1973. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In Second International Symposium on Information Theory, ed. Petrox, B. and Caski, F., 267–81. Budapest: Akademia Kaido.
Aldrich, John H., Borgida, Eugene, and Sullivan, John. 1989. Foreign affairs and issue voting: Do presidential candidates ‘waltz before a blind audience?’ American Journal of Political Science
Aldrich, John H., Gronke, Paul, and Grynaviski, Jeffrey. 1999. Policy, personality, and presidential performance. Paper presented at the 1999 Midwest Political Science Association meetings, Chicago, IL.
Brambor, Thomas, Clark, William, and Golder, Matt. 2006. Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis
1978. Partialed products are interactions; partialed powers are curve components. Psychological Bulletin
Converse, Philip. 1964. The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In Ideology and discontent, ed. Apter, David. New York: Free Press.
Converse, Philip, and Markus, Gregory. 1979. Plus ca change: The new CPS election study panel. American Political Science Review
Corrigan, Bryce, and Grynaviski, Jeffrey. 2005. The endogenous estimation of issue importance: Mixture models of heterogeneity in candidate evaluation. A Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association meetings, Chicago, IL.
Dahl, Robert. 1956. A preface to democratic theory. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Davis, Otto, Hinich, Melvin, and Ordeshook, Peter. 1970. An expository development of a mathematical model of the electoral process. American Political Science Review
Eagley, Alice, and Chaiken, Shelly. 1998. Attitude structure and function. In The handbook of social psychology. 4th ed. Vol. 1, ed. Gilbert, D., Frist, S. T., and Lindzey, G., 269–313. New York: McGraw Hill.
Enelow, James, Hinich, Melvin, and Mendell, Nancy. 1986. An empirical evaluation of alternative spatial models of elections. Journal of Politics
Enelow, James, Mendell, Nancy, and Ramesh, Subha. 1988. A comparison of two distance metrics through regression diagnostics of a model of relative candidate evaluation. Journal of Politics
Funk, Carolyn. 1999. Bringing the candidate into models of candidate evaluation. Journal of Politics
Gershkoff, Amy. 2005. How issue interest can save the American public. Paper presented at the 2005 Midwest Political Science Association meetings, Chicago, IL (August 25, 2005 revision).
Grynaviski, Jeffrey. 2003. Do issue publics exist? An application of Bayesian mixture models. A Paper presented at the American Political Science Association meetings, Philadelphia, PA.
Hill, Jennifer, and Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2001. An extension and test of converse’ ‘black and white’ model of response stability. American Political Science Review
Hinich, Melvin H., and Munger, Michael C.
1997. Analytical politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hutchings, Vincent. 2003. Public opinion and democratic accountability. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kinder, Donald. 1986. Presidential character revisited. In Political cognition, ed. Lau, Richard and Sears, David. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
King, G., Honaker, J., Joseph, A., and Scheve, K.
2001. Analyzing incomplete political science data: An alternative algorithm to multiple imputation. The American Political Science Review
Krosnick, Jon A.
1988. The role of attitude importance in social evaluation: A study of policy preferences, presidential candidate evaluations, and voting behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Krosnick, Jon A.
1989. Attitude importance and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Krosnick, Jon A.
1990. Government policy and citizen passion: A study of issue publics in contemporary America. Political Behavior
Macdonald, Stuart Elaine, Rabinowitz, George, and Listhaug, Ola. 2001. Sophistry versus science: On further efforts to rehabilitate the proximity model. The Journal of Politics
Miller, Joanne, and Peterson, David. 2004. Theoretical and empirical implications of attitude strength. Journal of Politics
Miller, Warren, and Shanks, Merrill. 1996. The new American voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Niemi, Richard G., and Bartels, Larry M.
1985. New measures of issue salience. Journal of Politics
Page, Benjamin I., and Jones, C. C.
1979. Reciprocal effects of policy preferences, party loyalties, and the vote. American Political Science Review
Pennock, J. R.
1979. Democratic political theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Peterson, David. 2004. Certainty or accessibility: Attitude strength in candidate evaluations. American Journal of Political Analysis
Rabinowitz, George, Prothro, James W., and Jacoby, William. 1982. Salience as a factor in the impact of issues on candidate evaluation. Journal of Politics
Raftery, A. E.
1995. Bayesian model selection in social research (with discussion). In Sociological methodology 1995, ed. Marsden, P. V., 411–27. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Rahn, Wendy. 1995. Candidate evaluation in complex information environments: Cognitive organization and comparison process. In Political judgement, ed. Lodge, Milton and McGraw, Kathleen. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Rahn, Wendy, Aldrich, John, Borgida, Eugene, and Sullivan, John. 1990. A social cognitive model of candidate appraisal. In Information and democratic process, ed. Ferejohn, John and Kuklinski, James. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Repass, David. 1971. Issue salience and party choice. American Political Science Review
Rubin, Donald. 1987. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley.
Schafer, Joseph L.
1997. Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. London: Chapman and Hall.
1978. Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics
Visser, Penny, Bizer, George, and Krosnick, Jon. 2003. Distinguishing the cognitive and behavioral consequences of attitude importance and certainty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Westholm, Anders. 2001. On the return of epicycles: Some crossroads in spatial modeling revisited. Journal of Politics