The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
You’ve Either Got It or You Don’t? The Stability of Political Interest over the Life Cycle
Abstract
Some people are more politically interested than others, but political scientists do not know how stable these differences are and why they occur. This paper examines stability in political interest. Eleven different panel surveys taken in four different countries over 40 years are used to measure stability. Several studies include a much larger number of interview waves—up to 23—than commonly used panels. The analysis empirically characterizes the stability of interest over time using a model that accounts for measurement error and a dynamic panel model. The large number of panel waves makes it possible to relax many restrictive assumptions to ensure robustness. With one exception (Germany reunification), political interest is exceptionally stable in the short run and over long periods of time. Hence, this study provides strong justification for efforts to understand how political interest forms among young people.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2297968 · Cited by 33,272
(2010) · Social Science Quarterly · doi:10.1111/(issn)1540-6237 · Cited by 13,458
How to do Xtabond2: An Introduction to Difference and System GMM in Stata
Roodman, D. (2009) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0900900106 · Cited by 9,848
EQS : structural equations program manual
Bentler, P. M. (1989) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 9,669
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Zaller, J. R. (1992) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511818691 · Cited by 7,785
Voice and equality: civic voluntarism in American politics
(1996) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-3597 · Cited by 5,186
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion.
Kenski, H. C., & Zaller, J. R. (1993) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2074664 · Cited by 5,169
Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, Third Edition
Byrne, B. M. (2016) · doi:10.4324/9781315757421 · Cited by 4,653
What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters
Brooks, C., Carpini, M. X. D., & Keeter, S. (1997) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2655098 · Cited by 4,437
Byrne, B. M. (2013) · doi:10.4324/9780203805534 · Cited by 4,016
Cited by
Differences in negativity bias underlie variations in political ideology
Hibbing, J. R., Smith, K. B., & Alford, J. R. (2014) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x13001192 · Cited by 608
Homemade citizens: The development of political interest during adolescence and young adulthood
Neundorf, A., Smets, K., & García-Albacete, G. M. (2013) · Acta Politica · doi:10.1057/ap.2012.23 · Cited by 208
Krupnikov, Y., & Ryan, J. B. (2022) · doi:10.1017/9781108923323 · Cited by 175
Conceptualizing, Organizing, and Positing Moderation in Communication Research
Holbert, R. L., & Park, E. (2020) · Communication Theory · doi:10.1093/ct/qtz006 · Cited by 146
Self-Confidence and Gender Gaps in Political Interest, Attention, and Efficacy
Wolak, J. (2020) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1086/708644 · Cited by 117
Metadata
- Authors
- Prior, M.
- Venue
- The Journal of Politics
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2010-07
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 747-766
- ISSN
- 0022-3816 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2508
- OpenAlex
- W2037704402
- Cited by
- 564
- References
- 49
- FWCI
- 121.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: You’ve Either Got It or You Don’t? The Stability of Political Interest over the Life Cycle. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0022381610000149
- The paper
- Prior, M. (2010). You’ve Either Got It or You Don’t? The Stability of Political Interest over the Life Cycle. The Journal of Politics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381610000149
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
