political ideology research papers

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

The Oxford Handbook of Political Ideologies

Professor Michael Freeden, Mansfield College, Oxford University

Professor Marc Stears, University College, Oxford University

• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This Handbook offers a comprehensive analysis of both the nature of political ideologies and their main manifestations. The diversity of ideology studies is represented by a range of theories that illuminate the field, combined with an appreciation of the changing complexity of concrete ideologies and the emergence of new ones. The Handbook is divided into three sections: The first reflects some of the latest thinking about the development of ideology on an historical dimension, from the standpoints of conceptual history, Marx studies, social science theory and history, and leading schools of continental philosophy. The second includes some of the most recent interpretations and theories of ideology. The third focuses on the leading ideological families and traditions, as well as on some of their cultural and geographical manifestations, incorporating both historical and contemporary perspectives.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• Google Scholar Indexing
• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code

Institutional access

• Sign in with a library card Sign in with username/password Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Political Ideology and Participation in Clinical Studies

Matthew gabel.

1 Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center, Washington University, St. Louis, MO

2 Department of Political Science, Washington University, St. Louis, MO

Jonathan Gooblar

7 Stanford University Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Stanford, CA

Catherine M. Roe

3 Department of Neurology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO

Natalie J. Selsor

John c. morris.

4 Department of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO

5 Department of Physical Therapy, Washington University, St. Louis, MO

6 Department of Occupational Therapy of the School of Medicine, Washington University, St. Louis, MO

Americans’ confidence in science varies based on their political ideology. This ideological divide has potentially important effects on citizens’ engagement with and participation in clinical studies of Alzheimer Disease (AD).

A probability sample of 1583 Americans was surveyed about their willingness to participate in longitudinal AD research and about their political attitudes. These survey results were compared with a survey of 382 participants in a longitudinal AD study at the Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center (Knight ADRC).

Among Americans, more conservative ideology decreases willingness to participate in a hypothetical longitudinal cohort study of AD both directly and through its negative effect on confidence in science. The Knight ADRC study participants expressed more liberal ideology and greater confidence in science than Americans in general. Of the survey respondents opposed to participation, over a quarter changed to neutral or positive if the study returned their research results to them.

Conclusions and Relevance

Clinical studies of AD are likely biased toward participants who are more liberal and have higher confidence in science than the general population. This recruitment bias may be reduced by lowering the trust demanded of participants through measures such as returning research results to participants.

1. Introduction

The conduct and efficacy of medical research depends on public commitment to science. Public funding and public policies governing research set limits on the scope and process of medical inquiry. Perhaps most directly, research involving human subjects often relies critically on voluntary public participation. The demands on volunteers can be quite substantial, as seen in issues with recruitment for large prospective longitudinal cohort studies and for clinical trials. 1 , 2 , 3

We investigate one important obstacle to successful recruitment for clinical studies conducted in the United States: the wide ideological divergence in Americans’ confidence in the scientific community. Political ideology reflects fundamental political values and is relatively stable, providing a general structure from which one derives attitudes toward social, economic, and political institutions and public policies. 4 , 5 , 6 Americans with a conservative political ideology gradually lost confidence in the scientific community over the last thirty years and now express significantly less trust in science than do liberals. 7 , 8 , 9 If this ideological divide in trust affects public participation in medical studies, many study cohorts are likely biased ideologically. Moreover, given that political ideology is correlated with important health behaviors (e.g., smoking) and health outcomes, this bias—if unaddressed—could substantially limit the generalizability of study findings. 10 , 11 , 12

We examine how this ideological divide relates to study participation in the context of prospective longitudinal cohort studies for Alzheimer disease (AD). AD investigators rely heavily on longitudinal clinical research for the development of treatments and prevention strategies. Currently, AD studies are recruiting over 70,000 volunteers for 150 active trials in North America. 13 The demand on participants for these trials is often high, as they may include frequent cognitive testing, neuroimaging studies, lumbar puncture to obtain cerebrospinal fluid, and collection of information about their daily function from family members. With few exceptions, volunteers are not informed about their individual performance. Participation in these studies therefore involves an important element of trust in researchers. The ideological divide in trust in science could therefore influence the decision to participate in these longitudinal studies.

2.1 Participants

Mass survey respondents are a probability sample of 1583 adult US citizens in June 2014 through the American Panel Survey (TAPS), a monthly on-line panel survey conducted by Knowledge Networks for the Weidenbaum Center at Washington University in St. Louis. The analysis uses a weighting strategy that ensures the sample is representative of the U.S. adult population. 14 The TAPS survey was reviewed and deemed exempt by the Washington University Institutional Review Board.

We compare the TAPS survey responses with those of cognitively normal participants (n=412) in longitudinal studies at Washington University’s Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center (Knight ADRC) surveyed between June 2013 and February 2016. 15 All participants were invited to participate in a paper and pencil survey at their regularly scheduled annual visits. At these visits, participants undergo blood draw for genetic testing, cognitive evaluations, and assessments of self-reported health and psychological changes. Individuals selected for this study also completed lumbar puncture for AD biomarker assessment. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants and the study was approved by the Washington University Human Research Protection Office. A small number (n=30) of Knight ADRC participants failed to complete the survey. Those who failed to complete the survey were similar to those who completed the survey with regard to age, sex, and average years of education (some college).

2.2. Survey Instrument

We included survey questions regarding AD study participation in the June 2014 mass opinion survey—The American Panel Survey (TAPS). The TAPS survey included respondents’ self-reported socio-economic and demographic characteristics (including self-reported race), respondents’ answers to a standard battery of questions concerning economic and political issues, and our module of questions regarding confidence in political and social institutions and participation in medical research. Our module included a vignette regarding an AD research study comparable to the character and burden of participating in the Knight ADRC longitudinal studies. We also included conventional measures of confidence in science and political ideology and employed them in surveys of both the TAPS and the Knight ADRC respondents.

Political Ideology

Respondents were asked, “In terms of your political views, do you think of yourself as:” and presented with a 7-point Likert scale. The options were very conservative, conservative, slightly conservative, moderate, slightly liberal, liberal, very liberal, and “don’t know”. The 111 respondents who indicated “don’t know” were presented with a follow-up question, “If you had to choose, would you consider yourself a liberal or conservative?”. Responses of “liberal” or “conservative” were coded as “slightly liberal” or “slightly conservative” on the original 7-point scale. The remaining 18 respondents who refused to answer were dropped from the analysis. The responses were recoded so that the variable ranges from 0 (very conservative) to 6 (very liberal). The Knight ADRC respondents answered a similar survey question about their ideology with the same 7-point response scale. Because the Knight ADRC survey did not include a follow-up question, the 17 responses of “don’t know” were assigned to categories using multiple imputation. The 18 Knight ADRC respondents who refused to answer were dropped from the analysis.

Confidence in the Scientific Community and Other Institutions

Respondents were asked, “As for the people running each of these professions and institutions, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, quite a lot of confidence, only some confidence, or very little confidence in them?” with reference to the following institutions and professions: the press, the television news, the Supreme Court, the scientific community, Congress, and the military. The responses were on a 4-point Likert scale coded so that the variable ranges from 0 (very little confidence) to 3 (great deal of confidence). For the “scientific community”, 22 respondents refused to answer the question and were eliminated from the analysis. The same survey question was asked of Knight ADRC study participants. Twenty-two participants refused to answer and were eliminated from the analysis.

We used the TAPS responses in reference to the other institutions/professions to create a measure of each respondent’s general confidence in institutions. Specifically, we estimated a one-factor model of responses to these questions using principal factors analysis. All items were positively related to the single factor and the eigenvalues (factor 1=1.93; factor 2=0.29) strongly supported a single-factor model. We then generated factor scores for TAPS respondents, with higher scores indicating higher general confidence in institutions. Fifty-six respondents refused to answer one or more of these questions and were excluded from the analysis.

Willingness to Participate in Alzheimer Disease Study

TAPS Survey respondents were presented with the following vignette describing the research study:

Some healthy people join research studies about Alzheimer disease. Such studies often involve a 2-3 hour interview at a medical center where the person tells their medical history, completes tests of memory and thinking, and has a physical examination. These interviews and test are repeated every year, for 10 or more years. Information from these and other tests, such as a brain scan (MRI) and a spinal tap, help researchers better understand Alzheimer disease so that better treatments can be developed. The test results are kept confidential and are not typically shared with the study participants.

They were then asked whether they agreed or disagreed with two statements. The first statement was “I would be willing to join such a study about Alzheimer disease.” The response options were on a 5-point Likert scale: strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree. Eighteen respondents refused to answer this question and were eliminated from the analysis. The responses were coded so that the variable ranges from 0 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The second statement was “I would be willing to join such a study about Alzheimer disease, but only if I learn my test results.” The response options and coding were the same as for the first statement. We excluded the 23 respondents who refused to answer this question.

Given that the questions were asked in order, we expect the answer to the first question to anchor the responses to the second (e.g., the stipulation can only increase willingness above the level indicated in response to the first question). Thus, by comparing responses to the two questions, we can identify how important that stipulation is to the respondent’s willingness to participate in such a study. Accordingly, we created a variable for the change in willingness due to learning test results by subtracting respondent answers to the first question from their responses to the second question.

Race: Black/African American

In both surveys, respondents were asked to choose one or more categories from a list to indicate the race they consider themselves. We created a dummy variable coded 1 for respondents who indicated “Black or African American” and coded 0 otherwise. Seventeen TAPS respondents were eliminated due to missing data on this question.

Level of Education

Respondents were asked “What is the highest level of school you have completed?” and presented with fifteen ordinal options ranging from “no formal education” (1) to “Doctorate degree” (15). Two respondents refused to answer and were eliminated from analysis. In the Knight ADRC survey, respondents reported the number of years of schooling.

We use the self-reported year of birth (TAPS respondents) and the full birthdate (Knight ADRC study subjects) to calculate the age at time of survey. In the TAPS survey, 27 respondents did not report their year of birth and were eliminated from the analysis.

2.3. Statistical Methods and Analysis

The descriptive statistics, difference in proportions tests, multiple imputation, and regression analyses were executed with STATA 14.0. The STATA svy suite for survey weighted data was used for the TAPS survey data. The mediation analysis was conducted with the “medeff” function in STATA. 16 This function provides estimates of mediated effects with robust (Huber/White/sandwich) standard errors and accommodates weighted survey data and continuous and binary outcome variables.

TAPS survey respondents varied considerably in their political ideology and confidence in science ( Table 1 ). Although the modal respondent was an ideological moderate, most respondents identified as at least slightly conservative (44%) or liberal (31%). A large share (45%) of respondents had only some or very little confidence in the scientific community. Respondents were widely divided in their willingness to participate, with almost half expressing some willingness to participate. Overall, 33% agreed and 16% strongly agreed with the statement that they would be willing to join the hypothetical study. Figure 1 presents the path diagram of the direct and mediated effect of political ideology on willingness to participate. 17 Consistent with past studies, political ideology positively predicted confidence in science. Political ideology was also positively related to willingness to participate in research studies. Trust in science had a positive and statistically significant effect on participation, mediating the effect of ideology. For example, a change from very conservative to very liberal ideology had an adjusted average causal mediation effect (ACME) of 0.20 (95% CI: 0.09 to 0.33), an average direct effect of 0.35 (95% CI: 0.03 to 0.67) and a total effect of 0.55 (95% CI: 0.23 to 0.87). Over a third of the effect of ideology (36%, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.87) was mediated. These relationships survived the inclusion of controls for several potential confounding factors: African-American race, level of education, age and general level of confidence in institutions.

Note: The values in the figure represent standardized regression coefficients. The value in parentheses is for the total effect of political ideology, which was estimated in the equation without confidence in science. ** p<.01, two-tailed test; * p<.05, two-tailed test.

Descriptive statistics

In addition to the TAPS survey involving hypothetical participation in an AD study, we examined attitudes among older adults enrolled in an actual AD study at the Knight ADRC. Knight ADRC participants and TAPS survey respondents were similar in terms of racial composition and average education levels (see Table 1 ). The TAPS respondents reported on average at least some college education, while the Knight ADRC participants reported on average almost 16 years of education. In addition, the Knight ADRC participants were substantially older than the TAPS respondents (see Table 1 ). Consequently, we compared the Knight ADRC participants with both the full set of TAPS respondents and with an older subset over 60 years of age for each of the main analyses.

Figure 2 shows that Knight ADRC participants reported more liberal and less conservative ideology than the US general public, as indicated by the TAPS survey results. The Knight ADRC study participants were almost 50% more liberal than were the TAPS respondents (p<.01, two-tailed test). Furthermore, the subset of TAPS respondents who were very willing to participate in the hypothetical study were much more liberal than the full sample of TAPS respondents and very similar in ideology to that of the Knight ADRC participants. We found no statistical difference in the proportion of respondents who identified as liberal in the TAPS subset (40%) and the proportion who identified as liberal among the Knight ADRC participants (44%, p>0.28, two-tailed test).

Note: The TAPS (very willing) subset consists of TAPS survey respondents who answered “strongly agree” in response to the survey question about their willingness to participate in the longitudinal research study of Alzheimer disease. The three categories of political ideology were constructed by combining the ideologically related responses to the 7-point Likert scale used in the survey question. For example, responses of 0-2 (very conservative, conservative, and slightly conservative) comprise the ‘conservative’ category.

These same relationships hold when we compare the Knight ADRC study subjects with the TAPS respondents over 60 years of age. Knight ADRC study subjects were more liberal than the full set of older TAPS respondents (p<.01, two-tailed test). Furthermore, among older respondents who reported that they were very willing to participate in a hypothetical AD study, the proportion expressing a liberal ideology (42%) was nearly identical that of the Knight ADRC study subjects (44%) (p>0.68, two-tailed test).

These distinctions between the Knight ADRC participants and the TAPS survey respondents generally apply to confidence in science as well ( Figure 3 ). The Knight ADRC study participants reported relatively high levels of trust in science, particularly when compared to the full sample of TAPS respondents. A higher proportion of Knight ADRC participants expressed a great deal of confidence in science (24%) than in the full set of TAPS respondents (17%) (p<.01, two-tailed test). Furthermore, the proportion expressing a great deal of confidence among the subset of TAPS respondents most willing to participate in the hypothetical study (26%) was not statistically different from that of the Knight ADRC participants (24% (p>0.57, two-tailed test).

Note: The TAPS (very willing) subset consists of TAPS survey respondents who answered “strongly agree” in response to the survey question about their willingness to participate in the longitudinal research study of Alzheimer disease.

We found the same pattern when we compared the Knight ADRC participants with an older subset of TAPS respondents. The proportion of all TAPS respondents over 60 years old with a great deal of confidence in science (15%) was significantly lower than in the Knight ADRC group (24%) (p<.01, two-tailed test). Among older respondents who reported that they are very willing to participate in an AD study, the proportion with a great deal of confidence increased to (31%), which is not statistically different than the proportion in the Knight ADRC group (24%) (p>0.16, two-tailed test).

For a large proportion (40%) of TAPS respondents, interest in participation differed depending on whether study participants would learn their study results. About half (19%) of those respondents recorded a positive change, indicating they were more likely to participate with the stipulation “only if I learned my test results”. Of the respondents who were negatively predisposed toward participation without the stipulation, 27% abandoned their opposition to participation if the study stipulated they would learn their test results. Moreover, almost one-fifth of those originally opposed to participation changed to agreement with participation when the study stipulated learning test results.

The magnitude of the change in willingness due to sharing test results differed with political ideology. The per cent of conservatives (22%) with positive changes was greater that of liberals (15%), indicating that learning test results from the study was more salient to the participation of conservatives than it was for participation of liberals. This effect of ideology was both direct and mediated through confidence in science ( Figure 4 ). As ideology became more conservative, respondents were more likely to change to participation with the stipulation that test results are shared. Trust in science had a negative and statistically significant effect, mediating the effect of ideology. For example, a change from very conservative to very liberal ideology had an adjusted average causal mediation effect (ACME) −0.13 (95% CI: −0.23 to −0.05), an average direct effect of −0.35 (95% CI: −0.65 to −0.06) and a total effect of −0.49 (95% CI: −0.79 to −0.18). The mediated portion of the ideological effect was 28% (95% CI: 17% to 76%). These relationships held in the presence of controls for African-American race, level of education, age, and general level of confidence in institutions.

4. Discussion

The ideological divide among Americans in their trust in science has important implications for the recruitment and representativeness (external validity) of prospective longitudinal research studies. Almost half (49%) of survey respondents were willing to participate in a longitudinal AD study, which is generally consistent with the past results showing fairly broad willingness to participate in hypothetical longitudinal studies. 1 , 18 However, conservative Americans were less willing to participate than liberals and this ideological difference was mediated by their confidence in the scientific community. Furthermore, this divide in participation appears to affect participation in actual longitudinal research studies, not simply survey responses about hypothetical ones. Participants in an actual study of the type described in the vignette, the Knight ADRC study group, express comparable political ideology and confidence in science to the subset of TAPS respondents who were most willing to participate in the hypothetical study. Moreover, similar to this subset of TAPS respondents, the Knight ADRC study participants are significantly more liberal and express much greater confidence in the scientific community than does the general US public. This is also true for an older subset of TAPS respondents with a similar age distribution to that of the Knight ADRC group ( Table 1 ) and to that of many dementia studies. 19

These findings should inform the development of study recruitment practices, public outreach programs and policies regarding the disclosure of test results to research participants. Because ideological differences are associated with important differences in health behaviors and health outcomes, disregarding ideological bias in the recruitment of study subjects can pose a significant constraint on the external validity of longitudinal studies and clinical trials. 10 , 11 , 12 This problem can be addressed in at least two ways. First, and most concretely, studies can be designed to limit or reduce the level of trust required of participants. For example, when test results are kept from study subjects, they must trust that the study administrators will evaluate and act upon clinically relevant or otherwise important findings in the best interest of the participant. We found that this sort of concern likely affects willingness to participate in studies, as willingness among conservatives increased if the study results were shared with study participants. Of course, sharing test results requires careful implementation, as it may adversely affect the study or the study participants. 20 , 21 Nevertheless, disclosing test results is an example of study design attributes that may lower the trust demanded of study participants.

Second, and more long-term, the medical and scientific community can work to increase confidence in science. Political ideology, as conventionally understood, is fairly stable and difficult to manipulate. 4 , 5 , 6 But its connection to confidence in the scientific community is a potential target for improvement. Scientists and researchers are generally seen as highly competent but not particularly warm or trustworthy. 22 In particular, efforts by researchers to communicate uncertainty and impartiality in reporting scientific findings can enhance trust. 22 , 23 , 24 Targeting such messages at conservative audiences may reduce the ideological divide in willingness to participate.

The current study has several limitations. First, the TAPS survey design (e.g., the use of self-reported ideology and confidence in science and a hypothetical AD study vignette) to assess the political basis for participation may, at least in part, fail to capture actual behavioral choice about participation. Nevertheless, this concern is mitigated by the favorable comparison of ideology and trust in science between the TAPS survey respondents willing to participate in the hypothetical AD study and participants in the Knight ADRC. Second, the TAPS survey was conducted on-line with a national sample, while the Knight ADRC survey involved primarily residents of the St. Louis area and a paper-and-pencil survey. We were unable to control for these design features and thus cannot rule out that they may account for some of the observed differences across the surveys. Third, this study addressed participation in only a longitudinal AD study. Such AD studies are common and continue to recruit significant number of participants. However, whether confidence in science and political ideology affect other forms of participation in clinical research is an open question.

Acknowledgments

Funding/Support: This study was supported by a Washington University Research Strategic Alliance Grant awarded to Drs. Gabel and Morris and by grants P50 AG005681, P01 AG03991, and PO1 AG026276 from the National Institute of Aging (Dr. Morris).

Dr. Morris is currently participating in clinical trials of antidementia drugs from Eli Lilly and Company, Biogen, and Janssen. Dr. Morris serves as a consultant for Lilly USA. He receives research support from Eli Lilly/Avid Radiopharmaceuticals and is funded by NIH grants # P50AG005681; P01AG003991; P01AG026276 and UF01AG032438.

Role of Funder/Sponsor: The funding sources had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to the submit the manuscript for publication.

Conflict of Interests: Neither the authors nor their families own stock or has equity interest (outside of mutual funds or other externally directed accounts) in any pharmaceutical or biotechnology company.

Author Contributions: Dr. Gooblar and Dr. Gabel had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: Roe, Selsor. Gabel, Morris. Acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data: Gooblar, Gabel. Drafting of manuscript: Gabel, Gooblar. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.

Additional Contributions: The TAPS survey instrument was developed with the assistance of David Kaufman, Ph.D. and his related survey funded by NIH/NHGRI, U01HG005217 and by Steven Smith and Betsy Sinclair, Department of Political Science, Washington University, St. Louis.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

•  We're Hiring!
•  Help Center

Political Ideology

• Most Cited Papers
• Most Downloaded Papers
• Newest Papers
• Save to Library
• Last »
• Ideology Follow Following
• History of Political Thought Follow Following
• Political Theory Follow Following
• Political Science Follow Following
• Political Philosophy Follow Following
• Political Extremism/Radicalism/Populism Follow Following
• Political Parties Follow Following
• Nationalism Follow Following
• Liberalism Follow Following
• Republicanism Follow Following

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• Academia.edu Publishing
•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

More From Forbes

The right likes the past, but we all hate the present, study shows.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Today is trash.

Political discourse can make it seem people on the left and right live in completely different universes, but buried in a new paper you almost certainly missed in the journal Political Psychology this week is a bittersweet insight:

We actually all agree about the state of the world today, specifically that it sucks.

Instead the research leads with the rather anodyne finding that people’s political beliefs shape how they interpret history. Researcher Dr. Francesco Rigoli from City University London’s department of psychology surveyed people in the USA, UK, Italy, South Africa, Mexico, and Poland, having them place their political ideology somewhere on a left-right spectrum and asking a series of questions about their attitudes toward the past, present and future.

The results bolster tropes we’ve heard for years about conservatives and others to the right romanticizing the past while the left-wing looks to the future as an opportunity for something in between progress, liberation and revolution.

“These observations may help to clarify why people on the right often resist change: this may occur not much because they like the present, but, rather, because they like the past and they may view change as being a further step away from the past,” Dr. Rigoli said in a statement .

“The analyses also reveal that left-wing supporters believe that human actions can make a difference: their opinion is that, if appropriate choices are made, the future can improve substantially. However, the left’s optimism was evident only in the USA, Poland and possibly the UK, indicating that this is not a general phenomenon.”

One Of The Best Shows Ever Made Lands On Netflix Today For The Very First Time

Apple quietly adds free performance upgrade for all iphone 12 users, jerry seinfeld s new netflix movie looks great except for one thing.

I detect some generalized suspicion of (or perhaps disappointment with) the right in some of the word choices used by the author, which I myself found suspicious, despite being a life-long left-wing voter. But this is not what I found most interesting in these results.

The surprising result in some otherwise forgettable research is that political orientation had no bearing on how people feel about the present.

“Contrary to predictions, the present does not appear to be evaluated differently by the left and the right,” the paper reads.

Given our hyper-polarized times, I would think that the headline finding here might be something Onion-esque like “Researcher Surprised To Find We All Agree On Something.”

You have to dig a little bit into the data to learn we all agree the present is rather terrible.

When Rigoli analyzed the results by country, independent of ideological identification, the data shows all countries except Mexico evaluate the present as being worse than the past. (Mexican participants seem to believe the past and the present are more or less the same qualitatively.)

It’s Just Terrible For Everyone Else

This tracks with a trend towards cynicism or pessimism about the present that has become entrenched, at least in the United States, for about the last 25 years. Gallup has been measuring satisfaction with the way things are going in the US since the late 1970s. The last time more than half of the country felt more satisfied than dissatisfied with the state of things was in 1999 during the dot-com boom. Since then it’s been much more doom and gloom than boom, with the low point coming during the 2008 economic crisis.

But there’s an odd and oft-cited disconnect when these sorts of general sentiments come up: Gallup has also been measuring Americans’ satisfaction with their individual personal lives over the same period of time. The number of people in the US satisfied with their lives has hovered between 73 and 90 percent non-stop for the past 45 years.

I guess I’m just a little less interested what any of us think about the past or the future since it’s impossible to actually live in either. We universally seem to think that things are getting worse all around us, but we’re always doing great individually.

So what gives?

While many have ventured guesses about this bizarre gap, it hasn’t been rigorously studied. That’s a shame, because it would certainly yield some findings worthy of grabbing more headlines than how the right-wing is sooo into nostalgia.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Political Philosophy Research Paper Topics

This page provides a comprehensive list of political philosophy research paper topics that aim to guide students through the vast expanse of ideas, theories, and debates that have influenced political thought over the ages. Political philosophy, with its emphasis on societal structures, rights, justice, and governance, offers a rich tapestry of subjects for academic exploration. Navigating these topics is crucial for understanding the foundational principles that have dictated and continue to shape political systems worldwide.

100 Political Philosophy Research Paper Topics

Political philosophy holds an esteemed position in the vast realm of philosophical inquiry, examining the fundamental nature of governance, rights, freedom, and societal structures. As societies evolve, so too does the need for a deepened understanding of the principles that guide them. Diving into political philosophy research paper topics is more than an academic exercise; it’s an exploration into the fabric of our collective societal heritage and a forecast of future trajectories.

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

• Origin and evolution of political thought.
• Natural rights and their influence on politics.
• The role of reason in political decision-making.
• The concept of the common good.
• Pluralism and its implications.
• Classical vs. modern political philosophies.
• The notion of political obligation.
• Autonomy and its role in politics.
• Political philosophy and the question of human nature.
• Liberty, equality, and their tensions.
• Rousseau’s Social Contract and the general will.
• Locke’s Two Treatises of Government and property rights.
• Hobbes’ Leviathan and the necessity of a strong sovereign.
• Rawls’ theory of justice and the veil of ignorance.
• Scanlon’s contractualism.
• Gauthier’s Morals by Agreement.
• Contemporary criticisms of social contract theories.
• The role of trust in social contracts.
• Feminist perspectives on the social contract.
• The social contract and non-Western philosophies.
• Classical principles of Athenian democracy.
• Modern representative democracies.
• Merits and criticisms of autocratic governance.
• The rise and implications of technocratic governance.
• Participatory vs. deliberative democracy.
• The challenges of direct democracy.
• Monarchies and their evolving roles.
• Theocracy and its place in modern politics.
• Tribal and indigenous governance structures.
• Supranational entities and global governance.
• The philosophical foundations of human rights.
• Balancing individual freedom and collective responsibility.
• Limitations and responsibilities of free speech.
• Rights to privacy in the digital age.
• Economic rights and their implications.
• Rights of marginalized and indigenous groups.
• Environmental rights and intergenerational justice.
• Philosophical debates on freedom vs. security.
• The right to revolt and civil disobedience.
• Duties and the scope of global responsibilities.
• Socratic views on governance and society.
• Medieval political thought and the divine right.
• Enlightenment thinkers and the rise of republicanism.
• Fascist and Nazi political philosophies.
• Post-colonial political thought.
• Marxism and its global implications.
• Feminist political philosophies through history.
• Confucianism and East Asian political thought.
• African Ubuntu philosophy and politics.
• The political thought of the American Founding Fathers.
• Rawls’ Theory of Justice.
• Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia.
• Distributive vs. commutative justice.
• The gendered perspective on justice.
• Restorative and retributive justice.
• The philosophy of social and economic equality.
• Capability approach to justice.
• The philosophical foundations of affirmative action.
• Intersecting oppressions and justice.
• The role of luck in justice and fairness debates.
• Classical conceptions of political power.
• Weber’s tripartite classification of authority.
• The problem of political obligation.
• Foucault’s power/knowledge thesis.
• Challenges to political legitimacy.
• The philosophical underpinnings of civil resistance.
• Power dynamics in international relations.
• The concept of soft power.
• Critical theory and power structures.
• The philosophy behind sovereign immunity.
• Just War theory and its critiques.
• Philosophical perspectives on nuclear deterrence.
• Humanitarian interventions and their ethical implications.
• Realism vs. liberalism in international politics.
• Kant’s Perpetual Peace and modern peace theories.
• The politics and philosophy of global institutions.
• Philosophical underpinnings of international law.
• Terrorism, radicalism, and their challenges to political philosophy.
• The ethics of drone warfare.
• Philosophical discussions on global migration and borders.
• Philosophical defenses and critiques of capitalism.
• Marxist theory and its contemporary relevance.
• The evolution and varieties of socialism.
• Anarchist philosophies and critiques of the state.
• Fascism and its ideological roots.
• Libertarianism: principles and criticisms.
• Environmental political philosophies.
• Feminist political ideologies.
• Postmodern political thought.
• The future of neoliberalism.
• Contemporary Issues and Challenges in Political Philosophy.
• The philosophical implications of populism.
• Identity politics and its critiques.
• Political philosophy in the age of information.
• Climate change and political responsibilities.
• Bioethics, technology, and governance.
• Challenges and opportunities of globalism.
• Philosophical perspectives on nationalism.
• The future of democracy in a digital age.
• The rights and roles of AI in politics.
• The political implications of post-truth.

As we delve into the labyrinth of political philosophy research paper topics, we find ourselves confronted with a vast array of ideas, theories, and questions that have shaped societies for millennia. The dynamic interplay of power, rights, governance, and ethics remains as relevant today as it did in the days of Plato and Aristotle. Engaging with these topics is more than an academic endeavor—it’s a journey into the heart of what it means to be human, to be a citizen, and to be a part of the ever-evolving story of civilization. The timeless value of political philosophy serves as a testament to its enduring influence and the essential role it plays in our collective narrative.

The Range of Political Philosophy Research Paper Topics

Introduction

The annals of Western thought have been significantly shaped by the enduring influence of political philosophy. From the early musings of Socratic dialogues to the nuanced debates in contemporary think tanks, political philosophy provides a compass by which societies navigate the turbulent waters of governance, rights, and justice.

Overview of the Historical Evolution of Political Philosophy

Political philosophy, as a distinct discipline, has its roots in ancient civilizations. Early Greek thinkers, notably Plato and Aristotle, laid the groundwork for many debates that persist today. Their considerations of the ideal state, justice, and the nature of leadership set the stage for millennia of discourse. This classical foundation was built upon during the Roman era by philosophers like Cicero and later during the Enlightenment by figures such as Locke, Rousseau, and Montesquieu. Their discussions on social contracts, individual rights, and the separation of powers have left an indelible mark on Western political systems.

The 19th and 20th centuries ushered in a plethora of new ideologies, spurred by industrialization, wars, and revolutions. Thinkers like Marx and Engels critiqued capitalism and introduced revolutionary socialist ideals. Concurrently, the horrors of war led to reflections on nationalism, imperialism, and the ethics of conflict, with philosophers like Hannah Arendt dissecting the roots of totalitarianism and the banality of evil.

Relevance of Political Philosophy Research Paper Topics

A venture into political philosophy research paper topics offers a unique prism through which one can comprehend the evolution and diversity of human governance. Every political system, from monarchies to democracies, springs from a foundational philosophical rationale. For instance, understanding the American Revolution and its aftermath is enriched by a grasp of Lockean principles of life, liberty, and property. Similarly, dissecting the rise and fall of Soviet communism is more insightful when one considers Marxist-Leninist tenets.

Moreover, as globalization melds East and West, there’s an increasing importance in understanding non-Western political philosophies. Confucianism’s influence on East Asian governance models, or the Ubuntu philosophy’s impact on African communal values, are testament to the vast expanse of political philosophical thought.

Contemporary Significance and Challenges Addressed by Political Philosophy

Today, the world is no less complex than it was for our philosophical forebears. We grapple with issues of globalism vs. nationalism, the role of AI in governance, and the sociopolitical ramifications of climate change. These challenges necessitate a philosophical lens. For instance, debates on global migration are enriched by applying Rawlsian principles of justice. Similarly, the ethical implications of surveillance in our digital age can be assessed through Foucauldian concepts of power dynamics.

Political philosophy research paper topics also offer avenues to dissect newer ideologies and movements. The rise of populism in various parts of the world, debates surrounding identity politics, and the philosophical underpinnings of the alt-right or antifa movements provide rich grounds for exploration.

The Role of Political Philosophy in Shaping Public Opinion, Policy-making, and Societal Norms

While often regarded as a high-brow academic pursuit, political philosophy is intrinsically tied to the pulse of the street. The philosophical convictions of thinkers often trickle down to shape public opinion and, by extension, influence policy-making. For instance, the principles articulated in John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty inform contemporary discussions on free speech and societal limits.

Additionally, societal norms, like our collective views on privacy, freedom, or equality, are continually shaped by ongoing philosophical discourses. The feminist philosophical movement, for example, has had tangible impacts, reshaping societal norms and pushing for policy changes in areas like workplace rights, reproductive health, and representation.

As the global landscape undergoes rapid and unpredictable shifts, the significance of political philosophy research paper topics becomes ever more pronounced. These topics, rooted in age-old debates yet adaptable to contemporary quandaries, provide invaluable tools for dissecting, understanding, and ultimately shaping the world around us. In a globalized, digitized age, political philosophy remains a beacon, illuminating the path for governance, societal values, and human rights. Its timeless relevance stands as a testament to the depth and breadth of issues it addresses, guiding societies past, present, and future.

Custom Writing Services by iResearchNet

Diving deep into the intricacies of political philosophy demands meticulous research, keen analytical skills, and a nuanced writing touch. Recognizing these requirements, iResearchNet has emerged as a leading authority, offering unparalleled expertise in crafting political philosophy research papers that resonate with clarity, depth, and academic rigor.

• Expert Degree-Holding Writers: At the heart of iResearchNet’s prowess lies a team of seasoned writers, each holding advanced degrees in philosophy and its related disciplines. Their rich academic background ensures that each research paper is an exemplar of scholarly excellence.
• Custom Written Works: Eschewing cookie-cutter templates, iResearchNet takes pride in delivering unique papers tailored to each student’s specific requirements and academic level.
• In-depth Research: A hallmark of any commendable research paper is the depth of investigation. iResearchNet’s writers delve into reputable sources, ensuring every paper is informed by authoritative voices in the field of political philosophy.
• Custom Formatting: Recognizing the varied formatting demands of different institutions, iResearchNet offers custom formatting options across popular styles including APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, and Harvard.
• Top Quality: Quality is the bedrock of iResearchNet’s services. Each paper undergoes rigorous quality checks, ensuring it meets the highest academic standards and is free from errors or inconsistencies.
• Customized Solutions: Whether it’s a specific philosophical perspective, a unique thesis argument, or integrating certain key texts, iResearchNet provides bespoke solutions tailored to meet each student’s unique needs.
• Flexible Pricing: High-quality doesn’t necessarily equate to high prices. iResearchNet offers a range of flexible pricing options designed to cater to students’ diverse budgetary needs without compromising on quality.
• Short Deadlines: Procrastinated a bit too long? iResearchNet understands. That’s why they offer expedited writing services, capable of delivering top-tier papers in as little as three hours.
• Timely Delivery: Punctuality is a virtue that iResearchNet holds in high regard. They ensure that every paper is delivered well within the stipulated deadline, granting students ample time for review.
• 24/7 Support: Questions, concerns, or last-minute instructions? iResearchNet’s dedicated support team is available round the clock, ready to assist at any hour.
• Absolute Privacy: iResearchNet champions the importance of privacy. Clients can rest assured that their personal and transactional information remains confidential, protected by robust data security measures.
• Easy Order Tracking: Gone are the days of anxious waiting. With iResearchNet’s intuitive order tracking system, students can effortlessly monitor the progress of their papers in real-time.
• Money-Back Guarantee: Confidence in the quality of service translates to a robust money-back guarantee. If, for any reason, a paper doesn’t meet the client’s expectations, iResearchNet stands ready to offer a full refund.

As you stand at the precipice of your academic journey into political philosophy, wouldn’t you want the best tools at your disposal? iResearchNet beckons. Harness their unmatched services and ensure your political philosophy research paper topics are explored with the depth, precision, and scholarly flair they deserve.

Treading the pathways of political philosophy can be daunting. However, with iResearchNet by your side, you’re not alone. Their unique blend of expertise, dedication, and academic excellence ensures that your foray into the realm of political philosophy is both rewarding and enlightening. iResearchNet is more than just a writing service; it’s a trusted academic companion for all your endeavors in political philosophy.

Unlock New Horizons with iResearchNet!

Navigating the vast seas of political philosophy can be both an exhilarating and challenging endeavor. It’s a domain where thought meets action, theory intertwines with practice, and age-old wisdom interacts with contemporary quandaries. At such pivotal moments, having a guiding hand can make all the difference, transforming an arduous journey into a voyage of discovery.

iResearchNet stands out as that beacon of guidance. With their unmatched depth and expertise in political philosophy, they offer students not just a paper, but a map to intellectual treasures. Their team’s profound knowledge ensures that every topic is explored from multiple angles, fostering a comprehensive understanding and igniting a passion for the subject.

But the magic of iResearchNet doesn’t just end with exceptional research papers. It’s the assurance of having a steadfast partner, one that understands the nuances of political philosophy, and is committed to helping you achieve academic excellence. Their dedicated team works tirelessly, ensuring that every student’s voice is heard, every query addressed, and every academic ambition nurtured.

As you stand on the cusp of new academic endeavors, remember that with iResearchNet, you’re not merely submitting a paper; you’re embarking on a transformative journey in the world of political philosophy. A journey where every challenge becomes an opportunity, every question leads to deeper understanding, and every research topic transforms into a stepping stone towards academic greatness.

So, why wait? Seize this unparalleled chance for in-depth exploration. Let iResearchNet be your compass in the enthralling world of political philosophy, guiding you towards horizons yet uncharted and potentials yet unlocked. Your quest for knowledge deserves nothing but the best, and with iResearchNet, that’s precisely what you get. Dive in, explore, and let the journey begin!

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER