Bob Botsch received his Ph.D. from UNC Chapel Hill in political science in 1977. He has been teaching at USC Aiken since 1978. During those years he has authored three books and numerous articles, book chapters, and technical reports. He was honored in receiving the USCA Outstanding Service award, the Scholarly Activity award, and twice winning the Teaching Excellence Award. In 1988 he was named the CASE professor of the year for South Carolina and one of the top ten professors in the nation.

Political observers have always been concerned about the civic health of citizens. This has been of particular concern in recent years as survey after survey show citizens to be setting all time high records in cynicism and all time low records in trust and voter turnout. National political columnist David Broder worries that the cynicism and emphasis on the negative will lead young people to reject careers in government. If public service can’t attract the best and brightest, or even the competent, then the quality of service will inevitably go down (Broder). Researchers at Project Vote Smart, which studies voter behavior and attempts to make information more readily available to voters, attribute low levels of voting to low levels of knowledge and high levels of cynicism (Scheuren). Political scientists have recorded declining numbers of students majoring in political science, taking government courses, and even exposing themselves to political news. They see this as a reflection of growing cynicism and distrust that may be explained by a variety of factors: historical events like Vietnam and Watergate (and all the other __gates that have followed), negative news reporting and negative campaigning, and the failure of public schools to engage in civic education (Bennet).

The situation has become so alarming that some schools are taking extraordinary measures to engage in more civic education. Tufts University is providing first year students with daily copies of the N.Y. Times in the hope that providing more factual information will increase civic virtue. Tufts President, John DiBiaggio, makes a strong case of the obligation universities have to play a central role in improving civic education.

"…universities have a special responsibility to promote in citizens whom they are housing and educating the willingness to carry out their fundamental democratic obligation—an action that should be as ingrained in their lives as smooth physical movement is ingrained in the muscles of a dancer or athlete" (DiBaggio).

The purpose of this paper is to examine the attitudes and knowledge of USC Aiken students and see if they are part of the problem or part of the solution. How do USC Aiken students measure up? If they fall short, what can be done? In particular, we shall examine levels of political knowledge, political participation, attitudes of trust and cynicism, and the understanding of ideology to see if we can identify factors that affect these important variables. If we can identify factors that explain differences in political sophistication and participation, we are on the first step to finding a remedy for those who fall short.

It is certainly in the self-interest of the larger community for institutions of higher learning to produce thoughtful active citizens. If we fail to do so, the community will be without a pool of qualified people from which to choose future leaders. Moreover, those who choose leaders will be incompetent to choose. Consequently, the future health of the community will be in danger.

Every fall my political science research methods class performs some kind of survey. Usually we perform either an exit poll (in election years) or a general Aiken County population telephone survey. However, in the fall of 1997 we decided to perform a survey of USCA students. The population was 3,400 USCA undergraduate students. A list of all students was obtained from student records that included telephone numbers and addresses. We employed a systematic sampling technique, choosing every nth name from the list so that a sample of 240 names was targeted for interviews.

All twelve student interviewers were trained in proper interviewing techniques, including using precise wording for all questions and neutral reinforcement. Interviewing was performed between October 21 and November 3, 1997. If a student could not be reached, the next student on the list was used as a replacement. In most cases the interview was performed on the telephone, but in some cases the interview was in person. We had a response rate of 98 percent, which is extremely high for a general survey. A more typical rate is in the range of 75 percent. However, the fact that students were interviewing other students created an empathy factor--students wanted to help their fellow students get their class assignments completed. Following completion of the interviews, students coded the data and loaded it into the MicroCase statistical package for analysis.

The sampling technique and the extremely high response rate allows us to assume that the sample has all the characteristics of a simple random sample in which all students had an equal chance of being chosen. This allows us to calculate a sampling error of + or – 6.5% for any question answered by all 240 student respondents. What this means is that there is only one chance in twenty that the percentages we give for our sample will be more than 6.5% away from the percentages for the entire USCA student body on any given question.

The questionnaire was created using a variety of standard questions used in national surveys so that comparisons could be made. This also increases the reliability and validity of the questions. Questions on the Constitution were taken from a national survey performed by the National Constitution Center. The complete questionnaire is in the appendix to this paper. Several compound variables were created by combining the codes on individual questions. Political trust was the combination of questions 3, 5, and 7 (see Appendix). Efficacy used questions 4, 8, and 9.

In addition to this general population survey, we have been giving comprehensive general knowledge tests of all entering students in American Government classes for the past two years. This test covers over 60 questions, covering basic information about all the major institutions of the national government. While not representative of all students, it covers students who are required to take the course (all political science and education majors) and other students who are interested enough to enroll in the class. Data from these surveys will be used to supplement and reinforce conclusions drawn from the campus-wide survey.

Knowledge

Americans in general and American teenagers in particular are very ignorant about the government of the nation in which they live. The National Constitution Center had found that teens know far more about popular culture than they do about American politics. For example, only one in fifty knows the name of the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, while nine in ten know who played the Fresh Prince of Bel Air on tv. Less than half know the name of the first ten amendments of the Constitution while more than half knows the name of the talk show host known for his nightly "Top Ten List." The same proportions knew the names of the three branches of government and the names of the three Stooges, less than half and more than half respectively. Four times as many knew the number of brothers in the musical group "Hanson" as knew the number of Senators in the U.S. Senate (National Constitution Center).

USC Aiken students were asked a series of questions to tap their level of general knowledge about American politics and government (see appendix). Many of the questions used were identical to those in a nationwide survey sponsored by the National Constitution Center. Arguably, college students should know more than the average American citizen, given their higher level of education and their daily exposure to faculty and peers who debate the issues of the day.

However, USCA students scored slightly lower than on national surveys on a number of questions. Forty-five percent of the general public knew that a U.S. House term was two years in length. Only 40% of USCA students answered correctly. The percentages giving the correct six year term for U.S. Senators were 43% and 34%, respectively, with USCA students again trailing. Just under 7% of USCA students knew the year in which the Constitution was written. Almost three times as many people in the general public knew the correct year was 1787. On the other hand, students did perform better than the general public on questions such as knowing that the federal government is composed of three branches (68% and 58% respectively) and knowing that the first ten amendments of the Constitution is called the Bill of Rights (74% and 66% respectively). Over a third of USCA students did not know that the Republicans control the U.S. House of Representatives. This is a little better than the general public, among which nearly half got it wrong.

In other political knowledge questions, less than one in ten USCA students could name the current Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court (William Rehnquist). This is about the same low figure as exists for the nation as a whole (Erikson and Tedin 57). We asked students to name the U.S. Senators representing the state. Looking only at those students who are from South Carolina, only three in ten could name Ernest "Fritz" Hollings. Students did better in naming Aiken’s own Strom Thurmond, but even here one in five failed. The general public in a national sample performed about equally badly, with 55% being able to name at least one of their senators, and only 25% being able to name both.

What are the correlates of political knowledge? What factors explain which students know more and which students know less? In order to answer these questions we created a compound variable that summarized political knowledge on all nine knowledge questions that were asked. The range for this compound variable is 0 to 9, with a perfect score of nine indicating that the student gave correct responses to all questions (terms for Senate, for House, the number of branches, name of first ten amendments, party in control of the House, year Constitution was written, name of Chief Justice, and names of each U.S. Senator from home state). The distribution for USCA students is shown below.

If this were a test and a passing grade was 60%, which would be getting at least 6 questions correct (6 of 9 is actually 67%), then only one in five USC Aiken students passed (21%, the total % with 6 or more right answers). Even if we set the bar lower and consider 50% to be acceptable, only a little more than a third of the students passed (38%).

We found significant relationships between the knowledge score and several factors we measured. Students who were older did significantly better, though not much better. Those who were 25 years of age or older got an average of one question more correct than those in the 18-21 or 22-25 age groups.

No significant relationship existed with school class. Upper class members are not doing significantly better than underclass members. Seniors only scored an average of half a question better than freshmen. If college is supposed to be educating students as knowledgeable citizens, progressing through the hours required for graduation is having no appreciable effect.

Gender did make a difference. Politics is still a man’s world at USCA if we are to judge by political knowledge. Women scored significantly lower, by about a question. In the South and in rural sections of the nation these traditional role orientations are slower to change. That would seem to be the case here.

Race also made a significant difference. The mean number correct for white students was a little over 4, as opposed to about 2.7 correct for blacks. We will never achieve political equality until we achieve equality in political knowledge.

South Carolina law (S.C. Code 59-29-120, 130, 140, and 150) requires that all colleges that are supported by public funds provide a year of instruction in the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers. The law is not enforced in many state universities, including USCA. Would enforcement make any difference in political knowledge? Data from our survey suggests that enforcement would make a significant difference. Those students who reported taking a one semester college course in American Government scored a question better than those who did not (4.5 versus 3.6 respectively for the two groups).

What students choose as their major field of study made a significant difference in scores. Social science majors did best, followed by humanities majors. Business majors and sciences and professional school majors performed about equally badly. Two years ago the Business Department dropped American Government as a required course for business majors. This change creates little hope that business majors will improve in the near future. USC Aiken will be sending business persons out into the world who know little about the government that regulates and taxes their enterprises on a daily basis.

Although we did not identify students by their specific majors in this survey, in the sixty-question general knowledge test we administer to all incoming American Government students, we do identify students by specific majors. The results on this much more comprehensive test confirm and reinforce what we found in the general student survey. Again, humanities and social science majors made the highest scores on this test they took before the course began (an average of 26.5 and 20.5 correct answers respectively). They were followed by nursing majors (an average of just over 17) and science and math majors (just under 17). The two majors with the worst scores were business majors (at 16.5) and education majors (at 13.7). Education majors, the teachers of the next generation of citizens, have the greatest need to be well-versed in basic political knowledge--they also have the greatest deficit in political knowledge.

Those who are more inclined to read the newspaper and/or watch the national news on television scored significantly higher on political knowledge. Unlike national studies which show that newspaper reading has a greater impact on political knowledge than television (Erikson and Tedin 228), each had about the same effect on USCA students. How do USCA students compare to the general public on watching tv news and reading newspapers? While 48% of the general public reports watching tv news daily (Erikson and Tedin 228), only 10% of USCA students watch the news on a daily basis. Among the general public, 39% report reading the newspaper daily as compared to only 17% of USCA students.

Political Participation

We measured political participation by asking students about registration and voting. Nearly three fourths claimed to be registered to vote. In addition, just under half of the student body reported having voted in the November 1996 election. This is virtually identical to the national turnout in 1996.

However, post election surveys typically overestimate turnout by about twenty percentage points. For example the 1996 General Social Survey found that 71% of respondents reported that they had voted in the 1992 Presidential election. In fact the percentage turnout was only 50%. If this over-reporting holds true for USCA students, as it most likely does, then voter turnout is most likely significantly lower among USCA students than for the nation as a whole. In one sense this would not be surprising due to the fact that students are younger than the general population, and we know that the young are less likely to vote. Indeed, voting was positively and significantly associated with increasing age in our sample of students. However, college students are also more educated than the general population, and those with at least some college are about ten percentage points more likely to vote than average citizens ("Voting Rates"). So one might expect that college students should have a higher rate than average citizens, despite their age. Indeed, this was clearly not the case for USCA students.

Political knowledge has an impact on whether or not students are fulfilling their citizen duties. Of those who scored 6 or higher on the knowledge test, 76% reported voting. For those scoring 5 or lower, only 51% reported voting. The difference is very significant. Being informed about basic facts makes voting choice both easier and more salient.

Attitudes Toward Government

We live in an age of political cynicism. The personal misdeeds of President Clinton have spilled over into his public political life and created a constitutional crisis that is exacerbated by partisan attacks from the other side that are at best uncharitable. This is just one more event in a long series of events over the last forty years that have contributed to a popular culture fraught with cynicism. Political assassinations, Vietnam, Watergate, Iran-Contra, Abscam, Koreagate, the forced resignation of Democratic Speaker Jim Wright and then the misdeeds and fine laid on Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich is a short list of the events that have molded the political socialization of several consecutive generations. One recent text on political scandals in American politics concludes that contemporary partisan conflict turns more on character and smear campaigns than on issue differences (Williams 130-2)

Students at USC Aiken have levels of distrust and cynicism that are quite comparable to those in national opinion surveys. For example, only 2 % said they would trust the government in Washington to do what is right "just about always." Two-thirds said they would trust the government only "some of the time," and the remaining 20% said either "only now and then" or "hardly at all." National surveys indicate that about two-thirds of the public have low feelings of trust toward the government (NES).

While a little bit of distrust is a healthy thing, the level of trust and cynicism that exists today is so high that it drives people away from the public arena and from public service. Moreover, it creates a citizenry who are less willing to make sacrifices when necessary for the well-being of the nation. One political commentator described the consensus that exists today as devoid of any sense of citizen obligation. "The traditional view, that a national government can assume the loyalty and trust of its citizens as it goes about using its resources to do the country's business, doesn't apply in America today" (Lemann). Institutions of higher education need to produce future citizen leaders who are part of the solution, not part of the problem.

We found very few factors that could be used to explain this low level of trust. Those who were older were no more or less trusting than those who were younger. Freshmen were not significantly different than those in other classes. Whether or not the student had taken American government made no difference. Knowledge had no effect, nor did daily reading of newspapers or watching television news, which is so often blamed for its negative reporting. The only factor that had a strong relationship with lack of trust was a lack of political efficacy. (The correlation between these two attitudes was .276 and the probability that we could have this high a correlation in this sample without a relationship in the population was practically zero. So it was a highly significant relationship.) Improving efficacy would seem to be the best way of increasing trust. So let us turn next to efficacy.

One of the most important political attitudes in a working democratic republic is the sense of political efficacy, the feeling that one has the power to be effective in political matters. Without this feeling, citizens will abandon the public arena and only the narrow interests will be left. USC Aiken students lack confidence in their ability to have an impact on government. Under a third feel they have no "say about what the government does." Another third have mixed feelings. Only a third have the confidence necessary to even try and be active citizens. While far less than ideal, the picture is marginally better than the nation as a whole, where 45% feel they have "no say" (NES). Both USCA students and citizens in the nation still have more faith in elections. Just under three-fourths of both agree that "elections are a good way of making governments pay attention to what the people think" (NES). Unfortunately, this is about twenty-five percentage points lower than the percentage of students who claimed to have voted, as we saw earlier. Moreover, efficacy is significantly associated with voting (p=.01). Those who feel effective in politics are more likely to vote.

What factors explain differences in efficacy? Both political knowledge and media consumption (tv news watching and newspaper reading) had statistically significant relationships with higher efficacy. Taking an American Government course had no significant direct relationship. However, as noted earlier, it has a significant relationship with political knowledge, so the relationship is probably indirect. Taking an American Government class increases political knowledge, which in turn increases efficacy. The bottom line on creating a stronger sense of efficacy is doing whatever we can to increase political knowledge. Those who know more about what is going on and how the system works feel more confident that they can have some influence on the system.

Ideology

Ideology is a much misunderstood and misapplied term. Only about half the public has even a minimal understanding of the term and how it applies (Erikson and Tedin 67). The term is important because it serves as a mental construct in sorting out opinions about the proper role and scope of government activity (Gitelson et. al. 18; Erikson and Tedin 66). Those who cannot apply the term will encounter difficulty in meaningful participation in political discussion. Politically healthy citizens should be able to utilize the term in discussions.

A first and minimal step in using the concept of ideology term is applying it to ones own political values. We asked USCA students to classify themselves. Less than 5% of all students admitted that they were unable to apply the term to themselves. That percentage did not change significantly with class. If political learning is taking place, upper level students should be more likely to apply the term consistently with their other identifications. Given that Republicans are generally more conservative and that Democrats are generally more liberal, those who understand the concept of ideology should have a stronger association between their ideological identifications and their partisan identifications. Therefore we would expect a higher correlation for upper level students between ideology and partisan identification than for lower level students—if learning is taking place. In fact, the correlation went down as class level went up. The correlation for freshmen was .549 (p=.000); for sophomores it was .392 (p=.004); for juniors it was .394 (p=.000); and, for seniors the correlation was only .252 (p=.026). We also looked at how age affected these associations. Unlike other areas where older students did seem more knowledgeable, we found that older students did no better than younger students in matching their ideology with conventional partisan identifications.

Conservatives outnumber liberals by about a two to one margin (22% liberal, 31% middle of the road, and 42% conservative). Most students on this mainly commuter campus, coming from a conservative county in a conservative state, match the ideological make-up of the community. They are almost opposite of the ideological make-up of students nationally, where liberals outnumber conservatives by not quite two to one with again about a third in the middle.

One of the most well documented effects of college is a liberalizing impact on students. As students move from freshman to sophomore, junior, and senior, the percentage of liberals tends to increase while the percentages of moderates and conservatives decrease. Alternative explanations have been offered for these shifts. Students may be becoming more aware of and accepting of diverse opinions, lifestyles, and points of view, all of which lead them in a liberal direction. Alternatively, students may be indoctrinated by a faculty which surveys show to be consistently more liberal than their students (Erikson and Tedin 133-4).

However, USC Aiken students run counter to this trend that holds for other college students. This can be seen in the table below.

As we move from freshmen to seniors the percentage of liberals does not change much, dropping just a little. However the percentage of moderates drops and the percentage of conservatives nearly doubles. These shifts are statistically significant with chi square = 16.4 and p = .01.

Several possible explanations exist for this surprising shift. Perhaps students are getting more in touch with their conservative political environment while in college. Perhaps the college environment is failing to expose them to or engender more tolerance of diversity and alternative values. Perhaps USCA has a conservative faculty that is socializing these students into conservative identifications. A last possibility might be that some minimal kind of learning is taking place. They might be learning that the proper label for the ideas they already had (and still have) is conservative rather than the more nebulous moderate or middle of the road label. However, as we saw above, students’ matching their chosen ideological identification with conventional partisan identifications decreases as they move up in class rank. This casts serious doubt on the political learning hypothesis. Beyond this we do not have sufficient data to point to any specific explanation here. More research is needed. Nevertheless, we found no evidence that USCA graduates will be any more able to knowledgeably engage in political discussions involving the basic organizing concept of ideology than entering freshmen.

The results of this survey strongly suggest that an alarmingly high proportion of USC Aiken students are politically apathetic, ignorant of even the most basic factual knowledge required to play an informed active citizen, and are politically impotent in terms of their confidence to play a meaningful role in our political system. Older students score higher in most areas whether they are freshmen, sophomores, juniors, or seniors. Their progression through classes at USC Aiken is having little impact on any of these shortcomings.

What can be done? We found that students who read newspapers and watch news programs frequently know more, vote more, and feel more confident in their political actions. Those students tend to be majors in social sciences and in the humanities. Those in the sciences and in the professions, fields that will be responsible for the moving us into the information age, for advancing science, and in socializing the next generation, are most in need of improvement in citizen knowledge and skills. Anything we can do to encourage students to keep up with current events will strengthen their skills and confidence as active citizens. Professors might place more emphasis on daily media consumption whenever possible. The school might consider adding links to daily newspapers on our home page so that students in labs would only be a click away from current news. Alternatively, we might encourage local papers to give free newspapers out on campus—creating a daily habit that could foster paid subscriptions later.

Students might be encouraged or even required to take American government courses. The data here suggest that this will have an impact on political knowledge, which has multiple effects of increasing efficacy and rates of voting. Increased efficacy seems to be the only clear key to increasing political trust. While this author/professor is not anxious to teach more large sections of American Government than he is already teaching, our future graduates will be better citizens if they are exposed to the information that is presented in that course of study. Several colleges and universities in the state (Coastal Carolina, Francis Marion, and Winthrop) do require an American government course, according to requirements listed on their Web pages. USCA and other schools, should they find that their undergraduates are deficient in fundamental areas of citizenship, might also consider enforcing existing state laws.

Continuing research in this area is needed. Trends in knowledge and political attitudes will give us a better understanding of cause and effect and allow us to monitor the performance of our institutions in producing healthy and competent citizens. I have invited other political scientists at colleges and universities across South Carolina to modify and improve the survey instrument used in this study and periodically apply it to students at their own schools. We will re-examine USC Aiken students again in the years to come.

Bennet, Stephen E. "Why Young Americans Hate Politics, and What We Should Do About It." PS: Political Science and Politics (March 1997), 47-52.

Broder, David. "Government Seldom Gets Credit for the Good Things." The State (23 November 1997), D3.

Erikson, Robert S. and Kent L. Tedin. American Public Opinion (5^th edition). Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1995.

Gitelson, Alan R., Robert L Dudley, and Melvin J. Dubnick. American Government (5^th edition). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1998.

National Constitution Center. Online: http://www.constitutioncenter.org/8B.html (November 13, 1998)

National Election Study data sets (NES). Seattle: MicroCase Corporation, 1998.

Scheuren, Clare. "Project Vote Smart." The Newsletter of the National Commission on Civic Renewal, Vol. I, No. 2 (Autumn 1997), 12.

"Voting Rates for Citizens in the 1996 Presidential Election by Educational Attainment." A poster using U.S. Census Bureau data. Oskaloosa, Iowa: Postsecondary Education Opportunity (515-673-3401).

Williams, Robert. Political Scandals in the USA. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn, 1998.

1. ID # ___ ___

__ 4) most the time __ 3) some __ 2) now and then __ 1) hardly at all __ 5) not sure

3. How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington to do what is right-- only some of the time, most of the time, or just about always? (trust)

__ 1) some of the time __ 2) most of the time __ 3) just about always __ 4) not sure

4. Sometimes politics and government seem so complicated that a person like me can't really understand what's going on. Would you [READ ANSWERS] (eff)

__ 1) strongly agree __ 2) agree __ 3) have mixed feelings __ 4) disagree

__ 5) strongly disagree __ 6) or have you not had time to think about this

5. Do you think that people in government waste a lot of the money we pay in taxes, waste some of it, or don't waste very much of it? (trust)

__ 1) waste a lot __ 2) waste some __ 3) don’t waste very much __ 4) not sure

6. How much do you feel that having elections makes the government pay attention to what people think -- not much, some, or a good deal? (gov responsiveness)

__ 1) not much __ 2) some __ 3) a good deal __ 4) not sure

7. Do you think that quite a few of the people running the government are crooked, not very many are, or do you think hardly any of them are crooked? (trust)

__ 1) quite a few __ 2) not very many __ 3) hardly any __ 4) not sure

8. People like me don't have any say about what the government does. Would you [READ ANSWERS] (eff)

__ 1) strongly agree __ 2) agree __ 3) have mixed feelings __ 4) disagree

__ 5) strongly disagree __ 6) or have you not had time to think about this

9. I don't think public officials care much what people like me think. Would you [READ ANSWERS](eff)

__ 1) strongly agree __ 2) agree __ 3) have mixed feelings __ 4) disagree

__ 5) strongly disagree __ 6) or have you not had time to think about this

10. Overall in your household when you were growing up, would you say that your parents followed what was going on in government and public affairs most of the time, some of the time, only now and then, or hardly at all?

__ 4) most the time __ 3) some __ 2) only now and then __ 1) hardly at all __ 5) not sure

11. Which of the following comes closest to describing your views on politics? [READ ANSWERS]

__ 1) liberal __ 2) slightly liberal __ 3) middle __4) slightly __5) or conservative

of the road conservative

[DO NOT READ THIS LAST ONE] __ 6) none or not sure

12. How many days in the past week did you watch the national news on TV?

__ 0) none __ 1) one __ 2) two __ 3) three __ 4) four __ 5) five __ 6) six __ 7) seven __ 0) dk

13. How many days in the past week did you read a daily newspaper?

__ 0) none __ 1) one __ 2) two __ 3) three __ 4) four __ 5) five __ 6) six __ 7) seven __ 0) dk

14. Which of the following comes closest to your party identification? [READ ANSWERS]

__ 1) Democrat __ 2) leaning __ 3) independent __ 4) leaning __ 5) Republican

Democrat Republican

__ 6) or some other identification--specify: ______________________

15. I need to ask you a few political information questions. We don’t expect anyone to know all the answers. How many years are in the term of a United States Senator? _____ years (0 = incorrect; 1 = correct)

16. How many years are in the term of a member of the U.S. House of Representatives? _____ years (0 for incorrect; 1 for correct)

17. Are you registered to vote? __ 1) yes __ 2) no (or not sure) __ 3) too young

18. How many branches of the federal government are there? ______ (0;1)

19. What are the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution called? _________________ (0;1)

20. In what year was the U.S. Constitution written? ______________ (0;1)

21. Do you happen to know which party controls the House of Representatives?

__ 0. Democrats __ 1. Republicans __ 0. not sure

22. Did you vote in the Nov. 1996 elections? __ 1) yes __ 2) no (or not sure)

__ 4) not eligible

23. Do you happen to remember the name of the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court?

Chief Justice ______________________ (0;1)

24. What is your home state? ___ 1) S.C. ___ 2) other (specify): _________________

How about the two U.S. Senators from your home state? Do you happen to remember their names?

25. Senator _________________(S.C.: Thurmond/Strom) (0 for incorrect; 1 for correct)

26. Senator ______________(S.C.: Hollings/Ernest-Fritz) (0 for incorrect; 1 for correct)

7. Have you taken or are you currently in a college level political science course on American National Government? __ 1) yes __ 2) no (or not sure)

28. Finally, I need to ask a few questions for background classification. What is your age? ___ ___

29. Major field of study? ____________________________(1 = social science; 2 = humanities/fine arts; 3 = business; 4 = sciences/professional schools)

30. Class in school? __ 1) freshmen __ 2) sophomore __ 3) junior __ 4) senior

31. What is your race/ethnicity? __ 1) White __ 2) Black __ 3) Hispanic __ 4) other

32. [CODE AFTER INTERVIEW] Gender? __ 1) male __ 2) female

There, that’s it! Thanks. I enjoyed interviewing you.