Elections are sometimes seen as legitimizing institutions, promoting system-level support among citizens by allowing them to have input into the political process. However, prior research has found that this is less true among supporters of losing candidates, who often exhibit lower levels of political trust and satisfaction with democracy. We analyze NES survey data from 1964 to 2004, as well as surveys from Florida and the nation following the controversial presidential election of 2000, and find that (1) losers exhibit lower levels of political trust, satisfaction with democracy, confidence that government is responsive to citizens, and in early 2001 were less inclined to extend legitimacy to the newly elected president; (2) losers also are more likely to endorse “rationalizations” as explanations of the election outcome, to be less satisfied with the choice of candidates offered in the election, and to perceive the electoral process as unfair; and (3) voter interpretations of the election mediate the relationships between winning/losing on the one hand, and trust, responsiveness, and satisfaction with democracy on the other. These findings suggest that the so-called legitimizing function of elections is far from a universal phenomenon.

Recent research has recognized that many people simultaneously hold positive and negative attitudes about important political issues. In this article, we review the concept of attitudinal ambivalence and propose a survey-based measure of ambivalence adapted from the experimental literature. Extending our earlier work on abortion, analysis of a statewide telephone survey of Florida residents reveals that (1) many people have ambivalent attitudes about issues related to gay and lesbian rights; (2) the amount of ambivalence varies according to the specific rights in question (military service, gay marriage and adoption, membership in youth organizations such as Boy Scouts, and others); (3) ambivalence on gay rights is to some extent a function of conflict among citizens’ underlying core values; and (4) under certain circumstances, ambivalence appears to mediate the relationship between a person’s issue preferences with regard to gay rights and his or her evaluation of political leaders and institutions.

Objectives. We analyze differences in how men and women in Latin American countries are utilizing the Internet to identify a possible regional gendered digital divide in Internet use. The extent, degree, and implications of this gender digital divide are explored across countries with varying degrees of digital freedom. Methods. We employ a series of random-and fixed-effects models utilizing individual-level data from the 2010 Latin Barometer merged with country-level data obtained from the U.N. Gender Inequality Index. Results. Our results suggest that, in general, Latin American men tend to use the Internet more than women. Men also use more social media and gather political information more frequently. In addition, Internet use is higher across these categories in countries with more gender equality. Conclusion. The potential for the Internet to serve as a social and political equalizing force in Latin America is stymied in part by the gendered digital divide.

Objectives In recent years, political scientists have found that civic education improves the democratic capacity of students, yet little research has been done to date on how and why civic education works when it does. In this study, we go inside the classroom to explore how teachers teach civics to find out what works best at preparing young people for responsible, democratic citizenship. Methods Using a survey of American students, principals, and teachers, we examine the varied instructional methods being employed by social studies teachers in ninth‐grade classrooms across the country to determine which methods and which combinations of methods do the best job of enhancing students’ democratic capacity defined as their political knowledge, political efficacy, and intent to vote. Results Our results suggest that there are four broad teaching approaches employed by social studies teachers: traditional teaching, active learning, video teaching, and maintenance of an open classroom climate. Teachers may employ some combination of these approaches. The analysis indicates that approaches that foster an open classroom climate (encouraging student input) in combination with the others tend to be the most fruitful across the board. While any combination including an open classroom climate maximizes benefit, traditional teaching (i.e., use of methods including textbook reading, worksheets, memorization, and so forth) combined with an open classroom climate seems to do the best. Also, the results suggest that the combinations that work best for stimulating internal efficacy vary greatly from those stimulating the other citizenship outcomes. Conclusions Taken together, our results suggest that fostering an open classroom climate when teaching civics is the surest way to improve the democratic capacity of America's youth. Further, teachers should be attentive to the instructional tradeoffs necessary to creating student capacities for both active and informed citizenship.

No abstract