b e d by the same two or t h r e e u n d e r l y i n g dimensions. I t c o u l d be argued, however, t h a t people of d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l , c u l t u r a l , and e d u c a t i o n a l backgrounds have such v a s t l y d i f f e r e n t r e p e r t o i r e s of p o l i t i c a l concepts t h a t any measures of i d e o l o g i c a l c o n s t r a i n t based on the whole sample w i l l s y s t e m a t i c a l l y underestimate i t f o r the more p o l i t i c a l l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d respondents, and overestimate i t f o r the l e s s s o p h i s t i c a t e d ones (Sniderman et a l . , 1986: 426). Of course the only way to d e a l i n a t h e o r e t i c a l l y s a t i s f a c t o r y way with the problem of p o t e n t i a l l y i d i o s y n c r a t i c b e l i e f systems i s t o d e s c r i b e each case s e p a r a t e l y , which i s not very p r a c t i c a l i n s t u d i e s of the mass p u b l i c . Some r e s e a r c h e r s have attempted t o d e a l with t h i s problem by u s i n g such techniques as m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l s c a l i n g and c l u s t e r a n a l y s i s , t e s t i n g p a i r s of cases f o r s i m i l a r i t y and t r y i n g t o d i v i d e the sample i n t o s e v e r a l more or l e s s homogeneous groups (see, f o r example, an argument i n favour of t h i s approach i n Marcus and S u l l i v a n , 1974). S t i l l , at some p o i n t the r e s e a r c h e r must aggregate the data, and i t i s p r o b a b l y b e t t e r t o compute these aggregates f o r t h e o r e t i c a l l y meaningful s o c i a l groups than f o r products of a sample-dependent s t a t i s t i c a l procedure. 9 In t h i s study, the sample i s d i v i d e d i n t o E n g l i s h and French speakers. T h i s i s necessary because i n a d d i t i o n t o the c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s which may w e l l a f f e c t the a t t i t u d i n a l s t r u c t u r e , the two groups were served with d i f f e r e n t q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , and th e r e can never be any c e r t a i n t y t h a t a t r a n s l a t e d q u e s t i o n r e t a i n s i t s o r i g i n a l meaning. Of course, a g r e a t e r v a r i e t y of groups c o u l d have been used and a d i f f e r e n t f a c t o r s t r u c t u r e e s t i m a t e d f o r each one, but t h i s would have made any i n t e r - g r o u p comparisons q u i t e d i f f i c u l t . Instead, r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s of f a c t o r s c a l e s , with s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l i n d i c a t o r s expressed as dummy v a r i a b l e s , w i l l be used i n an attempt t o r e l a t e the i d e o l o g i c a l s t r u c t u r e of the sample t o the p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e s of the country. The procedure used t o e x t r a c t the f a c t o r s ( d e s c r i b e d i n d e t a i l i n the next chapter) a l s o r e q u i r e s some t h e o r e t i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n . The a n a l y s i s w i l l be performed not on the o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s but on s p e c i a l l y c o n s t r u c t e d indexes. The re a s o n i n g which prompted t h i s d e c i s i o n had to do with an o b s e r v a t i o n made by a number of s c h o l a r s t h a t a s i n g l e q u e s t i o n , no matter how c a r e f u l l y worded, can never be f r e e of ambiguity. No q u e s t i o n can be guaranteed t o mean the same t h i n g t o a l l respondents, or even t o the same respondent at d i f f e r e n t times. 4 4 Note, f o r i n s t a n c e , the problem of "temporal v a l i d i t y " of survey q u e s t i o n s : " I f the survey q u e s t i o n s h o l d s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t meanings f o r respondents at d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s i n time, they w i l l not tap e x a c t l y the same u n d e r l y i n g a t t i t u d e each time ... the s t a b i l i t y of the u n d e r l y i n g a t t i t u d e w i l l appear lower than i t r e a l l y i s because the co v a r i a n c e of the i n d i c a t o r s across time w i l l omit c o v a r i a n c e l o s t through the changed meaning of the i n d i c a t o r s " (Chubb, 1978: 417). 10 Th i s i s because q u e s t i o n s on complex matters of economic or s o c i a l p o l i c y are bound t o e l i c i t from the respondent s e v e r a l c o n f l i c t i n g " c o n s i d e r a t i o n s " ( Z a l l e r , 1984: 29). For example, a respondent may t h i n k of welfa r e r e c i p i e n t s as both "cheats" and needy c i t i z e n s . Which c o n s i d e r a t i o n p r e v a i l s depends on the context i n which the q u e s t i o n i s asked. P e r s o n a l experience, recent news s t o r i e s , and the s t r u c t u r e of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e may a l l have an impact. Much of t h i s context i s beyond the r e s e a r c h e r ' s c o n t r o l . One may, however, ask the respondent s e v e r a l q u e s t i o n s d e a l i n g with the same b a s i c i s s u e , but worded d i f f e r e n t l y and put i n d i f f e r e n t c o n t e x t s . These s e v e r a l q u e s t i o n s can then be combined i n t o a s i n g l e "index" — a composite v a r i a b l e on which f u r t h e r analyses can be performed. In a sense, t h e r e f o r e , the r e s e a r c h s t r a t e g y t h a t w i l l be f o l l o w e d i n Chapter 2 w i l l be t o perform a two-stage f a c t o r a n a l y s i s , the f i r s t stage b e i n g the aggr e g a t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l q u e s t i o n s i n t o indexes, and the second c o n s i s t i n g of l o o k i n g f o r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among the index v a r i a b l e s . 11 CHAPTER 2: IDENTIFICATION OF THE FACTORS I. The Data The analyses p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s t h e s i s are based on the Social Change in Canada (also known as the Quality of L i f e ) panel survey by the I n s t i t u t e f o r B e h a v i o u r a l Research of York U n i v e r s i t y . The i n t e r v i e w s were conducted i n 1977, 1979 and 1981, and the respondents were asked v i r t u a l l y the same q u e s t i o n s each time. (The r e l e v a n t e x c e r p t s from the 1981 E n g l i s h q u e s t i o n n a i r e are e n c l o s e d i n Appendix C.) As suggested i n the survey's t e c h n i c a l documentation, a weighing v a r i a b l e (WGT) was used t o produce a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample of 1790 respondents from the 1665 o r i g i n a l cases (Survey Research Centre, 1984: 22). Th i r t y - t w o q u e s t i o n s on p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l i s s u e s t h a t were giv e n i n a l l t h r e e waves of the survey were s e l e c t e d f o r a n a l y s i s . They are l i s t e d i n Appendix A.I. t o g e t h e r with t h e i r o r i g i n a l names and d e s c r i p t i o n s . In a d d i t i o n , s e v e r a l background i n f o r m a t i o n v a r i a b l e s were e x t r a c t e d from the o r i g i n a l data f i l e s . As shown i n Appendix C, most ques t i o n s were score d on f i v e or f o u r p o i n t a g r e e - d i s a g r e e s c a l e s . 5 5 The f o l l o w i n g coding m o d i f i c a t i o n s were performed: i . ) The q u e s t i o n on Quebec independence (see p. 50) was recoded i n t o two c a t e g o r i e s : responses 1, 2, 3 and 5 = support; 4 and 6 = oppose; i i . ) A l l "Depends" (as w e l l as "Don't Know" and "No Answer") responses were marked as m i s s i n g . 12 Table I: I n t e r - I s s u e C o r r e l a t i o n s , O r i g i n a l V a r i a b l e s . Issue Mean 1977 1979 1981 GDtCare/PLostT 0 . 67 0 . 64 0 . 6 6 0 . 7 0 GDtCare/NoSay 0 . 64 0 . 5 6 0 . 6 6 0 . 7 1 A t t n Q u e / B i l i n g u 0 . 5 3 0 . 5 1 0 . 5 4 0 . 5 4 AttnQue/FrSchl 0 . 5 1 0 . 4 6 0 . 5 6 0 . 5 1 B i l i n g u / F r S c h l 0 . 4 9 0 . 4 7 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 2 NoSay/PLostT 0 . 4 5 0 . 4 3 0 . 4 3 0 . 5 0 NoSay/PCompli 0 . 4 5 0 . 4 0 0 . 4 3 0 . 5 1 HelPoor/UnemplH 0 . 4 4 0 . 3 9 0 . 4 6 0 . 4 9 R p D i f f / T a x R i c h 0 . 4 1 0 . 3 8 0 . 4 3 0 . 4 2 CrimePr/HelPoor 0 . 4 0 0 . 4 1 0 . 4 2 0 . 3 7 GGJobs/TaxRich 0 . 3 9 0 . 3 9 0 . 4 1 0 . 3 8 CrimePr/DiscWom 0 . 3 9 0 . 3 1 0 . 4 4 0 . 4 2 E n v i r o / N a t i v e R 0 . 3 8 0 . 4 3 0 . 3 7 0 . 3 5 HelPoor/RpDiff 0 . 3 8 0 . 3 9 0 . 3 8 0 . 3 8 DiscWom/Enviro 0 . 3 8 0 . 3 1 0 . 4 7 0 . 3 6 GGJobs/RpDiff 0 . 3 7 0 . 3 6 0 . 3 9 0 . 3 7 DiscWom/NativeR 0 . 3 7 0 . 3 6 0 . 4 0 0 . 3 6 DiscWom/HelPoor 0 . 3 6 0 . 3 3 0 . 41 0 . 3 5 Range of Cases: 1 5 5 8 - 1 7 9 0 Notes: E n t r i e s are Gamma c o e f f i c i e n t s . The exact wording of the que s t i o n s can be found i n Appendix C. Ple a s e see Table X (p. 45) f o r E n g l i s h - F r e n c h d i f f e r e n c e s i n the magnitude of these c o r r e l a t i o n s . I I . Examination of the O r i g i n a l V a r i a b l e s The f i r s t s tep i n a n a l y z i n g the data was t o use the simple but time-honoured technique of b i v a r i a t e c o r r e l a t i o n s t o ac q u i r e some sense of the o v e r a l l l e v e l of i n t e r - i s s u e " c o n s t r a i n t " i n t h i s sample as compared t o , say, the sample used by Converse. Table I l i s t s Gamma c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r those p a i r s of que s t i o n s with an average c o r r e l a t i o n h i g h e r than 0 . 3 5 . (See a l s o Table X on p. 4 5 ; i t may be somewhat e a s i e r t o r e a d . ) . The f i g u r e s i n t h i s t a b l e may n o t seem t o o l o w , b u t one s h o u l d n o t e t h a t i n a 32 by 32 m a t r i x t h e r e a r e 496 n o n - r e d u n d a n t , o f f - d i a g o n a l e n t r i e s . I n o t h e r w o r d s , o n l y 18 o u t o f t h e p o s s i b l e 496 p a i r s o f r e s p o n s e s (3.6%) h a d c o r r e l a t i o n s h i g h e n o u g h t o w a r r a n t a t t e n t i o n . I t i s w o r t h n o t i n g , h o w e v e r , t h a t t h e s e v e n h i g h e s t e n t r i e s i n t h e t a b l e r e f e r t o o n l y t w o b a s i c k i n d s o f i s s u e s : p o l i t i c a l a l i e n a t i o n a n d F r e n c h - E n g l i s h c o n t r o v e r s i e s . The i m p l i c a t i o n o f t h i s , o f c o u r s e , i s t h a t i f t h e r e i s a more c o m p l e x s t r u c t u r e b u r i e d i n t h e f u l l 32 by 32 m a t r i x , i t w i l l n o t be p o s s i b l e t o d i s c o v e r i t w i t h o u t a r t i f i c i a l l y e n h a n c i n g t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f some v e r y l o w c o r r e l a t i o n s . One may o n l y hope t h a t e v e n t h o u g h t h e o v e r a l l l e v e l o f c o r r e l a t i o n s i s l o w , i t w i l l be p o s s i b l e t o d i s c o v e r p a t t e r n s among them. T e s t - r e t e s t c o r r e l a t i o n s do n o t l o o k any b e t t e r , s o t h e h y p o t h e s i s o f s t a b l e b u t h i g h l y i d i o s y n c r a t i c b e l i e f s y s t e m s c a n be r e j e c t e d ( s e e T a b l e X I on p. 4 6 ) . The a v e r a g e P e a r s o n ' s r f o r E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g r e s p o n d e n t s i s a b o u t 0 . 4 w h i c h , w i t h t h e u s e o f an e r r o r - c o r r e c t i o n t e c h n i q u e s u c h as W i l e y - W i l e y , c o u l d be i n f l a t e d t o o v e r 0 . 8 0 . B u t t h e r e i s l i t t l e p o i n t i n d o i n g so s i n c e , a s h a s b e e n a r g u e d i n t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r , t h e t e s t - r e t e s t t e c h n i q u e s u f f e r s f r o m t o o many t h e o r e t i c a l a n d m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m s . However, t h e r e d i d emerge one i n t e r e s t i n g f a c t . The r e l i a b i l i t y e s t i m a t e s p r o d u c e d by b o t h t h e W i l e y - W i l e y p r o c e d u r e a n d a r e l a t e d one p r o p o s e d by H e i s e h a d an a v e r a g e v a l u e o f 0 . 5 0 , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t 50% o f v a r i a n c e i n t h e d a t a was due t o random n o i s e . T h i s f i g u r e i s i n t e r e s t i n g b e c a u s e i n no f a c t o r a n a l y s i s 14 run on these data d i d the amount of " e x p l a i n e d v a r i a n c e " exceed 50%. 6 I I I . C o n s t r u c t i o n of Index V a r i a b l e s Appendix A. II l i s t s the index v a r i a b l e s t o g e t h e r with the o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s used to c r e a t e them. I attempted t o make the p r ocess of grouping v a r i a b l e s i n t o indexes somewhat l e s s a r b i t r a r y by running s e v e r a l f a c t o r analyses on the o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s . But these were of l i t t l e h e l p as t h e i r s o l u t i o n s were very u n s t a b l e from wave to wave. S t i l l , such poor r e s u l t s were not s u r p r i s i n g g i v e n the e x c e e d i n g l y low c o r r e l a t i o n s between most v a r i a b l e s ( t y p i c a l l y , a l l but about ten r c o r r e l a t i o n s out of the p o s s i b l e 496 would be below 0.30). T h i s seemed t o c o n f i r m the o p i n i o n expressed by s e v e r a l s c h o l a r s t h a t survey data s c o r e d on 5 or 4 p o i n t s c a l e s does not r e a l l y f u l f i l the requirements of f a c t o r a n a l y s i s (Kim and M u e l l e r , 1978a: 75). The second p r a c t i c a l argument i n favour of c o n s t r u c t i n g index v a r i a b l e s was p r o v i d e d by the skewed d i s t r i b u t i o n s of responses to the o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s . (These were e i t h e r " p r o / n e u t r a l " or " c o n / n e u t r a l , " with v i r t u a l l y no normal " p r o / n e u t r a l / c o n " d i s t r i b u t i o n s . ) The indexes were c r e a t e d by a simple a d d i t i v e procedure. F i r s t , those respondents with v a l i d answers to a l l items t h a t would 6 Note: In any f a c t o r a n a l y s i s i t i s p o s s i b l e to account f o r 100% of the v a r i a n c e by e x t r a c t i n g as many f a c t o r s as t h e r e are v a r i a b l e s . But t h i s makes l i t t l e sense s i n c e the whole o b j e c t i v e of the procedure i s to d e s c r i b e a l a r g e set of v a r i a b l e s i n terms of a s m a l l e r set of h y p o t h e t i c a l f a c t o r s . So i n most cases the number of f a c t o r s to be e x t r a c t e d i s l i m i t e d by some c r i t e r i o n , say, e i g e n v a l u e > 1 (meaning t h a t every e x t r a c t e d f a c t o r must account f o r more v a r i a n c e than a s i n g l e v a r i a b l e -- the sum of e i g e n v a l u e s b e i n g equal to the number of input v a r i a b l e s ) . 15 be i n c l u d e d i n the index would be s e l e c t e d and giv e n a score of zero on the newly c r e a t e d index v a r i a b l e . Then, they would be gi v e n a p o i n t f o r each "agree" and two p o i n t s f o r each " s t r o n g l y agree." S i m i l a r l y , a p o i n t would be deducted f o r each " d i s a g r e e " and two p o i n t s f o r " s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e . " N e u t r a l responses ("neither agree nor disagree") would be i g n o r e d and i n the r e s u l t i n g indexes they would be r e p r e s e n t e d by a score c l o s e t o zero. Note (Appendix A.II) t h a t the p o l a r i t i e s of some i n d i v i d u a l q u e s t i o n s are r e v e r s e d t o ensure t h a t a p o s i t i v e score on each index means support f o r a p a r t i c u l a r s et of p o l i c i e s or o p i n i o n s , and a n e g a t i v e score means o p p o s i t i o n . 7 The procedure d e s c r i b e d above p r e s e n t s the danger t h a t one or two v a r i a b l e s may dominate the index and d i s t o r t i t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . One sch o o l of thought recommends t h a t a l l v a r i a b l e s be s t a n d a r d i z e d (transformed t o gi v e a mean of zero and a standard d e v i a t i o n of one) be f o r e i n c l u s i o n i n an index. But others p o i n t out t h a t s t a n d a r d i z i n g the data d e s t r o y s much of the i n t e r e s t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n about i t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Nunnally, 1978). So when u s i n g the simple a d d i t i v e procedure i t i s wise t o check the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the r e s u l t i n g index v a r i a b l e s f o r s i g n s of 1 The f o l l o w i n g i s an SPSSX program segment used t o c r e a t e the index v a r i a b l e IMMIGR1: do i f range(IMDSELF1,1,5) and range(IMDTWRK1,1,5) . compute IMMIGR1=0 . i f (IMDSELF1=1) or (IMDSELF1=2) IMMIGR1=IMMIGR1-(3-IMDSELF1) . i f (IMDSELF1=4) or (IMDSELF1=5) IMMIGR1=IMMIGR1+(IMDSELF1-3) . i f (IMDTWRK1=1) or (IMDTWRK1=2) IMMIGR1=IMMIGR1-(3-IMDTWRK1) . i f (IMDTWRK1=4) or (IMDTWRK1=5) IMMIGR1=IMMIGR1+(IMDTWRK1-3) end i f 16 skewness. In the case of t h i s study the d i s t r i b u t i o n s were almost normal, a major improvement over the o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s . IV. F a c t o r E x t r a c t i o n : E n g l i s h Speakers A l l f a c t o r analyses were done with the SPSSX computer program u s i n g the " P r i n c i p a l Components" e x t r a c t i o n method. There i s some c o n t r o v e r s y as to whether p r i n c i p a l components i s a t r u e f a c t o r a n a l y t i c procedure because i t does not attempt t o estimate (by means of an i t e r a t i v e procedure) the h y p o t h e t i c a l v a r i a b l e s thought to account f o r the s t r u c t u r e i n the data. Rather, p r i n c i p a l components are weighted l i n e a r composites of the o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s . They are c r e a t e d by an a l g o r i t h m which f i r s t f i n d s t h a t combination of v a r i a b l e s which accounts f o r more v a r i a n c e i n the data than any other p o s s i b l e combination, and then repeats the procedure on the remaining v a r i a b l e s while e n s u r i n g t h a t the f a c t o r s remain orthogonal ( u n c o r r e l a t e d with one a n o t h e r ) . Besides b e i n g r e l a t i v e l y easy to understand, p r i n c i p a l components s o l u t i o n s a l s o tend to be q u i t e s t a b l e g i v e n minor v a r i a t i o n s i n the input data. T h i s cannot be s a i d f o r most computer implementations of i t e r a t i v e e x t r a c t i o n procedures as they have been known to generate d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t s from the same data (Wilkinson, 1988: 408-10). The f i r s t a n a l y s i s was run on the E n g l i s h speaking p a r t of the sample. The t o t a l number of E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g respondents was 1203, but the number of m i s s i n g responses was so h i g h t h a t had a l l cases with a m i s s i n g response on any s i n g l e v a r i a b l e been d e l e t e d from a n a l y s i s (the " l i s t w i s e " method), the sample would have been almost h a l v e d . Therefore, the " p a i r w i s e " method of m i s s i n g case d e l e t i o n was used to compute the c o e f f i c i e n t s i n the i n i t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n 17 matrix, t a k i n g advantage of the maximum number of v a l i d cases a v a i l a b l e f o r each p a i r of v a r i a b l e s . 8 Table I I : The F i r s t P r i n c i p a l Component; E n g l i s h Speakers Loadings on the P r i n c i p a l Component V a r i a b l e Mean 1 9 7 7 1 9 7 9 1 9 8 1 REDISTR 0 .7200 0 .7682 0. 7317 0. 6600 MINRGT 0 .6742 0 .6600 0. 6718 0. 6906 GSERV 0 .6536 0 .6824 0. 6625 0. 6158 UNWELF 0 .5922 0 .5342 0. 6124 0. 6301 UNIONS 0 .5056 0 . 4 7 6 2 0 . 4 8 0 0 0. 5604 FRCDN 0 . 3 0 6 9 0 . 2 3 1 1 0 . 2 4 5 0 0 . 4 4 4 7 FINV - 0 . 3 0 3 5 - 0 . 2 6 6 3 - 0 . 3 6 7 1 - 0 . 2 7 7 2 ALIEN 0 . 2 8 9 8 0 . 4 2 7 0 0 . 3 2 4 3 0 . 1 1 8 2 BUSN - 0 . 1 6 4 7 - 0 . 1 8 7 4 - 0 . 2 1 0 6 - 0 . 0 9 6 2 PWRFED - 0 . 1 3 0 6 - 0 . 2 2 4 4 - 0 . 1 7 7 7 0 . 0 1 0 3 QUENAT - 0 . 1 2 5 9 - 0 . 0 4 1 1 - 0 . 0 3 7 4 - 0 . 2 9 9 3 PWRPROV - 0 . 0 6 4 5 - 0 . 1 4 6 4 - 0 . 0 1 3 9 - 0 . 0 3 3 2 IMMIGR 0 . 0 4 3 7 0 . 0 2 1 2 - 0 . 0 0 5 1 0 . 1 1 5 1 Notes: E n t r i e s g r e a t e r than 0 . 5 are shown i n b o l d type. Please see Appendix A.II f o r composition of indexes. There were f i v e f a c t o r s with e i g e n v a l u e s g r e a t e r than one, but they t u r n e d out t o be d i f f i c u l t t o i n t e r p r e t . In an attempt t o a r r i v e at a b e t t e r s o l u t i o n , the number of f a c t o r s was r e s t r i c t e d to f o u r (Kim and Mue l l e r , 1978a: . 43 ) . Table II shows v a r i a b l e l o a d i n g s on the f i r s t p r i n c i p a l component f o r a l l t h r e e waves of the survey. As has been mentioned above, the f i r s t component e x p l a i n s the most v a r i a n c e i n the data ( i n t h i s case, the f i g u r e 8 The analyses were l a t e r repeated u s i n g the " l i s t w i s e " case d e l e t i o n method and the r e s u l t s were found t o be e s s e n t i a l l y the same. Of course cases with m i s s i n g v a l u e s c o u l d have been p l a c e d at the midpoint, but the number of cases at the midpoints of the index v a r i a b l e s was al r e a d y l a r g e . 18 was 18.5% f o r a l l waves) and t h e r e f o r e can be thought of as the master i d e a behind the i n d i v i d u a l responses. The data i n Table II s t r o n g l y suggest t h a t t h i s master idea i s about support or o p p o s i t i o n to "welfare l i b e r a l i s m . " I t i n c l u d e s o p i n i o n s on such i s s u e s as i n c r e a s e s of government spending on s o c i a l s e r v i c e s ( h e a l t h care, e d u c a t i o n , unemployment i n s u r a n c e ) , support f o r r e d i s t r i b u t i v e programs such as p r o g r e s s i v e t a x a t i o n , i n t e r e s t i n p r o t e c t i o n of the r i g h t s of women and n a t i v e people, and expansion of the power of lab o u r unions. The s i g n i f i c a n t l o a d i n g s do not change much from wave t o wave suggest i n g t h a t we may be d e a l i n g here with a t r u l y fundamental s t r u c t u r e and not j u s t a s t a t i s t i c a l a c c i d e n t . Before examining the remaining f a c t o r s the s o l u t i o n w i l l be r o t a t e d by means of the Varimax method. The purpose of r o t a t i o n i s t o make the f a c t o r matrix e a s i e r t o i n t e r p r e t by maximizing each v a r i a b l e ' s l o a d i n g on a s i n g l e f a c t o r and m i n i m i z i n g i t s l o a d i n g s on a l l the other f a c t o r s . The b a s i c procedure i s simple enough to be c a r r i e d out with a p i e c e of graph paper with the l o a d i n g s p l o t t e d on i t , and a sheet of t r a n s p a r e n t p l a s t i c on which the axes can be drawn and r o t a t e d over the p o i n t s . Of course when more than two f a c t o r s are i n v o l v e d , l e a v i n g the process to a computer i s l e s s time-consuming and undoubtedly more a c c u r a t e . V a r i o u s r o t a t i o n a l g o r i t h m s are a v a i l a b l e but Varimax, which maximizes the v a r i a n c e of the squared l o a d i n g s f o r each f a c t o r , seems t o enjoy the g r e a t e s t p o p u l a r i t y . 19 T a b l e I I I : Average Rotated Loadings; E n g l i s h Speakers Varimax Rotated Loadings V a r i a b l e Welfare Nostalgic Pro- P r o v i n c i a l Liberalism Conservatism Business Rights MINRGT 0.6819 0 . 0 2 6 3 - 0 . 0 0 4 2 - 0 . 2 2 2 8 GSERV 0.6580 - 0 . 2 0 5 9 0 . 0 9 0 3 - 0 . 2 4 5 0 REDISTR 0.6475 - 0 . 2 2 8 9 - 0 . 3 2 7 9 0 . 0 0 6 8 UNWELF 0.6242 0 . 1 4 0 1 - 0 . 0 7 0 1 0 . 1 9 3 7 UNIONS 0.5477 0 . 1 5 6 3 - 0 . 1 2 1 7 0 . 3 1 5 5 ALIEN 0 . 2 0 6 4 -0.7380 - 0 . 0 4 6 7 - 0 . 1 2 9 0 PWRFED - 0 . 0 4 8 1 0.5535 - 0 . 0 2 3 1 0 . 2 0 3 2 FRCDN 0 . 3 8 3 1 0.5508 0 . 1 4 2 7 - 0 . 2 1 8 7 IMMIGR 0 . 0 4 1 5 0.5459 - 0 . 0 4 6 3 - 0 . 1 0 8 8 BUSN 0 . 0 4 1 2 - 0 . 0 6 9 5 0.8010 0 . 1 0 9 6 FINV - 0 . 1 7 1 8 0 . 0 8 2 6 0.6442 - 0 . 0 8 5 3 PWRPROV 0 . 0 8 4 5 0 . 0 1 5 2 0 . 2 4 4 1 0.6279 QUENAT - 0 . 1 1 8 8 - 0 . 1 4 1 5 - 0 . 1 4 1 5 0.5248 E x p l a i n e d V a r i a n c e (%) 1 8 . 5 1 3 . 2 9 . 9 8 . 6 Notes: E n t r i e s with a b s o l u t e values g r e a t e r than 0 . 5 are shown i n b o l d type. P lease see Appendix A.II f o r composition of indexes. Table I I I l i s t s the 1 9 7 7 - 8 1 means of Var i m a x - r o t a t e d l o a d i n g s f o r a l l f o u r f a c t o r s . Do these means present a t r u e p i c t u r e ? I t c e r t a i n l y seems so i n the case of the f i r s t f a c t o r which appears to be e x a c t l y the same as the u n r o t a t e d f i r s t p r i n c i p a l component d e s c r i b e d p r e v i o u s l y as r e p r e s e n t i n g "welfare l i b e r a l i s m . " As F i g u r e 1 suggests, a l l the v a r i a b l e s with s i g n i f i c a n t l o a d i n g s are r e l a t e d t o the f i r s t f a c t o r i n a c o n s i s t e n t manner: wave-to-wave d i f f e r e n c e s appear q u i t e minor. 9 V a r i a b l e s with l e s s s i g n i f i c a n t l o a d i n g s (ALIEN, FINV) a l s o appear s t a b l e and seem t o f i t q u i t e w e l l i n t o the t h e o r e t i c a l framework of t h i s h y p o t h e t i c a l 9 P l e a s e note t h a t a l l i n f o r m a t i o n from the c h a r t s i s a l s o p r e s e n t e d i n a numerical format i n Table XII on p. 4 7 . 20 dimension. G e n e r a l l y speaking, one would expect someone who wants the government to do much more i n the area of s o c i a l s e r v i c e s (high l o a d i n g s on GSERV, REDISTR, UNWELF, etc.) to f e e l t h a t the p a r l i a m e n t i s out of touch or t h a t p o l i t i c i a n s do not care about o r d i n a r y people — hence the s m a l l but c o n s i s t e n t l y p o s i t i v e l o a d i n g on the a l i e n a t i o n v a r i a b l e . S i m i l a r l y , such a person would not be l i k e l y t o support government p o l i c i e s designed t o h e l p b i g c o r p o r a t i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y i f they are f o r e i g n . So a n e gative l o a d i n g on FINV i s not s u r p r i s i n g . And i f we are r e a l l y d e a l i n g here w i t h a l e f t - r i g h t dimension r o o t e d i n a t t i t u d e s t o economic p o l i c i e s , i t i s a l s o h a r d l y s u r p r i s i n g t o see the "union power" (UNIONS) v a r i a b l e p l a y such a prominent r o l e . Figure 1: S t a b i l i t y of the F i r s t F a c t o r ("Welfare L i b e r a l i s m " ) ; E n g l i s h Speakers O B • .7 O.E -0 .5 OA D.3 0.2 0.1 /s /s / s i /s-l / s l s 2 /si si /si N / s i ^ 1 ^ 1 /si /si /si /si, /si, /si, /si, /si, /si, /si Baa. /si /si ' s l /si / s l / s l / s l /si, /si / s l /si, /si / s l ^ 1 ^1 '^1 , s l / s l ^ 1 /si /s-l /s-l / s l '^1 /si /si /si, /si, /si /si / s l /si, /si, / y l /si, /si /si /si ft? <s4 ^ 1 '^1 / s l / s l / s l /si /si, / s l / s l /si /si —I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1— ALIE BUSN FINV FHCO GSER IhMI MINP. PWRF PWHP OUEN RED I 1771 1977 1979 V77X 19B1 — i r UNIO UNWE I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g , however, t h a t the f i r s t f a c t o r a l s o i n c o r p o r a t e s a t t i t u d e s towards the p r o t e c t i o n of m i n o r i t y r i g h t s (MINRGT and, to a l e s s e r extent, FRCDN). S e v e r a l separate analyses 21 (with d i f f e r e n t r o t a t i o n c r i t e r i a ) were run to see i f t h i s was not j u s t a s t a t i s t i c a l a c c i d e n t and the r e s u l t s seemed t o confirm, at l e a s t as f a r as the Social Change in Canada data was concerned, t h a t the r e l a t i o n s h i p was r e a l . One p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n i s t h a t the f i r s t f a c t o r r e p r e s e n t s , b r o a d l y d e f i n e d , a d e s i r e t o see the government use i t s l e g i s l a t i v e powers t o s o l v e many d i f f e r e n t kinds of s o c i a l problems. Besides, the m i n o r i t y r i g h t s i s s u e i s not j u s t about the p r o t e c t i o n of languages and c u l t u r e s , but a l s o about f a i r h i r i n g p r a c t i c e s and an e l i m i n a t i o n of other forms of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n which have a d i r e c t economic impact on the group i n q u e s t i o n . T h i s may mean s t r e t c h i n g t h i n g s somewhat, but i t c o u l d be argued t h a t the f i r s t f a c t o r i s a r a t h e r s o p h i s t i c a t e d v e r s i o n of l i b e r a l i s m complete not only with i t s "welfare s t a t e " aspects, but a l s o with i t s emphasis on p r o t e c t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l r i g h t s . F i g u r e 2 pr e s e n t s the l o a d i n g s on the second r o t a t e d f a c t o r which accounts f o r about 13% of the v a r i a n c e . I t appears from the l o a d i n g s t h a t t h i s f a c t o r i s a dimension of o p i n i o n having t o do with f e e l i n g s about the f e d e r a l government and about the p e r c e p t i o n of i n t e r e s t s t h a t the government r e p r e s e n t s . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e does not mention the Ottawa government by name, but i t uses words such as "Parliament" i n s t e a d of " L e g i s l a t u r e " (see p. 49) which had proba b l y prompted most respondents t o t h i n k about the f e d e r a l government when answering t h i s q u e s t i o n . S t i l l , a p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t some respondents expressed t h e i r f e e l i n g s about p r o v i n c i a l governments or about " b i g government" i n g e n e r a l cannot be di s c o u n t e d . Figure 2: S t a b i l i t y of the Second F a c t o r ("Nostalgic Conservatism")/ E n g l i s h Speakers 22 • .7 • . G -0.5 0.4 -0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0 .1 - , s £ - 0 . 3 - ' s $ 'J/ - O . B - 0 . 7 - O . B 7 /s4 /s4 I I ft! 0 ALIE BUSN FINV FRCO G5ER 11*11 MINR PWHF PVHP QUEN RED I 1 r UNIO UNWE V 7 \ 1977 IV^l 1979 V7A 19B1 Probably the most important p a i r of v a r i a b l e s l o a d i n g on t h i s f a c t o r was ALIEN and PWRFED. The a l i e n a t i o n index had a hi g h n e g a t i v e l o a d i n g and the "support f o r i n c r e a s e d power of f e d e r a l government" had a moderately h i g h p o s i t i v e l o a d i n g . (The l a t t e r , i n c i d e n t a l l y , s t r o n g l y s u g g e s t i n g t h a t t h i s f a c t o r indeed measures a t t i t u d e s about the f e d e r a l government.) Such an arrangement i s not s u r p r i s i n g : only someone who does not t h i n k t h a t the government i s remote and u n c a r i n g w i l l l i k e l y support the expansion of i t s powers. But a more complete p i c t u r e of what t h i s dimension r e p r e s e n t s emerges from l o o k i n g at the l o a d i n g s of two other v a r i a b l e s : support f o r government p o l i c i e s (eg. o f f i c i a l b i l i n g u a l i s m ) designed t o accommodate French-speaking m i n o r i t i e s o u t s i d e Quebec (FRCDN) and a g e n e r a l a t t i t u d e about immigration and immigrants (IMMIGR). The f a c t t h a t these two v a r i a b l e s are n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o the a l i e n a t i o n v a r i a b l e suggests t h a t the second f a c t o r may be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of a p a r t i c u l a r brand of c o n s e r v a t i s m 1 0 t h a t shows d i s d a i n f o r a government which i s p e r c e i v e d t o favour the French (remember, the survey was taken between 1977 and 1981) and which sponsors l a r g e - s c a l e immigration i n apparent d i s r e g a r d f o r the danger of i r r e v e r s i b l y a l t e r i n g the t r a d i t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e of Canadian s o c i e t y . But to see i f we are r e a l l y d e a l i n g here with a n o s t a l g i a f o r the " B r i t i s h c o n n e c t i o n " i t w i l l be necessary t o examine the s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e behind t h i s dimension, a t a s k which w i l l be undertaken i n the next chapter. Figure 3: S t a b i l i t y of the T h i r d F a c t o r ("Pro-Business"); E n g l i s h Speakers 0.9 a.e 0.7 0.6 -0.5 OA 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0 .1 - 0 . 2 - 0 . 3 -D .4 I mi w<, k '1 s ALIE BUSN FINV FRCD GSEP. IMMI MINP. PWRF PWRP QUEN RED I UNIO UNWE [7"71 1977 IVS] 1979 V7A 19B1 F i g u r e 3 shows l o a d i n g s on the t h i r d f a c t o r which accounts f o r about 9.5% of the v a r i a n c e . T h i s f a c t o r seems t o be about 1 0 See C h r i s t i a n and Campbell (1983: 76-78) f o r more on t h i s " n o s t a l g i c " aspect of Canadian conservatism. a t t i t u d e s towards " b i g b u s i n e s s , " e s p e c i a l l y of the f o r e i g n v a r i e t y . I t i s not s u r p r i s i n g t o see a t t i t u d e s f a v o u r i n g r e d i s t r i b u t i v e programs (REDISTR) b e i n g n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o support of bu s i n e s s i n t e r e s t s , but i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note t h a t those f a v o u r i n g such i n t e r e s t s tended ( i n l a t e 1970s) t o support the expansion of the powers of p r o v i n c i a l governments. Of course the q u e s t i o n of whether t h i s was a r e a c t i o n t o p a r t i c u l a r p o l i c i e s of the f e d e r a l government of the time or a more long-term phenomenon can be s e t t l e d only by s t u d y i n g more rec e n t survey data. And f i n a l l y , F i g u r e 4 shows l o a d i n g s on the f o u r t h and l a s t f a c t o r , a c c o u n t i n g f o r 8.5% of v a r i a n c e . The two v a r i a b l e s with the h i g h e s t l o a d i n g s are PWRPROV and QUENAT, which suggests t h a t t h i s dimension i s about " p r o v i n c i a l r i g h t s , " t h a t i s , about s u p p o r t i n g i n c r e a s e s i n the power of p r o v i n c i a l governments ( i n c l u d i n g Quebec's) at the expense of the f e d e r a l government. The problem, however, i s t h a t the l o a d i n g on a v a r i a b l e which s p e c i f i c a l l y measures the a t t i t u d e towards the f e d e r a l government (PWRFED) i s not u n i f o r m l y n e g a t i v e as one would expect i n a f a c t o r of t h i s s o r t . One p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s anomaly c o u l d w e l l be the f a c t t h a t i n a l l waves th e r e was a small p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between PWRPROV and PWRFED, i n d i c a t i v e , perhaps, of some g e n e r a l a t t i t u d e towards "power of government." 25 Figure 4: S t a b i l i t y of the Fourth F a c t o r R i g h t s " ) ; E n g l i s h Speakers ( " P r o v i n c i a l O.B • .7 0.6 D.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -• .1 - D . 2 - D . 3 - D . 4 ft! / s 4 n f N 7 ALIE BUSN FINV FHCO GSER IMII MINR PWRF PWRP OUEN RED I UNIO UNWE I771 1977 IVs] 1379 19B1 Table IV: The F i r s t P r i n c i p a l Component; French Speakers Loadings on the P r i n c i p a l Component V a r i a b l e Mean 1977 1979 1981 REDISTR 0 .6533 0 .6393 0. 5527 0. 7679 MINRGT 0 .6142 0 .5438 0. 6636 0. 6352 GSERV 0 .5902 0 .5607 0. 6466 0. 5635 UNWELF 0 . 4 6 5 2 0 . 3 9 8 4 0. 5858 0 . 4 1 1 3 FRCDN 0 . 4 0 0 4 0 . 3 3 8 6 0 . 3476 0. 5149 ALIEN 0 . 3 6 5 7 0 . 3 9 0 2 0 . 2 1 0 1 0 . 4967 UNIONS 0 . 3 6 3 5 0 . 2 9 6 4 0. 5347 0 . 2 5 9 5 PWRFED - 0 . 3455 -0 .5034 - 0 . 3707 - 0 . 1625 BUSN - 0 . 2 0 5 0 - 0 . 3 9 0 4 - 0 . 0681 - 0 . 1564 FINV - 0 . 1761 - 0 . 3 8 3 0 - 0 . 0822 - 0 . 0 6 3 3 IMMIGR - 0 . 1196 - 0 . 0 6 8 7 - 0 . 0881 - 0 . 2 0 2 1 QUENAT 0 . 1054 0 . 3 3 0 4 0 . 2 6 0 0 - 0 . 2 7 4 2 PWRPROV 0 . 0095 0 . 2 2 0 4 0 . 0117 - 0 . 2 0 3 4 Notes: E n t r i e s with a b s o l u t e v a l u e s g r e a t e r than 0 . 5 are shown i n b o l d type. Please see Appendix A.II f o r composition of indexes. 26 V. F a c t o r E x t r a c t i o n : French Speakers The second set of analyses was run on the French-speaking p a r t of the sample. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , due t o a s m a l l number of cases (N = 387 minus cases d e l e t e d due t o m i s s i n g data) the r e s u l t s were not c o n c l u s i v e as only the f i r s t two f a c t o r s were i n t e r p r e t a b l e and s t a b l e enough to warrant d i s c u s s i o n . Of course, i t i s important to remember t h a t we are d e a l i n g here with data i n which the b a s i c b i v a r i a t e c o r r e l a t i o n s are not too d i f f e r e n t from those which l e d Converse to conclude t h a t most people have no o p i n i o n s at a l l . In other words, i t may have been a s k i n g too much t o expect n i c e , s t a b l e f a c t o r s o l u t i o n s from s u b s t a n t i a l l y reduced samples. The l o a d i n g s on the f i r s t p r i n c i p a l component are shown i n Table IV and they do not seem to d i f f e r much from r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d from E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g respondents: the f i r s t component i s about a t t i t u d e s t o the government's r o l e as a p r o v i d e r of v a r i o u s c e n t r a l l y a d m i n i s t e r e d s e r v i c e s designed t o address v a r i o u s s o c i a l problems and i n e q u i t i e s . And, as b e f o r e , t h e r e are p o s i t i v e l o a d i n g s on the a l i e n a t i o n v a r i a b l e and on the "union power" index. Probably the only s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i s the f a c t t h a t the l o a d i n g s on the "power of f e d e r a l government" (PWRFED) v a r i a b l e are, at l e a s t i n the f i r s t two waves, s u b s t a n t i a l l y more negative than was the case with E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g respondents. The 1977-81 averages of Varimax-rotated l o a d i n g s on the f i r s t two f a c t o r s are shown i n Table V. The f i r s t f a c t o r , a c c o u n t i n g f o r about 17% of v a r i a n c e i s a cleaned-up v e r s i o n of the f i r s t p r i n c i p a l component i n the sense t h a t the minor l o a d i n g s have been s u b s t a n t i a l l y reduced by r o t a t i o n . I t appears t h a t , as was the 27 case with E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g Canadians, the most important dimension of o p i n i o n i n v o l v e s i s s u e s of p u b l i c s e c t o r spending and s o c i a l i n s u r a n c e . However, French-Canadians a l s o see promotion of b i l i n g u a l i s m and support of separate s c h o o l i n g as proper f u n c t i o n s of the government. Table V: Average Rotated Loadings; French Speakers Varimax Rotated Loadings Welfare French V a r i a b l e Liberalism Riqhts GSERV 0.7589 0.0177 MINRGT 0.7195 -0.0533 REDISTR 0.5396 -0.0634 QUENAT -0.1034 0.6700 PWRPROV -0.0743 0.6639 PWRFED -0.1772 -0.5665 FRCDN 0.4832 0.1924 UNWELF 0.3592 0.1603 ALIEN 0.1198 -0.1411 BUSN 0.0434 -0.1787 FINV 0.0340 -0.2200 IMMIGR 0.0520 -0.0284 UNIONS 0.1730 0.3618 E x p l a i n e d V a r i a n c e (%) 17.2 13.7 Notes: E n t r i e s with a b s o l u t e v a l u e s g r e a t e r than 0.5 are shown i n b o l d type. Please see Appendix A.II f o r composition of indexes. The second f a c t o r (14% of variance) i s unique t o the French-speaking p a r t of the sample. I t r e p r e s e n t s concerns about the p r o t e c t i o n of c u l t u r a l and l i n g u i s t i c i d e n t i t y of Quebec, and appears t o i n d i c a t e t h a t i n c r e a s i n g the power of the p r o v i n c i a l government at the expense of Ottawa i s the best way of doing i t . In a way, t h i s f a c t o r i s comparable t o the " p r o v i n c i a l r i g h t s " 28 f a c t o r i d e n t i f i e d f o r E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g respondents. The l o a d i n g s on the t h r e e most s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s (PWRPROV, PWRFED, and QUENAT) were extremely s t a b l e (see F i g u r e 5) from one wave to the next, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t o p i n i o n s on these q u e s t i o n s were very w e l l d e f i n e d . T h i s i s h a r d l y s u r p r i s i n g g i v e n t h a t the s t a t u s of Quebec v i s - a - v i s Ottawa has always been and continues t o be perhaps the most important and most f r e q u e n t l y debated i s s u e i n Canadian p o l i t i c s . S t i l l , i t would be i n t e r e s t i n g t o see whether any changes i n the o p i n i o n s t r u c t u r e s of French-Canadians have taken p l a c e s i n c e the apparent realignment of f e d e r a l v o t i n g p a t t e r n s i n 1984. A new long-term panel survey would be most u s e f u l . Figure 5: S t a b i l i t y of the Second F a c t o r ( " P r o t e c t i o n of French-Canadian S o c i e t y " ) ; French Speakers O B 0.7 O.B 0.5 • . 4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0 .1 - 0 . 2 - 0 . 3 - 0 . 4 - 0 . 5 - O . B - D . 7 1 J / S 4 '4 '4 m — i — i — i — i — ALIE BUSN FINV FRCO G5ER '4 <4 'A IMrfl MINR PWRF PWRP OUEN RED I UNIO UNWE 1771 1977 IXXI 1979 X777X 1981 29 CHAPTER 3: THE FACTORS IN CONTEXT I. The Regression Model I t was shown i n Chapter 2 t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o e x t r a c t from the Social Change in Canada data s e v e r a l s t a b l e and t h e o r e t i c a l l y meaningful f a c t o r s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the "master i d e a s " which govern the respondents' o p i n i o n s on a wide v a r i e t y of i s s u e s . However, i n order t o understand the nature of these f a c t o r s more f u l l y , i t i s necessary to f i n d out which s o c i a l groups tend to o r g a n i z e t h e i r o p i n i o n s along which f a c t o r . An a d d i t i o n a l b e n e f i t of doing so w i l l be t h a t i t w i l l a l l o w us t o determine i f the f a c t o r s are indeed meaningful i n the s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l contexts r e p r e s e n t e d i n the survey. What kinds of contexts need t o be examined? F i r s t of a l l t h e r e i s the geographic aspect of Canadian p o l i t i c s . I t has been suggested, f o r i n s t a n c e , t h a t d i f f e r e n t p r e f e r e n c e orders f o r p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s are used i n d i f f e r e n t r e g i o n s of t h i s country. In the East, people are l i k e l y t o order the p a r t i e s as f o l l o w s : NDP-LIB-PC (-SC); i n the West, the order becomes NDP-PC-LIB(-SC) ( E l k i n s , 1 9 8 0 : 2 3 0 - 3 7 ) . One p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n may be t h a t the nature of dimensions used to e v a l u a t e the p a r t i e s v a r i e s from r e g i o n t o r e g i o n . When one c o n s i d e r s only the t h r e e major p a r t i e s , i t q u i c k l y becomes apparent t h a t the "Western" order (NDP-PC-LIB) simply cannot be d e r i v e d from the t r a d i t i o n a l " l e f t - r i g h t " ranking of the p a r t i e s (NDP-LIB-PC); another p r e f e r e n c e order must be at work. 1 1 Johnston (1987) argues t h a t t h i s second order i s 1 1 For more on i n t r a n s i t i v e p r e f e r e n c e rankings and other consequences of m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l i t y of o p i n i o n s see Brams ( 1 9 7 6 ) . 30 r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the E n g l i s h - F r e n c h or C a t h o l i c - P r o t e s t a n t cleavage i n Canadian p o l i t i c s , and t h a t i t i s i n t i m a t e l y r e l a t e d to the country's geography: i t s importance i n c r e a s e s at the expense of the l e f t - r i g h t ( c l ass) dimension as one moves east and the number of C a t h o l i c s grows. So t h e r e i s no q u e s t i o n t h a t we should a l s o examine the r o l e p l a y e d by r e l i g i o n i n determining the s t r u c t u r e of o p i n i o n . Even though the sample i s d i v i d e d i n t o E n g l i s h and French speakers, which takes care of the most important c u l t u r a l and r e l i g i o u s d i v i d e i n Canadian s o c i e t y , i t may s t i l l be u s e f u l to examine the C a t h o l i c / n o n - C a t h o l i c d i f f e r e n c e s among E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g respondents simply because r e l i g i o n has t r a d i t i o n a l l y p l a y e d such a major r o l e i n the shaping of the Canadian p o l i t i c a l system. Then t h e r e are the t r a d i t i o n a l socioeconomic s t a t u s v a r i a b l e s t o be taken i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n . Income (top 25% earners vs. the r e s t ) , age (over 55), u n i v e r s i t y education, and union membership can a l l be expected t o a f f e c t p o l i t i c a l a t t i t u d e s . And f i n a l l y , i n order to l i n k the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e d e s c r i b e d by a l l these v a r i a b l e s t o p o l i t i c a l behaviour, we w i l l examine how p a r t y p r e f e r e n c e i s r e f l e c t e d i n the f a c t o r s c o r e s . A l l the s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l groups d e s c r i b e d above w i l l be r e p r e s e n t e d by dichotomous (dummy) independent v a r i a b l e s i n an equation i n which the dependent v a r i a b l e w i l l be the score on a f a c t o r - b a s e d s c a l e . The s c a l e s were computed by a weighted a d d i t i v e procedure i n which scores on index v a r i a b l e s w i t h the most s i g n i f i c a n t l o a d i n g s on a g i v e n f a c t o r ( f o r E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g respondents these are shown i n b o l d type i n Table I I I on page 19) 31 are m u l t i p l i e d by the v a r i a b l e s ' l o a d i n g s on t h a t f a c t o r and added t o g e t h e r . The s c a l e s were computed f o r each wave of the survey s e p a r a t e l y u s i n g f a c t o r l o a d i n g s o b t a i n e d i n t h a t wave and not the averages shown i n Table I I I . 1 2 The a c t u a l e s t i m a t i o n technique w i l l be O r d i n a r y Least Squares r e g r e s s i o n . The model to be estimated i s as f o l l o w s : F S c a l e = b 0 + bjMaritimes + b 2 P r a i r i e s + b 3BC + b„Catholic + b 5Union Member + b 6 U n i v e r s i t y + b7NDP + b 8PC + bjjAge > 55 + b 1 0High Income + u Note t h a t a r e g r e s s i o n equation of t h i s type i s r e a l l y a d i s g u i s e d a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e model. The i n t e r c e p t (b0) r e p r e s e n t s the mean f a c t o r score f o r the r e f e r e n c e group which i n t h i s case c o n s i s t s of n o n - C a t h o l i c , low-income, non-union, under-55, n o n - u n i v e r s i t y -educated L i b e r a l s who r e s i d e i n O n t a r i o (avg. N=39). The other 1 2 T h i s i s the SPSSX program segment used t o c r e a t e the s c a l e f o r the second f a c t o r e x t r a c t e d i n the 1977 wave: compute f2indwl = 0 i f not sysmis(ALIEN1) f2indwl = f2indwl - (0.670 * ALIENl) i f not sysmis(FRCDN1) f2indwl = f2indwl + (0.652 * FRCDNl) i f not sysmis(IMMIGR1) f2indwl = f2indwl + (0.573 * IMMIGR1) i f not sysmis(PWRFED1) f2indwl = f2indwl + (0.352 * PWRFED1) A good d i s c u s s i o n of v a r i o u s techniques f o r c r e a t i n g f a c t o r - b a s e d s c a l e s can be found i n Kim and M u e l l e r (1978a: 60-73). 32 c o e f f i c i e n t s r e p r e s e n t the d i f f e r e n c e s i n mean scores f o r the v a r i o u s groups, and the model i s a d d i t i v e i n t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e to combine two or more c o e f f i c i e n t s t o o b t a i n a r e s u l t f o r , say, u n i v e r s i t y - e d u c a t e d r e s i d e n t s of BC (Mean score = b 0 + b 3 + b6) . I t i s important to remember, however, t h a t a model of t h i s type g r e a t l y s i m p l i f i e s the r e l a t i o n s h i p s i t d e s c r i b e s . The assumption of simple a d d i t i v i t y means t h a t t h e r e i s no allowance f o r any p o s s i b l e i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s among the v a r i a b l e s : the f a c t t h a t someone i s a C a t h o l i c i s supposed to a f f e c t the score i n e x a c t l y the same way r e g a r d l e s s of t h a t person's l e v e l of e d u c a t i o n or p l a c e of r e s i d e n c e . 1 3 I I . R e s u l t s The analyses were performed on E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g respondents whose p l a c e of r e s i d e n c e was recorded i n the data f i l e (N = 761) . 1 4 Table VI shows the three-wave averages of the c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the f i r s t f a c t o r t o g e t h e r with t h e i r s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l s . (A T-Ratio with an a b s o l u t e value of two or more means t h a t the c o e f f i c i e n t i s s i g n i f i c a n t at approximately 95% l e v e l ; these c o e f f i c i e n t s are shown i n b o l d type. Note t h a t the t a b l e s do not show the values of R2 f o r the equations because the estimates are f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n group means r a t h e r than f o r l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p s . ) I t was argued i n the p r e v i o u s chapter (see p. 20) t h a t the f i r s t f a c t o r 1 3 For a d i s c u s s i o n of the s t r e n g t h s and weaknesses of the v a r i o u s dummy v a r i a b l e r e g r e s s i o n models see Chapter 13 i n G u j a r a t i (1978) . 1 4 U n f o r t u n a t e l y , due to the small number of cases i t was not p o s s i b l e t o o b t a i n meaningful r e g r e s s i o n r e s u l t s f o r French-speaking respondents even though a g r e a t l y s i m p l i f i e d model (socioeconomic v a r i a b l e s only) was used f o r the e s t i m a t i o n . 33 r e p r e s e n t s a t t i t u d e s about w e l f a r e l i b e r a l i s m . The numbers i n the t a b l e make t h i s c l a i m q u i t e c r e d i b l e : NDP s u p p o r t e r s are the group most l i k e l y t o favour the expansion of the w e l f a r e system. Union members are the second most l i k e l y group to h o l d t h i s view; they are f o l l o w e d by r e s i d e n t s of Canada's p o o r e s t r e g i o n , the M a r i t i m e s . Not s u r p r i s i n g l y , people with h i g h incomes and s u p p o r t e r s of the C o n s e r v a t i v e p a r t y are not l i k e l y t o support such p o l i c i e s . Table V I : 1977-81 Average Regression C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the Welfare Liberalism F a c t o r ; E n g l i s h Speakers Category B T-Ratio Maritimes 1. 037 2.654 P r a i r i e s 0. 321 0. 951 BC 0. 233 0.560 C a t h o l i c 0. 538 1. 665 Union Member 1. 466 4.060 U n i v e r s i t y -0. 568 -1.814 NDP 1. 944 4.568 PC -0. 516 -1.831 Age > 55 0. 069 0.226 High Income -1. 004 -3.272 (Constant) 2. 393 8.160 Note: E n t r i e s s i g n i f i c a n t at approx. 95% l e v e l are shown i n b o l d type. The second f a c t o r was i d e n t i f i e d i n the p r e v i o u s chapter as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the " n o s t a l g i c " aspect of Canadian conservatism d e f i n e d by C h r i s t i a n and Campbell as a p r e f e r e n c e f o r "a s o c i a l order which p r e v a i l e d , or was imagined to have p r e v a i l e d , i n the p a s t , " the key element of which was the f e d e r a l government's support of the " B r i t i s h c o n n e c t i o n " ( C h r i s t i a n and Campbell, 1983: 76). What about the evidence? As can be seen i n Table VII, s u p p o r t e r s of the C o n s e r v a t i v e p a r t y are l i k e l y t o h o l d such a view 34 while C a t h o l i c s are not. (The CATHOLIC v a r i a b l e i s a good proxy f o r support of the L i b e r a l p a r t y and f o r a more accommodating a t t i t u d e towards French-Canadians.) I n t e r e s t i n g l y , s u p p o r t e r s of the NDP seem to share t h i s view as w e l l , which squares q u i t e n i c e l y with the th e o r y t h a t e t h n o - l i n g u i s t i c dimension of Canadian p o l i t i c s tends t o scramble the simple l e f t - r i g h t p r e f e r e n c e o r d e r i n g f o r p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s . However, i t i s the e d u c a t i o n a l l e v e l which has by f a r the s t r o n g e s t impact on an i n d i v i d u a l ' s score on t h i s f a c t o r , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t more educated people are l e s s l i k e l y t o d e r i v e t h e i r p o l i t i c a l o p i n i o n s from an a t t i t u d e about a p a r t i c u l a r e t h n o - c u l t u r a l group (see Sniderman et a l . f o r more on t h i s argument). Table V I I : 1977-81 Average Regression C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the Nostalgic Conservatism F a c t o r ; E n g l i s h Speakers Category B T-Ratio Maritimes 0. 234 0. 696 P r a i r i e s -0. 507 -1.738 BC 0. 091 0.238 C a t h o l i c 0. 627 2.231 Union Member 0. 108 0.331 U n i v e r s i t y 2. 244 8.345 NDP -1. 105 -3.043 PC -1. 048 -4.190 Age > 55 -0. 378 -1.554 High Income 0. 325 1.268 (Constant) -2. 050 -8.111 Note: E n t r i e s s i g n i f i c a n t at approx. 95% l e v e l are shown i n b o l d type. The t h i r d f a c t o r p r e s e n t s us with no s u r p r i s e s . I t was argued t h a t t h i s f a c t o r r e p r e s e n t s support f o r the i n t e r e s t s of " b i g b u s i n e s s " and, as can be seen i n Table V I I I , h i g h income people t e n d t o h o l d such a view while the r e s t of the p o p u l a t i o n does not. 35 A l s o , t h i s f a c t o r ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e c o u n t r y ' s p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e makes s e n s e i n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l l e f t - r i g h t t e r m s : NDP s u p p o r t e r s s c o r e l o w , PC s u p p o r t e r s s c o r e h i g h , a n d L i b e r a l s u p p o r t e r s a r e somewhere i n t h e m i d d l e . Table V I I I : 1977-81 A v e r a g e R e g r e s s i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r t h e Pro-Business F a c t o r ; E n g l i s h S p e a k e r s C a t e q o r y B T - R a t i o M a r i t i m e s 0. 121 0. 964 P r a i r i e s - 0 . 007 -0.038 BC - 0 . 127 -0.903 C a t h o l i c 0. 020 0.175 U n i o n Member 0. 027 0.187 U n i v e r s i t y 0. 042 0.471 NDP -0. 550 -3.936 PC 0. 194 2.037 Age > 55 0. 180 1. 912 H i g h Income 0. 262 2.456 ( C o n s t a n t ) -0. 276 -2.873 N o t e : E n t r i e s s i g n i f i c a n t a t a p p r o x . 9 5 % l e v e l a r e shown i n b o l d t y p e . F i n a l l y , t h e r e i s t h e f o u r t h f a c t o r i d e n t i f i e d a s b e i n g a b o u t " p r o v i n c i a l r i g h t s " a n d r e g i o n a l a l i e n a t i o n . I t s g e o g r a p h i c s t r u c t u r e i s c l e a r l y v i s i b l e i n T a b l e I X : r e s p o n d e n t s i n BC a n d t h e M a r i t i m e s a r e l i k e l y t o h a v e h i g h e r s c o r e s t h a n r e s i d e n t s o f O n t a r i o ( t h e r e f e r e n c e g r o u p ) . P e o p l e who s a y t h a t t h e y s u p p o r t t h e C o n s e r v a t i v e p a r t y i n f e d e r a l e l e c t i o n s a r e a l s o more l i k e l y t h a n o t h e r s t o s h a r e t h i s v i e w , w h i c h i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g g i v e n t h e w e l l - k n o w n f a c t t h a t W e s t e r n s e p a r a t i s t p a r t i e s t e n d t o r e c r u i t t h e i r members f r o m t h e r a n k s o f d i s e n c h a n t e d PC v o t e r s . A l t h o u g h t h i s p a r t i c u l a r m o d e l o f f e r s no p r o o f o f t h i s , one may g u e s s t h a t h i d d e n w i t h i n t h i s f a c t o r a r e v a r i o u s a s p e c t s o f t h e E n g l i s h - F r e n c h 36 c l e a v a g e -- e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e f o c u s i n g on t h e p o l i c i e s o f t h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t . Table IX: 1977-81 A v e r a g e R e g r e s s i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r t h e P r o v i n c i a l Rights F a c t o r ; E n g l i s h S p e a k e r s C a t e q o r y B T - R a t i o M a r i t i m e s 0. 283 3.418 P r a i r i e s 0. 089 1.196 BC 0. 225 2.544 C a t h o l i c 0. 015 0.233 U n i o n Member - 0 . 042 -0.459 U n i v e r s i t y - 0 . 069 -1.052 NDP 0. 169 1.714 PC 0. 124 2.019 Age > 55 - 0 . 046 -0.775 H i g h Income 0. 011 0.184 ( C o n s t a n t ) -0. 890 -14.018 N o t e : E n t r i e s s i g n i f i c a n t a t a p p r o x . 95% l e v e l a r e shown i n b o l d t y p e . I I I . Summary a n d C o n c l u s i o n s I t may be u s e f u l now t o s u m m a r i z e t h e f i n d i n g s p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s t h e s i s . F i r s t o f a l l , i t h a s b e e n shown t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o e x t r a c t f r o m s u r v e y d a t a m e a n i n g f u l i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e s t r u c t u r e o f mass b e l i e f s y s t e m s e v e n i f t h e b i v a r i a t e c o r r e l a t i o n s among t h e r e s p o n s e s a r e v e r y l o w . A v a r i a n t o f t h e l e f t - r i g h t d i m e n s i o n was shown t o be t h e most i m p o r t a n t e l e m e n t o f t h e o p i n i o n s t r u c t u r e s o f b o t h E n g l i s h a n d F r e n c h - s p e a k i n g r e s p o n d e n t s , a n d i t i s c l e a r f r o m t h e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s t h a t t h i s d i m e n s i o n i s r o o t e d i n t h e c o u n t r y ' s c l a s s s t r u c t u r e . I t h a s a l s o b e e n shown t h a t t h e c u l t u r a l d i m e n s i o n ( c o n s i s t i n g o f a t t i t u d e s a b o u t F r e n c h - C a n a d i a n s , C a t h o l i c s , i m m i g r a n t s , e t c . ) h a s , a t l e a s t i n t h e c a s e o f E n g l i s h -s p e a k i n g r e s p o n d e n t s , a m a j o r i m p a c t on p a r t y p r e f e r e n c e . F r e n c h -37 speaking respondents were found t o e v a l u a t e a wide range of i s s u e s by t h e i r impact on French language and c u l t u r e . The o p i n i o n s of E n g l i s h speakers were found to be a l s o governed by a g e n e r a l a t t i t u d e towards bu s i n e s s i n t e r e s t s and by support of expanded powers f o r p r o v i n c i a l governments. Second, thanks to the a v a i l a b i l i t y of repeated measures i n the panel data s e t , i t was shown t h a t Canadian respondents had q u i t e robust o p i n i o n s t r u c t u r e s t h a t remained v i r t u a l l y unchanged d u r i n g a f o u r year p e r i o d . T h i s suggests t h a t i s p o s s i b l e t o use mass surveys to' gather i n f o r m a t i o n about the more permanent a t t i t u d e s of the respondents — d e s p i t e the low t e s t - r e t e s t c o r r e l a t i o n s among the o r i g i n a l responses. And t h i r d , i t was shown t h a t r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s on f a c t o r - b a s e d s c a l e s can p r o v i d e a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n about the nature of the o p i n i o n s t r u c t u r e s , and can a l s o be used to determine whether these s t r u c t u r e s make sense i n the context of the p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l make-up of the s o c i e t y under study. With r e g a r d to the m e t h o d o l o g i c a l i s s u e s , i t must be s a i d t h a t f a c t o r a n a l y s i s i s not a magic s o l u t i o n t o the problem of measurement e r r o r . The amount of v a r i a n c e i t c o u l d e x p l a i n (50%) was v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l to the one e x p l a i n e d through the b i v a r i a t e c o r r e l a t i o n s method, which means t h a t we s t i l l cannot t e l l i f we have one h a l f of the sample responding i n a s t r u c t u r e d way and the other h a l f responding at random, or i f everyone has s t r u c t u r e d o p i n i o n s which are measured with only 50% accuracy. On the other hand, f a c t o r a n a l y s i s d i d r e v e a l the presence of q u i t e complex and s t a b l e o p i n i o n s t r u c t u r e s i n a mass sample, which i n i t s e l f seems 38 t o put the " n o n a t t i t u d e s " argument i n s e r i o u s doubt. I t appears, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t the u t i l i t y of the approach p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s t h e s i s can be best summarized by an analogy t o d i g i t a l image a n a l y s i s : s o p h i s t i c a t e d a l g o r i t h m s are a great h e l p i n enhancing c o n t r a s t s and b r i n g i n g out d e t a i l s i n a b l u r r y or otherwise i l l e g i b l e photograph, but the f a c t t h a t you can f i n d something t h e r e sheds no l i g h t on the q u e s t i o n of why the p i c t u r e was of poor q u a l i t y i n the f i r s t p l a c e . 39 BIBLIOGRAPHY Achen, C h r i s t o p h e r H. (1975), "Mass P o l i t i c a l A t t i t u d e s and the Survey Response," The American P o l i t i c a l Science Review, 69, pp. 1218-31. (1982), "Toward Theories of P o l i t i c a l Data," B e r k e l e y : n.p. Asher, Herbert B. (1983), Causal Modelling, B e v e r l y H i l l s : Sage. (1984), P r e s i d e n t i a l Elections and American P o l i t i c s , Homewood, I I : The Dorsey P r e s s . B l a l o c k , Hubert M. J r . (1960), Social S t a t i s t i c s , New York: McGraw-Hill. Brams, S. J . (1976), Paradoxes in P o l i t i c s , New York: The Free P r e s s . Campbell, Angus et a l . (1960), The American Voter, New York: Wiley. C h r i s t i a n , W. and C. Campbell (1983), P o l i t i c a l Parties and Ideologies in Canada, Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson. Chubb, John E. (1978), " M u l t i p l e I n d i c a t o r s and Measurement E r r o r i n Panel Data," P o l i t i c a l Methodology, 5, pp. 413-44. Converse, P h i l i p E. (1964), "The Nature of B e l i e f Systems i n Mass P u b l i c s , 11 i n David Apter (ed.) Ideology and Discontent, New York: Free Press, pp. 206-61. (1970), " A t t i t u d e s and N o n - A t t i t u d e s : C o n t i n u a t i o n of a D i a l o g u e , " i n Edward R. T u f t e (ed.) The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems, Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, pp. 168-89. Coombs, C. H. (1964), A Theory of Data, New York: Wiley. E l k i n s , David J . (1974), "The P e r c e i v e d S t r u c t u r e of the Canadian P a r t y Systems," Canadian Journal of P o l i t i c a l Science, 7, pp. 502-24. (1980), "The S t r u c t u r e of P r o v i n c i a l P a r t y Systems" i n D. J . E l k i n s and R. E. B. Simeon, eds., Small Worlds: Parties and Provinces in Canadian P o l i t i c a l L i f e , Toronto: Methuen. (1982), "The Nature of B e l i e f Systems i n Issue P u b l i c s , " Paper p r e s e n t e d t o the Canadian P o l i t i c a l Science A s s o c i a t i o n Annual Meeting, Ottawa. 40 E r i k s o n , Robert S. (1978), " A n a l y z i n g One-Variable Three-Wave Panel Data: A Comparison of Two Models," P o l i t i c a l Methodology, 5, pp. 151-65. (1979), "The SRC Panel Data and Mass P o l i t i c a l A t t i t u d e s , " B r i t i s h Journal of P o l i t i c a l Science, 9, pp. 89-114. F e s t i n g e r , Leon (1957), A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, S t a n f o r d , C a l . : S t a n f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Fleishman, John A. (1986), "Types of P o l i t i c a l A t t i t u d e S t r u c t u r e : R e s u l t s of C l u s t e r A n a l y s i s , " Public Opinion Quarterly, 50, pp. 371-86. Fr i e d e n b e r g , Edgar Z. (1980), Deference to Authority: The Case of Canada, White P l a i n s , N.Y., M. E. Sharpe. Grant, Lawrence V. and John W. P a t t e r s o n (1975), "Non-Attitudes: The Measurement Problem and I t s Consequences," P o l i t i c a l Methodology, 2, pp. 455-81. G u j a r a t i , Damodar (1978), Basic Econometrics, New York: McGraw-H i l l . Heise, David R. (1969), " S e p a r a t i n g R e l i a b i l i t y and S t a b i l i t y i n T e s t - R e t e s t C o r r e l a t i o n s , " American Sociological Review, 34, pp. 93-101. Jackson, Thomas H. and George E. Marcus (1975), " P o l i t i c a l Competence and I d e o l o g i c a l C o n s t r a i n t , 11 Social Science Research, 4, pp. 93-111. Johnston, R i c h a r d (1986), Public Opinion and Public P o l i c y in Canada, Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s . (1987), "The Geography of C l a s s and R e l i g i o n i n Canadian E l e c t i o n s , " Paper prepared f o r the Canadian P o l i t i c a l S c ience A s s o c i a t i o n Annual Meeting, Hamilton, O n t a r i o . (1988), "The I d e o l o g i c a l S t r u c t u r e of Opinion on P o l i c y " i n George P e r l i n , ed., Party Democracy in Canada: The P o l i t i c s of National Party Conventions, Scarborough, O n t a r i o : P r e n t i c e - H a l l . J o l l i f f e , I. T. (1986), P r i n c i p a l Component Analysis, New York: S p r i n g e r . Kay, B a r r y J . (1977), "An Examination of C l a s s and L e f t - R i g h t P a r t y Images i n Canadian V o t i n g , " Canadian Journal of P o l i t i c a l Science, 10, pp. 127-43. Kim, Jae-On and C h a r l e s W. M u e l l e r (1978a), Factor Analysis: S t a t i s t i c a l Methods and P r a c t i c a l Issues, B e v e r l y H i l l s : Sage. 41 (1978b), Introduction to Factor Analysis, B e v e r l y H i l l s : Sage. Lambert, Ronald D. et a l . (1986), "In Search of L e f t / R i g h t B e l i e f s i n the Canadian E l e c t o r a t e , " Canadian Journal of P o l i t i c a l Science, 19, pp. 542-63. Laponce, J . A. (1970), "Note on the Use of the L e f t - R i g h t Dimension," Comparative P o l i t i c a l Studies, 2, pp. 481-502. (1972), "In Search of the S t a b l e Elements of the L e f t - R i g h t Landscape," Comparative P o l i t i c s , 4, pp. 455-75. (1981), Left and Right: The Topography of P o l i t i c a l Perceptions, Toronto, U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s . Luttbeg, Norman R. (1968), "The S t r u c t u r e of B e l i e f s Among Leaders and the P u b l i c , " Public Opinion Quarterly, 32, pp. 398-409. Marcus, George D. and John L. S u l l i v a n (1974), "The A p p l i c a t i o n of I n d i v i d u a l D i f f e r e n c e s S c a l i n g t o the Measurement of P o l i t i c a l Ideology, 1 1 American Journal of P o l i t i c a l Science, 18, pp: 405-20. Neuman, W. R u s s e l l (1986), The Paradox of Mass P o l i t i c s , Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Nie, Norman. H. (1976), Sidney Verba and John R. P e t r o c i k , The Changing American Voter, Cambridge, MA: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Nunnally, Jum C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, New York, McGraw-Hill. P e f f l e y , M. A. and J . Hurwitz (1985), "A H i e r a r c h i c a l Model of A t t i t u d e C o n s t r a i n t , " American Journal of P o l i t i c a l Science, 29. P i e r c e , John C. and Douglas D. Rose (1974), "Nonattitudes and American P u b l i c Opinion: The Examination of a Thesis,"The American P o l i t i c a l Science Review, 68, pp. 626-49. Shuman, Howard and S t a n l e y P r e s s e r (1981), Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording, and Context, New York: Academic P r e s s . Sniderman, Paul M. et a l . (1986), "Reasoning Chains: Causal Models of P o l i c y Reasoning i n Mass P u b l i c s , " B r i t i s h Journal of P o l i t i c a l Science, 16, pp. 405-31. SPSS Inc. (1988), SPSS-X User's Guide, 3rd E d i t i o n , Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc. 42 S u l l i v a n , John L. e t a l . (1978), " I d e o l o g i c a l C o n s t r a i n t i n the Mass P u b l i c : A M e t h o d o l o g i c a l C r i t i q u e and Some New F i n d i n g s , " American Journal of P o l i t i c a l Science, 22, pp. 233-49. Survey Research Centre, I n s t i t u t e f o r B e h a v i o u r a l Research, York U n i v e r s i t y . (1981), Project 310: Social Change in Canada, Phase 3, n.p. (1984), Social Change in Canada: Technical Documentation, n.p. Tryon, Robert C. and D a n i e l E. B a i l e y (1970), Cluster Analysis, New York: McGraw-Hill. U n d e r h i l l , Frank H. (1960), In Search of Canadian Liberalism, Toronto, Macmillan. Wayman, Frank W. and Ronald R. Stockton (1983), "The S t r u c t u r e and S t a b i l i t y of P o l i t i c a l A t t i t u d e s : F i n d i n g s from the 1974-76 Dearborn Panel Study," Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, pp. 329-46. Wiley, David E. and James A. Wiley (1970), "The E s t i m a t i o n of E r r o r i n Panel Data," American Sociological Review, 35, pp. 112-17. W i l k i n s o n , L e l a n d (1988), SYSTAT: The System for S t a t i s t i c s , Evanston, IL: SYSTAT, Inc. Wilson, Glenn D., ed. (1973), The Psychology of Conservatism, London: Academic Press. Wyckoff, M i k e l L. (1987), "Issues of Measuring I d e o l o g i c a l S o p h i s t i c a t i o n , " P o l i t i c a l Behaviour, 9, pp. 193-224. Z a l l e r , John (1984), "Toward a Theory of the Survey Response," Paper p r e s e n t e d t o the American P o l i t i c a l Science A s s o c i a t i o n Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C. 43 APPENDIX A: VARIABLE CROSS-REFERENCE TABLES I. Items: V a r i a b l e D e s c r i p t i o n  Ottawa A t t e n t i o n To Quebec Promoting B i l i n g u a l i s m P e r c e i v e d Power-Large Corp Crime P r e v e n t i o n E l i m i n a t i n g D i s c r i m Women Edu c a t i o n E n g l i s h Schools In Quebec P r o t e c t i n g The Environment P e r c e i v e d Power-Federal Govt R e s u l t Of F o r e i g n Inv In Can French Schools Outside Que Govt Does Not Care About People Govt Should P r o v i d e Jobs H e a l t h And Me d i c a l Care H e l p i n g The Poor Immigrants B r i n g D i s c r i m On S e l f Immigrants Don't Work Hard P e r c e i v e d Power-Labour Unions P r o t e c t i n g R i g h t s Of N a t i v e s Have No Say What Govt Does P o l i t i c s , Govt Complicated Parliament Lost Touch P e r c e i v e d Power-Prov Govt Que S e p a r a t i n g From Cananda Too Much D i f f r n c e Rich, Poor Management Not H i r e Scabs Govt Supporting Business Tax High Income People More Teachers Have No Right To S t r i k e More A s s i s t a n c e To Unemployed Enough U.S. C a p i t a l In Canada Welfare Too Easy Name i n Data F i l e Name 1977 1979 1981 ATTNQUE Q37 QJ2 ZQK2 BILINGU Q22e QDle ZQDle CORPPWR Q199e QD7c ZQD3c CRIMEPR Q22i QDlg ZQDlg DISCWOM Q22k QDlh ZQDlh EDUC Q22q QDlj ZQD1 j ENGSQUE Q39d QJ8b ZQK6b ENVIRO Q22n QD l i ZQDli FEDGPWR Q199h QD7d ZQD3e FORINV Q46 QK9 ZQL1 FRSCHL Q39a QJ8a ZQK6a GDTCARE Q21b QD6b ZQD2b GGJOBS Q23d QK16c ZQL6c HEALTH Q22a QDla ZQDla HELPOOR Q22h QDlf ZQDlf IMDSELF Q250e QJ8g ZQK6g IMDTWRK Q250c QJ8e ZQK6e LABRPWR Q199d QD7b ZQD3b NATIVER Q22b QDlb ZQDlb NOSAY Q21d QD6d ZQD2d PCOMPLI Q21c QD6c ZQD2c PLOSTT Q21a QD6a ZQD2a PROGPWR Q199b QD7a ZQD3a QUESEPR Q40 QJ4 ZQK4 RPDIFF Q23a QK16a ZQL6a SCABS Q156c QK16f ZQL6f SUPPBUS Q22d QDld ZQDld TAXRICH Q23e QK16d ZQL6d TEACHRS Q156b QK16e ZQL6e UNEMPLH Q22c QDlc ZQDlc USCAPIT Q257 QK10 ZQL2 WELFREZ Q23c QK16b ZQL6b Note: The v a r i a b l e s have been renamed f o r c o n s i s t e n c y and ease of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The NAME column l i s t s " r o o t " names which i n t e x t may be f o l l o w e d by the wave number, (eg. EDUC3 would be the 1981 EDUC v a r i a b l e ) 44 I I . Indexes D e s c r i p t i o n Index Items P o l i t i c a l A l i e n a t i o n ALIEN Pro-Business I n t e r e s t s P r o - F o r e i g n Investment Pro-French-Canadian Issues Support f o r more Govt S e r v i c e s BUSN FINV FRCDN GSERV P o s i t i v e Opinion about Immigrants IMMIGR Favour Combatting D i s c r i m i n a t i o n MINRGT Support f o r more Fed. Govt Power PWRFED Support f o r more Prov. Govt Power PWRPROV Support f o r Quebec Issues QUENAT Support f o r Income R e d i s t r i b u t i o n REDISTR Support f o r Labour Unions Support f o r more Ul/Welfare UNIONS UNWELF NOSAY GDTCARE PLOSTT PCOMPLI -CORPPWR SUPPBUS FORINV USCAPIT ATTNQUE FRSCHL BILINGU EDUC HEALTH CRIMEPR ENVIRO -IMDSELF -IMDTWRK DISCWOM NATIVER -FEDGPWR -PROGPWR -ENGSQUE QUESEPR RPDIFF TAXRICH HELPOOR -LABRPWR SCABS -TEACHRS -WELFREZ UNEMPLH GGJOBS Note: The minus s i g n s i n the "Items" column i n d i c a t e t h a t the p o l a r i t y of responses had been r e v e r s e d . 45 APPENDIX B: MISCELLANEOUS TABLES Table X: 1977-81 Average I n t e r - I s s u e C o r r e l a t i o n s , O r i g i n a l V a r i a b l e s , E n g l i s h - F r e n c h D i f f e r e n c e s Whole V a r i a b l e P a i r s Sample E n q l i s h F r e n c h Govt Does Not Care (GDtCare) / 0. 67 0 . 66 0. .66 P a r l i a m e n t L o s t Touch (PLostT) Govt Does Not Care (GDtCare) / 0. 64 0 . 67 0. , 61 Have No Say What Govt Does (NoSay) Ottawa A t t e n t i o n To Quebec (AttnQue) / 0. 53 0 .52 -0. .07 Promoting B i l i n g u a l i s m ( B i l i n g u ) Ottawa A t t e n t i o n To Quebec (AttnQue) / 0. 51 0 .32 0, .11 French S c h o o l i n g O u t s i d e Que ( F r S c h l ) Promoting B i l i n g u a l i s m ( B i l i n g u ) / 0. 49 0 .43 0. .12 French S c h o o l i n g O u t s i d e Que ( F r S c h l ) Have No Say What Govt Does (NoSay) / 0. 45 0 .46 0. , 43 P a r l i a m e n t L o s t Touch (PLostT) Have No Say What Govt Does (NoSay) / 0. 45 0 .37 0. .59 P o l i t i c s , Govt C o m p l i c a t e d (PCompli) H e l p i n g The Poor (HelPoor) / 0. 44 0 .44 0. .39 A s s i s t a n c e To Unemployed (UnemplH) Too Much D i f f r n c e R i c h , Poor (RpDiff) / 0. 41 0 .44 0. . 31 Tax High Income People More (TaxRich) Crime P r e v e n t i o n (CrimePr) / 0. 40 0 . 37 0 , . 40 H e l p i n g The Poor (HelPoor) Govt P r o v i d e Jobs (GGJobs) / 0. 39 0 .34 0 . 42 Tax High Income People More (TaxRich) Crime P r e v e n t i o n (CrimePr) / 0. 39 0 . 36 0 . 45 E l i m i n a t i n g D i s c r i m Women (DiscWom) P r o t e c t i n g The Environment (Enviro) / 0. 38 0 .38 0 , . 36 P r o t e c t i n g R i g h t s Of N a t i v e s (NativeR) H e l p i n g The Poor (HelPoor) / 0. 38 0 . 42 0. .28 Too Much D i f f r n c e R i c h , Poor (RpDiff) E l i m i n a t i n g D i s c r i m Women (DiscWom) / 0. 38 0 .39 0 , . 33 P r o t e c t i n g The Environment (Enviro) Govt P r o v i d e Jobs (GGJobs) / 0. 37 0 .35 0 . 30 Too Much D i f f r n c e R i c h , Poor (RpDiff) E l i m i n a t i n g D i s c r i m Women (DiscWom) / 0. 37 0 . 40 0. .25 P r o t e c t i n g R i g h t s Of N a t i v e s (NativeR) E l i m i n a t i n g D i s c r i m Women (DiscWom) / 0. 36 0 .33 0 , . 32 H e l p i n g The Poor (HelPoor) Range of Cases 155 18- 1073- 332-1790 1203 387 Notes: E n t r i e s a r e Gamma c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r each v a r i a b l e p a i r . B o l d type i n d i c a t e s c o r r e l a t i o n s which d i f f e r by more than 0.20 f o r E n g l i s h - and F r e n c h - s p e a k i n g r e s p o n d e n t s . P l e a s e r e f e r t o the v a r i a b l e names ( i n parentheses) t o f i n d the exac t wording of the q u e s t i o n s i n Appendix C. 46 Table XI: Test-Retest C o r r e l a t i o n s , O r i g i n a l V a r i a b l e s , E n g l i s h -French D i f f e r e n c e s V a r i a b l e s E n g l i s h Speakers F r e n c h Speakers D e s c r i p t i o n s Names 77--79 79--81 77--81 77--79 79--81 77--81 Ottawa A t t e n t i o n To Quebec AttnQue 0. ,37 0. .45 0. , 36 0. .31 0. 32 0. 19 Promoting B i l i n g u a l i s m B i l i n g u 0. .54 0 .59 0. ,50 0. .33 0 . 30 0 . 17 P e r c e i v e d Power-Large Corp CorpPwr 0. .36 0. .40 0. , 34 0. .29 0 . 29 0. 22 Crime P r e v e n t i o n CrimePr 0. . 34 0 . 44 0 , .38 0 . 16 0 . 29 0. 22 E l i m i n a t i n g D i s c r i m Women DiscWom 0. .40 0 .52 0, .44 0, ,30 0. 38 0. 18 E d u c a t i o n Educ 0. .32 0 . 48 0, .37 0, .20 0 . 22 0 . 23 E n g l i s h S c h o o l s i n Quebec EngSQue 0. .27 0 .28 0 . 20 0 , .30 0 . 28 0 . 28 P r o t e c t i n g t he Environment E n v i r o 0. ,42 0 . 44 0 . 41 0 , .20 0 . 23 0 . 17 P e r c e i v e d Power-Fed Govt FedGPwr 0. ,40 0 .43 0 . ,33 0 , .19 0 . 33 0. 25 R e s u l t o f F o r e i g n Investmnt F o r l n v 0 . ,36 0 . 40 0. .39 0, .18 0 . 28 0 . 24 F r e n c h S c h o o l s O u t s i d e Que F r S c h l 0 . ,49 0. .49 0. .40 0 , 21 0. 38 0 . 30 Govt Does Not Care GDtCare 0 , .36 0 . 38 0. .35 0 .28 0. . 34 0 . ,23 Govt P r o v i d e Jobs GGJobs 0 . 48 0 . 46 0. . 39 0. .40 0 . 48 0. , 37 H e a l t h and M e d i c a l Care H e a l t h 0, ,34 0 .42 0. .37 0. .16 0. 30 0. ,32 H e l p i n g The Poor HelPoor 0. ,42 0. .44 0 . 44 0, .32 0 . 40 0. ,28 Immigrnts B r i n g D i s c r S e l f ImDSelf 0. .38 0 .46 0 . 33 0 , .16 0 . 26 0 . ,16 Immigrnts Don't Work Hard ImDtWrk 0. ,23 0 .37 0 . 32 0 , .35 0. 65 0. 39 P e r c e i v e d Power-Unions LabrPwr 0. ,39 0 .46 0. . 35 0, .42 0. 45 0. 35 P r o t e c t R i g h t s o f N a t i v e s N a t i v e R 0 . ,49 0 .56 0. ,51 0, ,34 0 . 36 0 . 34 Have No Say What Govt Does NoSay 0 , .43 0 .46 0 , .37 0 .41 0 . 40 0 . ,36 P o l i t i c s , Govt C o m p l i c a t e d PCompli 0. .43 0 .49 0 , .44 0 .34 0. 47 0 , 31 P a r l i a m e n t L o s t Touch PLostT 0 , .30 0 .39 0, . 33 0 .32 0 . 24 0, ,19 P e r c e i v e d Power-Prov Govt ProGPwr 0 . 28 0 .31 0. .24 0 .28 0. 35 0. ,24 Que S e p a r a t i n g from Canada QueSepr 0. ,22 0 . 38 0. . 17 0 .55 0. 51 0 . , 37 Too Much D i f f r n c e R i c h,Poor R p D i f f 0 .53 0 .55 0. .51 0. .27 0 . 38 0 . , 32 Management Not H i r e Scabs Scabs 0. .49 0 .58 0. .51 0 , .14 0 . 22 0. .35 Govt S u p p o r t i n g B u s i n e s s SuppBus 0 . , 31 0 . 33 0 . , 32 0 , .29 0 . 26 0. 26 Tax High Income People More TaxRi c h 0 , 48 0 .53 0 . 46 0 . 39 0 . 47 0, .43 Teachers No R i g h t To S t r i k e TeachRS 0 . 43 0 .53 0 , .42 0 .24 0 . 48 0 . , 17 A s s i s t a n c e To Unemployed UnEmplH 0 . 46 0 . 45 0 . 42 0 .32 0 . 38 0. ,28 Enough US C a p i t a l In Canada USCapit 0 , 35 0 .50 0 , 39 0 .26 0 . 30 0 . , 30 W e l f a r e Too Easy WelfrEZ 0, .51 0 .52 0. .49 0 .34 0. 50 0. ,29 Average 0. .37 0 .45 0. , 38 0, .29 0. 36 0. 27 S t d . Dev. 0. . 12 0. .07 0 . 08 0, .09 0 . 10 0 . 07 Range of Cases: E n g l i s h Speakers: 1037-1203 French Speakers: 312-387 Notes: E n t r i e s a r e Pearson's r c o e f f i c i e n t s . B o l d type i n d i c a t e s e n t r i e s g r e a t e r than 0.50. P l e a s e see Appendix C f o r exact wording o f the q u e s t i o n s . 47 Table X I I : Rotated F a c t o r Loadings (1977, 1979, 1981); E n g l i s h Speakers Index V a r i a b l e s (1977) Varlmax R o t a t e d L o a d i n g s  D e s c r i p t i o n s Names F a c t o r 1 F a c t o r 2 F a c t o r 3 F a c t o r 4 P o l i t i c a l A l i e n a t i o n ALIEN 0. 3402 -0. .6701 0. ,0190 -0. .2285 P r o - B u s i n e s s BUSN 0. 0089 -0. ,0167 0. .8157 0. ,1443 P r o - F o r e i g n Investment FINV -0 . 1507 0. .1488 0. .6835 -0. ,1523 P r o - F r e n c h I s s u e s FRCDN 0. 3163 0. .6519 0. .0960 -0. . 0389 Expand Govt S e r v i c e s GSERV 0. 6930 -0. ,1252 0. ,1434 -0. .1976 Pro-Immigrant IMMIGR 0. 0609 0. .5735 0. .0841 -0. .1553 Combat D i s c r i m i n a t i o n MINRGT 0. 6380 0. ,1185 -o. ,0166 -0. .2900 More Power t o Fed Govt PWRFED -0 . 0931 0. ,3518 -0. ,0670 0. .5760 More Power t o Prov Govt PWRPRO 0. 0445 -0. .1173 0. .2372 0, .7347 Pro-Quebec I s s u e s QUENAT -0 . 0244 -0. .1424 -0. .1948 0, . 3450 P r o - R e d i s t r i b u t i v e Progs REDIST 0. 7302 -0. ,2030 -0. .2495 -0, .0145 More Power t o Unions UNIONS 0. 5374 0. ,1977 -0. .1592 0. .2477 Spend More on U l / W e l f a r e UNWELF 0. 6002 0. ,1273 -0. .0051 0. ,1332 V a r i a n c e E x p l a i n e d (%) 18. 6 12, .4 10. . 3 8, . 8 Index V a r i a b l e s (1979) Varimax R o t a t e d L o a d i n g s D e s c r i p t i o n s Names F a c t o r 1 F a c t o r 2 F a c t o r 3 F a c t o r 4 P o l i t i c a l A l i e n a t i o n ALIEN 0. 1588 -0. .7779 -0. .1187 -0, .0557 P r o - B u s i n e s s BUSN 0. 0505 -0, ,1176 0. .8239 0, .0574 P r o - F o r e i g n Investment FINV -0 . 1730 0. .0526 0. .5686 -0, .0471 P r o - F r e n c h I s s u e s FRCDN 0. 4313 0. ,4630 0. . 1267 -0, . 3163 Expand Govt S e r v i c e s GSERV 0. 7080 -0. .2256 0, .0481 -0 .1680 Pro-Immigrant IMMIGR 0. 0361 0. .5486 -0. .1644 0, .0722 Combat D i s c r i m i n a t i o n MINRGT 0. 7421 0. .0099 -0. .0069 -0, .1402 More Power t o Fed Govt PWRFED -0 . 0536 0. .6333 0. .0262 -0, .0539 More Power t o Prov Govt PWRPRO 0. 0695 0. .1016 0. . 3000 0 .5945 Pro-Quebec I s s u e s QUENAT -0 . 1695 -0. . 1292 -0. .1444 0 .6144 P r o - R e d i s t r i b u t i v e Progs REDIST 0. 5902 -0. .2553 -0. .3925 0 .1136 More Power t o Unions UNIONS 0. 4635 0. .1615 -0. .1509 0, .4337 Spend More on U l / W e l f a r e UNWELF 0. 5968 0. .0952 -0. .1662 0, .3328 V a r i a n c e E x p l a i n e d (%) 18. 5 13. .1 10. .0 8, .7 Index V a r i a b l e s (1981) Varlmax R o t a t e d L o a d i n g s D e s c r i p t i o n s Names F a c t o r 1 F a c t o r 2 F a c t o r 3 F a c t o r 4 P o l i t i c a l A l i e n a t i o n ALIEN 0. , 1202 -0. .7660 -0. ,0403 -0. 1027 P r o - B u s i n e s s BUSN 0, .0642 -0. . 0743 0. .7634 0. , 1272 P r o - F o r e i g n Investment FINV -0. .1918 0. .0465 0. .6805 -0. .0566 P r o - F r e n c h I s s u e s FRCDN 0. .4017 0. .5374 0, .2054 -0. , 3009 Expand Govt S e r v i c e s GSERV 0. .5732 -0. .2669 0. ,0794 -0. , 3694 Pro-Immigrant IMMIGR 0. ,0275 0. .5156 -0. ,0587 -0. ,2432 Combat D i s c r i m i n a t i o n MINRGT 0. .6655 -0. .0496 0. . 0108 -0. ,2381 More Power t o Fed Govt PWRFED 0. .0023 0. .6755 -0. . 0285 0. , 0876 More Power t o Prov Govt PWRPRO 0. .1396 0. .0613 0. .1951 0. .5546 Pro-Quebec I s s u e s QUENAT -0. ,1626 -0. .1530 -0. , 0854 0. .6151 P r o - R e d i s t r i b u t i v e Progs REDIST 0. .6221 -0. .2285 -0. , 3418 -0. ,0788 More Power t o Unions UNIONS 0. .6422 0. ,1096 -0. .0549 0. ,2651 Spend More on U l / W e l f a r e UNWELF 0. .6755 0. .1980 -0. .0390 0. ,1151 V a r i a n c e E x p l a i n e d (%) 18. .5 14 . ,2 9. . 3 8. , 3 Notes: E n t r i e s w i t h a b s o l u t e v a l u e s g r e a t e r than 0.5 are shown i n b o l d t y p e . P l e a s e see Appendix A . I I f o r c o m p o s i t i o n o f i n d e x e s . 48 APPENDIX C: QUESTIONNAIRE The preamble and q u e s t i o n s reproduced below are from the 1981 Social Change in Canada q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n c l u d e d i n Survey Research Centre, I n s t i t u t e f o r B e h a v i o u r a l Research, York U n i v e r s i t y , (1981), Project 310: Social Change in Canada, Phase 3. The v a r i a b l e names used throughout t h i s t h e s i s are a l s o i n c l u d e d f o r r e f e r e n c e . The Survey Research Centre of York U n i v e r s i t y i s conducting a study on the q u a l i t y of l i f e i n Canada. We are i n t e r e s t e d i n f i n d i n g out how people f e e l about t h e i r l i v e s and what they l i k e and d i s l i k e about t h e i r homes, t h e i r jobs and so on. We a l s o want to ask your o p i n i o n about some of the important p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l i s s u e s f a c i n g Canada today. There are no r i g h t or wrong answers, we would j u s t l i k e your o p i n i o n s . Any i n f o r m a t i o n you g i v e w i l l remain completely c o n f i d e n t i a l . (p. 7) Much more More About the Less Much l e s s | e f f o r t e f f o r t same e f f o r t e f f o r t e f f o r t |Depends DK 1 2 3 4 5 I 7 8 We would l i k e t o know how much e f f o r t you t h i n k government should put i n t o a number of a c t i v i t i e s . P l e a s e choose the answer on t h i s c a r d which comes c l o s e s t t o your o p i n i o n about the e f f o r t t h a t should be made i n each area. Remember t h a t p u t t i n g more e f f o r t i n t o one of these areas would r e q u i r e a s h i f t of money from other areas or an i n c r e a s e i n t a x e s . . . HEALTH NATIVER UNEMPLH SUPPBUS BILINGU HELPOOR CRIMEPR DISCWOM ENVIRO EDUC a. F i r s t of a l l , how much e f f o r t should be put i n t o h e a l t h and medical care? b. What about p r o t e c t i n g the r i g h t s of n a t i v e people? c. P r o v i d i n g a s s i s t a n c e t o the unemployed? d. Supporting the b u s i n e s s community? e. How much e f f o r t s h ould be put i n t o promoting b i l i n g u a l i s m ? f. H e l p i n g the poor? g. Crime p r e v e n t i o n ? h. E l i m i n a t i n g d i s c r i m i n a t i o n a g a i n s t women? P r o t e c t i n g the environment? Education? 4 9 (p. 7) S t r o n g l y Agree 1 Agree 2 Disagree 3 S t r o n g l y | Disagree| 4 I No Opinion 5 Now, I would l i k e t o t a l k t o you about some o p i n i o n s t h a t you hear d i f f e r e n t people g i v i n g . I would j u s t l i k e you t o t e l l me offhand whether you d i s a g r e e . . . PLOSTT GDTCARE s t r o n g l y agree, agree, d i s a g r e e , or s t r o n g l y PCOMPLI NO SAY a. b. G e n e r a l l y , those e l e c t e d t o Parliament soon l o s e touch with the people. I don't t h i n k t h a t the government cares much what people l i k e me t h i n k . Sometimes p o l i t i c s and government seem so complicated t h a t a person l i k e me can't r e a l l y understand what's going on. People l i k e me don't have any say about what the government does. (p. 8) Much too Too much About Too l i t t l e Much too | much power power r i g h t power l i t t l e power|Depends DK 1 2 3 4 5 I 7 8 Some groups i n Canada have more power than others t o get the t h i n g s they want. I am going t o read you a l i s t of groups and would l i k e you t o t e l l me i f t h i n k each one has too much power f o r the good of the country, too l i t t l e power f o r the good of the country, or about the r i g h t amount of power. Please use the answers on the ca r d . . . PROGPWR a. How much power does the government of your p r o v i n c e have? LABRPWR b. What about labour unions? CORPPWR c. What about l a r g e c o r p o r a t i o n s ? FEDGPWR What about the f e d e r a l government i n Ottawa? 50 (p. 34) ATTNQUE What about Quebec, do you t h i n k the Government has g i v e n Quebec... Too l i t t l e Too much About the r i g h t amount I Don't a t t e n t i o n a t t e n t i o n of a t t e n t i o n I know 1 2 3 I 8 (p. 34) QUESEPR What i s your o p i n i o n about Quebec's s e p a r a t i n g from Canada and becoming independent. Are you... 1. i n f a v o r of independence i f an economic c o o p e r a t i o n agreement can be worked out with the r e s t of Canada 2 . i n f a v o r of independence even i f no agreement i s p o s s i b l e 3. i n f a v o r of independence but a g a i n s t working out any economic c o o p e r a t i o n agreement, or 4. are you opposed t o independence 5. Q u a l i f i e d support f o r independence 6. Q u a l i f i e d o p p o s i t i o n t o independence 7. Depends 8. Don't know (p. 35) S t r o n g l y N e i t h e r agree S t r o n g l y |No agree Agree nor d i s a g r e e Disagree d i s a g r e e |Opinion Dep. 1 2 3 4 5 I 7 8_ Here i s a s e r i e s of statements about language and immigrants i n Canada. Could you choose the answer on the c a r d which comes c l o s e s t t o your o p i n i o n about each. I f you have mixed f e e l i n g s about a statement you should use the "Neither Agree nor Disagree" answer. Use the "No Opin i o n " answer i f you r e a l l y have no views on the statement at a l l . FRSCHL a. French-speaking Canadians o u t s i d e of Quebec should be ab l e t o f i n d s c h o o l i n g f o r t h e i r c h i l d r e n i n French. 51 ENGSQUE IMDTWRK IMDSELF People who do not speak E n g l i s h and move to Quebec should be able t o f i n d s c h o o l i n g f o r t h e i r c h i l d r e n i n E n g l i s h . Immigrants t o t h i s country aren't prepared to work as hard as people born i n Canada. Immigrants o f t e n b r i n g d i s c r i m i n a t i o n on themselves by t h e i r own p e r s o n a l h a b i t s and a t t i t u d e s . (p. 36) FORINV There has been a l o t of debate about f o r e i g n ownership i n the Canadian economy i n the past few years. Some people say i t has helped our economy grow, but others d i s a g r e e . What do you t h i n k has been the r e s u l t of t h i s f o r e i g n investment i n Canada, do you t h i n k i t has had... Mostly Some About e q u a l l y Some Mostly | good good good and bad bad bad |Don't e f f e c t s e f f e c t s e f f e c t s e f f e c t s e f f e c t s Iknow. 1 2 3 4 5 | 9 (p. 36) USCAPIT Do you t h i n k t h e r e i s enough U.S. c a p i t a l i n Canada now or would you l i k e t o see more U.S. c a p i t a l i n v e s t e d i n t h i s country? Enough Would l i k e | Don't now more | know 1 2 1 8 52 (p. 37) S t r o n g l y N e i t h e r agree S t r o n g l y |No agree Agree nor d i s a g r e e Disagree d i s a g r e e I Opinion Dep. 1 2 3 4 5 I 7 8 Here i s a s e r i e s of statements about the way our economy works. Pl e a s e choose the answer on t h i s c a r d which comes c l o s e s t t o your o p i n i o n about each one. I f you have mixed f e e l i n g s about a statement you should use the " n e i t h e r agree nor d i s a g r e e " answer. Use the "No o p i n i o n " answer i f you r e a l l y have no views on the statement at a l l . RPDIFF a. There i s too much of a d i f f e r e n c e between r i c h and poor i n t h i s country. WELFREZ b. Unemployment i s h i g h these days because i t i s too easy to get w e l f a r e a s s i s t a n c e . GGJOBS c. The government should p r o v i d e jobs f o r Canadians who want to work but cannot f i n d a job. TAXRICH d. People with h i g h incomes should pay a g r e a t e r share of the t o t a l taxes than they do now. TEACHRS e. Teachers should not have the r i g h t t o s t r i k e . SCABS f. During a s t r i k e , management should be p r o h i b i t e d by law from h i r i n g workers to take p l a c e of s t r i k e r s . 53 INDEX "Bi g B u s i n e s s " 24, 34 " B r i t i s h c o n n e c t i o n " 23, 33 B i l i n g u a l i s m 22, 27, 43, 45, 46, 48 Conservatism . i i , i v , v, 1, 19, 22, 23, 33, 34, 42 F a c t o r s e x t r a c t i o n i i i , 16, 26 f a c t o r a n a l y s i s i i , 6-8, 10, 13, 14, 37, 40, 41 r o t a t i o n 18, 21, 26 s c a l e s i i , 9, 30, 31, 37 Measurement e r r o r c o r r e c t i n g f o r 4-6, 13 problems with i i i , 2-4, 37, 39 Opinions coherence 1 dimensions i i , 1, 5, 6, 8, 29 p o t e n t i a l f o r i d i o s y n c r a s y 2, 8, 13 s t a b i l i t y i , i i , v, 1, 3, 4, 9, 20, 22, 23, 25, 28, 40, 42 s t r u c t u r e i , i i , i i i , 1, 2, 5, 9, 10, 13, 16, 18, 23, 30, 35, 36, 39-42 P r o v i n c i a l r i g h t s i i , i v , v, 24, 25, 27, 35, 36 Q u e s t i o n n a i r e i i i , 9-11, 21, 48 Reg r e s s i o n dummy v a r i a b l e s 9, 30, 32 i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s 32 the model 31 Sample E n g l i s h speakers i i i , i v , v, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 33, 34-37, 46, 47 French speakers i i i , i v , v, 9, 25-28, 30, 46 s i z e i i , 11, 12, 45 V a r i a b l e s b i v a r i a t e c o r r e l a t i o n s i i i , 2, 7, 12, 26, 36, 37 f a c t o r s c a l e s i i , 9, 30, 31, 37 index i i i , 9, 10, 14, 15, 17, 19, 22, 25-27, 30, 44, 47, 53 o r i g i n a l i i i , i v , 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 37, 45, 46 t e s t - r e t e s t c o r r e l a t i o n s i v , 3, 13, 37, 40, 46 Welfare l i b e r a l i s m i i , i v , v, 18-20, 33 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0302357/manifest

Comment

Related Items