| Lodge, Stroh, and Wahlke (1990) noted that all models of evaluation were "black box" models because they were "silent about the processes that drive their explanations" (p. 13). This dissertation attempts to peer inside the "black box" to achieve a greater understanding of how individuals process political information. Two student-based experiments are used to test several hypotheses concerning information processing. These hypotheses include: (a) activating one's attitudes about political parties cross-activates one attitudes about political actors making them more accessible, (b) activating one's attitudes about political actors does not make one's attitudes about political parties more accessible due to the chronic accessibility of attitudes about political parties, (c) models that test competing evaluative strategies using fictitious candidates are inaccurate, (d) receiving information in a debate-style format (dimension-centered format) makes it easier to recall information and update one's assessment of proximity to the candidates.;Experiment I tests theories of cross-activation between related political constructs and the chronic accessibility of attitudes about political parties. Findings gleaned from a survey-based experiment indicate that the accessibility of attitudes about political actors is increased when subjects received information about political parties. Efficacy, sophistication, and updated proximity, or similarity, assessments also combined to increase the accessibility of attitudes about political actors. Results also lend support for the hypothesis that attitudes about political parties are chronically accessible.;Experiment II offers a re-examination of Rahn, Aldrich, and Borgida's evaluative model concluding that their use of fictitious candidates and the construction of some of their variables casts some doubt on their conclusions. Experiment II also posits an "update" model of evaluation that demonstrates individuals tend to use a mixed strategy of both on-line and memory-based approaches in creating evaluations and highlights the importance of the individual's policy proximity assessment, sophistication, and information format on the evaluative process as one updates his or her evaluations in light of new information. |
