Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Representing Red and BlueHow the Culture Wars Change the Way Citizens Speak and Politicians Listen$

David C. Barker and Christopher Jan Carman

Print publication date: 2012

Print ISBN-13: 9780199796564

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2012

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199796564.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2017. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: null; date: 26 February 2017

(p.172) Appendix Chapter 5: Tables and Statistical Output

(p.172) Appendix Chapter 5: Tables and Statistical Output

Source:
Representing Red and Blue
Publisher:
Oxford University Press

Table A5.1 Probit Analysis of 2008 Presidential Vote on Representation Preferences and Controls, Among Independents

McCain Vote 2008 (Results for Figure 5.1)

Executive Representation Preferences

0.581* (0.271)

Women

0.0735 (0.248)

Whites

0.579 (0.319)

Education

0.0103 (0.0877)

Income

0.125** (0.0454)

Resides in South

0.883** (0.272)

Married

-0.0334 (0.295)

Birth Year

-0.0125 (0.00892)

Catholics

0.655 (0.335)

Constant

22.28 (17.54)

Observations

167

Robust standard errors in parentheses

** p 〈 .01

* p 〈 .05

(p.173)

Table A5.2 Multinomial Logistic Regression Analysis of House Voting (2006 & 2008) on Congressional Representation Preferences and Controls

House Vote 2006 & 2008 (Base Category, Dem. vote in 2006 & 2008) (Results for Figure 5.2)

Mixed Vote

GOP 2006 & 2008

MC Rep. Prefs.

0.661* (0.287)

0.557* (0.277)

Women

0.150 (0.267)

-0.412 (0.264)

Whites

-0.228 (0.312)

0.599 (0.346)

Education

-0.307** (0.109)

-0.0825 (0.0898)

Income

-0.0741 (0.0380)

0.0177 (0.0361)

Resides in South

-0.407 (0.321)

-0.272 (0.281)

Married

0.413 (0.295)

0.885** (0.283)

Birth Year

0.0183 (0.00998)

0.00133 (0.00920)

Catholic

0.457 (0.319)

0.0103 (0.324)

Constant

-35.03 (19.64)

-3.832 (18.13)

Observations

493

493

Robust standard errors in parentheses

** p 〈 .01

* p 〈 .05

(p.174)

Table A5.3 Multinomial Logistic Regression Analysis of Senate Voting (2006 & 2008) on Generalized Representation Preferences and Controls

Senate Vote 2006 & 2008 (Base Category, Dem. vote in 2006 & 2008) (Results for Figure 5.3)

Mixed Vote

GOP 2006 & 2008

Generalised Rep. Prefs.

0.509* (0.232)

0.704** (0.205)

Women

-0.0718 (0.383)

-0.768* (0.330)

Whites

-0.0935 (0.588)

-0.0476 (0.393)

Education

-0.636** (0.153)

-0.332** (0.118)

Income

-0.0334 (0.0609)

-0.0241 (0.0421)

Resides in South

0.613 (0.404)

0.268 (0.339)

Married

0.445 (0.442)

0.976** (0.357)

Birth Year

0.0148 (0.0144)

0.00887 (0.0127)

Catholic

0.543 (0.487)

1.309** (0.395)

Constant

-29.11 (28.09)

-17.86 (24.97)

Observations

319

319

Robust standard errors in parentheses

** p 〈 .01

* p 〈 .05

(p.175)

Table A5.4 Multinomial Logistic Regression Analysis of Gubernatorial Voting (2006 & 2008) on Executive Representation Preferences and Controls

Governor Vote 2006 & 2008 (Base Category, Dem. vote 2006 & 2008) (Results for Figure 5.4)

Mixed

GOP 2006 & 2008

Executive Rep. Prefs.

1.789** (0.485)

2.359** (0.359)

Women

0.720 (0.489)

0.107 (0.350)

Whites

-0.553 (0.525)

0.373 (0.503)

Education

-0.345 (0.183)

-0.232 (0.132)

Income

-0.0652 (0.0647)

-0.00419 (0.0454)

Resides in South

-0.884 (0.625)

-0.127 (0.450)

Married

0.424 (0.539)

0.532 (0.374)

Birth Year

-0.00327 (0.0162)

-0.0123 (0.0122)

Catholic

-0.0942 (0.586)

0.146 (0.405)

Constant

6.266 (31.86)

23.03 (23.93)

Observations

266

266

Robust standard errors in parentheses

** p 〈 .01

* p 〈 .05

(p.176)

Table A5.5 Ols Regression of Respondents’ Prioritization of Traits Vs. Policies When Evaluating Candidates, on Representation Preferences and Controls

Representation Prefs. (Trustee high)

-0.0156* (0.00749)

African American

0.0775* (0.0304)

Resides in South

-0.0293* (0.0141)

Women

-0.0119 (0.0148)

Married

-0.00890 (0.00837)

Age (in years)

-3.27e-05 (0.000510)

Education

0.00302 (0.00563)

Income

0.00381 (0.00297)

Constant

0.688 (1.005)

Observations

3,429

Robust standard errors in parentheses

** p 〈 .01

* p 〈 .05

Table A5.6 Ols Regression of Experimental Subjects’ Evaluation of Hypothetical Congressional Candidate, According to Differences in Christian Traditionalism

Delegate Treatment

Trustee Treatment

Control

Christian Traditionalism

.03 (.02)

.09 (.02)**

.02 (.02)

Constant

.64 (.02)**

.65 (.01)**

.66 (.02)**

N

251

208

238

Robust standard errors in parentheses

** p 〈 .01

* p 〈 .05

(p.177)

Table A5.7 Ols Regression of Experimental Subjects’ Evaluation of Hypothetical Congressional Candidate, According to Differences in Partisan Orientation

Delegate Treatment

Trustee Treatment

Control

Partisan Orientation (GOP)

.00 (.02)

.07 (.01)**

.00 (.02)

Constant

.63 (.01)**

.64 (.01)**

.66 (.01)**

N

322

286

334

Robust standard errors in parentheses

** p 〈 .01

* p 〈 .05

Table A5.8 Supplementary Analysis: Ols Regression of Experimental Subjects’ Evaluation of Hypothetical Congressional Candidate, According to Differences in Egalitarianism

Delegate Treatment

Trustee Treatment

Control

Egalitarianism

.03 (.04)

-.12 (.04)**

.05 (.04)

Constant

.61 (.03)**

.70 (.02)**

.63 (.03)**

N

344

298

338

Robust standard errors in parentheses

** p 〈 .01

* p 〈 .05

Table A5.9 Supplementary Analysis: Ols Regression of Experimental Subjects’ Evaluation of Hypothetical Congressional Candidate, According to Differences in Humanism

Delegate Treatment

Trustee Treatment

Control

Humanism

.02 (.04)

-.14 (.04)**

.01 (.04)

Constant

.62 (.02)**

.59 (.02)**

.66 (.02)**

N

343

297

344

Robust standard errors in parentheses

** p 〈 .01

* p 〈 .05