Getting ‘political,’ whatever that might mean

Definition varies by placement on political spectrum and geographic region, researcher finds

By Clay Evans

Political scientists, particularly those interested in political behavior, have understandably spent a good deal of time exploring the connection between individuals and the political realm.

But where, exactly, do the boundaries of that realm lie?

“Asking people how often they engage in political discussion is a common question in public opinion surveys,” says Jennifer Fitzgerald, associate professor of political science at the University of Colorado Boulder. “But it occurred to me that I don’t even know what ‘political’ means to people. I have my working definition, and I imagine other people have a sort of instinct about what it means.”

The lack of solid information about what the very idea of “political” means to research subjects, Fitzgerald realized, “put into question some of our bigger findings that rested on survey questions.”



So she figured she’d do something about it. Armed with a seed grant from Stein Sture, vice chancellor for research at CU-Boulder, Fitzgerald set up a study  “to establish whether people have vastly different ideas about what counts as political,” the results of which were published as “What Does Political Mean to You?” in Political Behavior.

To maximize potential differences in nationality, as well as those of gender, age, ideology and other factors, Fitzgerald surveyed 241 people in the communities of Port Huron, Mich., and Sarnia, Ont. — physically conjoined yet separated by the American-Canadian national border. She asked respondents to imagine that they were the editor of a “political magazine,” then judge what kind of stories, from a list of 33 topics, belonged in the publication.

“(C)hoose the ones that are ‘political.’ This should be your only consideration,” the survey directed.

“We just wanted them to use their ‘gut,’” Fitzgerald says.

Overall, subjects defined “political” in three broad ways: anything related to government; what government should (or shouldn’t) do; and finally, if it’s controversial.

“If people are fighting about it,” Fitzgerald says, “survey respondents tend to think it’s political.”

The study ranked all 33 topics according to how many respondents, overall, deemed them political. Nearly 90 percent agreed that tax cuts are political, the top answer, while 95 percent said “diet pills” are not political. A sampling of topics in between, in descending order: nuclear weapons, global warming, terrorism, oil drilling, same-sex marriage, childcare, morality, tourism and museum exhibitions.

The study — which Fitzgerald deems “preliminary, exploratory (and) suggestive” — revealed that generally speaking, conservatives have a narrower perception of what “political” means. That finding, she says, goes to the second primary prism through which people define the word.

“Conservatives who think political relates to desired government functions think very few things are political. Essentially, they are saying they want less government,” she says.

Meanwhile, there is also a divide between Americans and Canadians. Canadians generally found more topics to be political, most notably in “care” categories — childcare, poverty, refugees and other topics. Fitzgerald surmises that this could be related to the fact that Canada’s government is more engaged in those areas than is the U.S. government.

“It could just be that their government does more things,” she says.

Education also may be a factor, Fitzgerald says. People with more education are more likely to identify more topics as political. And, she notes, that political scientists themselves tend to think more things are political, perhaps including diet pills; after all, that seemingly banal topic can relate to body image, sexism, medical ethics and even policies at the Food and Drug Administration, which makes regulations and regulates diet pills.

“We are probably making some assumptions when conducting survey research. We need to stop and get the lay of the land every once in a while,” she says.

Fitzgerald calls the findings “cool” and “fun to look at,” but they are also much more than that. After all, if two people are talking about, say, same-sex marriage, and one thinks it’s a political discussion and the other doesn’t, that has implications for researchers.

“Individuals’ interpretations of the term ‘politics’ relate systematically to other measures of self-reported political behavior including political interest and frequency of political discussion,” she writes in her abstract. “These results can be used to refine survey analysis and to broaden knowledge of day-to-day citizen politics.”

And that’s something that other political scientists say is needed.

“Too many times, scholars take as given well-used concepts or empirical findings. Professor Fitzgerald question is a foundational one that really hasn’t been asked before,” says David S. Brown, professor and chair in the Department of Political Science at CU-Boulder. “Both because of its novelty and centrality to political behavior research, her findings will have an important impact on how we conduct research and will also challenge previous empirical findings.”

December 2013