political science interdiciplinary 3rd sem

   

 

Niche ek pdf file notes hai download karlo

support me to help your more follow

Online NES Classes Subscription Available!

Students (Any Semester)!

We are excited to announce that subscriptions for online NES classes are now available. These classes will be conducted on Google Meet twice a week.

Subscription Options:

 *₹500  ₹249 per month

 *₹3000 ₹1509 for six months

Special Offer: This subscription offer is valid only until May 2025.

Don't miss this chance to join!

studies

with MCQ

studies and MCQ questions

Democratic Theory and Public Opinion

Public opinion research has sometimes been

neglectful of both the political content of its

data and the extent to which it could vitalize

the theory of democratic politics. In this, his

Presidential Address before the seventh annual

convention of the American Association for

Public Opinion Research, Bernard Berelson

restates the fundamental requirements of a

democratic politic and points out how opinion

research can help a democracy to know itself,

evaluate its achievements, and bring its

practices more nearly in accord with its own

fundamental ideals. Mr. Berelson's interest in

this topic has de veloped out of, and is

expressed in, the Elmira study of opinion

formation during the Presi dential campaign of

1948. In the preparation of this paper, he has

benefited from discussions with Edward Shils,

his former colleague at the University of

Chicago, and from his reading of Mr. Shils'

manuscript on Consensus and Liberty: The

Social and Psychological Condi tions of Political

Democracy. At present, Mr. Berelson is

Director of the Behavioral Sciences Division of

the Ford Foun dation. J. HE field of public

opinion research has had a number of

intellectual godparents. Psychologists have

contributed their experience with attitude and

intelligence tests and measurements, as well as

substantive concepts and propositions.

Sociologists have provided experience with

field and community studies and ideas about

social structure and the place of opinion within

it. Market research has developed new

techniques and furnished a variety of practical

problems on which to try them. The

statisticians have worked on such problems as

sampling and scaling. But my subject is the

claim of political theory to contribute to the

character of public opinion research. It would

be too much to say that it has played no role

thus far. For a good many years the political

scientists have been discussing the nature of

public opinion and the role it plays in the

political process. But somehow, in recent years,

we have tended to overlook the related facts

that there is a political content in what we call

public opinion; that there exists a long and

elegant intellectual tradition (in the form of the

political theory of democracy) for dealing with

opinion problems; and that this theory

provides a helpful framework for the

organization and conduct of opinion studies.

The normative theory of political democracy

makes certain requirements of the citizen and

at AAPOR Member Access on March 8, 2016 3H

assumptions about his capacity to meet them.

The tools of social research have made it

possible, for the first time, to determine with

reasonable precision and objectivity the extent

to which the practice of politics by the citizens

of a democratic state conforms to the

requirements and the assumptions of the

theory of democratic politics (insofar as it

refers to decisions by the electorate). The

closer collaboration of political theorists and

opinion researchers should contribute new

problems, new categories, and greater

refinement and elaboration to both sides. The

theorists tell us how a democratic electorate is

supposed to behave and we public opinion

researchers claim to know something about

how the democratic electorate in this country

actually does behave. The task I have taken on

myself is figuratively to confront the one with

the other. Such an analysis should be useful not

only in organizing the results of opinion studies

in terms of an important body of theory, but

also in revealing neglected and promising areas

for further investigation. I bespeak the interest

of both theorists and researchers in extending,

refining, and, in general, improving this

formulation. For even on the basis of my

preliminary exploration, I am convinced that

each side has a good deal to learn from the

other and that joint work on this common

problem can be valuable both for social science

and for public policy. Such collaboration, like

most cross-disciplinary work, is not easy, but it

is necessary since neither side can solve the

problem alone. In this connection, the

deficiencies of the present formulation on the

theoretical side will be particularly clear to the

political theorist; I can only hope that the

representation of theory, drawn as it is from a

variety of sources, has not been caricatured,

and that the theorists will themselves

undertake the indicated corrections. What,

then, does democratic political theory assume

or require of the democratic citizen, and to

what extent are the assumptions or

requirements realized? There are a number of

ways of identifying and classifying the

requirements, depending upon which political

philosophers are given primary consideration.

It has seemed most appropriate in this

preliminary analysis to present a composite set

of requirements, even though they may

overlap at various points and thus not present

a coherent system. While not all of them may

be required in any singleDEMOCRATIC THEORY

AND PUBLIC OPINION 315 political theory of

democracy, all of them are mentioned in one

or another theory. THE PREREQUISITES OF

ELECTORATE DECISIONS There appear to be

two requirements in democratic theory which

refer primarily to characteristics demanded of

the electorate as it initially comes to make a

political decision. These are the preconditions

for electorate decisions. The first is the

possession of a suitable personality structure:

within a range of variations, the electorate is

required to possess the types of character

which can operate effectively, if not efficiently,

in a free society. Certain kinds of personality

structures are not congenial to a democratic

society, could not operate successfully within

it, and would be destructive of democratic

values. Others are more compatible with or

even disposed toward the effective

performance of the various roles which make

up the democratic political system. Among the

characteristics required—and diis is not

intended as anything more than an illustrative

list—are a capacity for involvement in

situations remote from one's face-to-face

experience; a capacity to accept moral

responsibility for choices; a capacity to accept

frustration in political affairs with equanimity;

self-control and self-restraint as reins upon the

gross operation of self-interest; a nice balance

between submissiveness and assertiveness; a

reasonable amount of freedom from anxiety so

that political affairs can be attended to; a

healthy and critical attitude toward authority; a

capacity for fairly broad and comprehensive

identifications; a fairly good measure of self-

esteem; and a sense of potency. The

distribution of such personality characteristics

in the population, let alone their relationship to

political behavior, is not known. What is more

or less known is only a beginning of the

problem. We know, for example, that contrary

to common belief the incidence of psychosis

has not increased in this country over the past

century (Goldhamer and Marshall); on this

score, at least, we are not less capable than

past generations of governing ourselves. We

know that the authoritarian personality is

associated with social prejudice and restrictive

politics (the Berkeley study of Adorno, Frenkel-

Brunswick, et «/.); that neuroticism limits

attention to political matters (Elmira study);

that a wide discrepancy between aspiration

and achievement leads some persons to over-

aggressive acts against the political

environment and316 PUBLIC OPINION

QUARTERLY, FALL 1952 lowers their respect for

political leaders (Bettelheim and Janowitz); that

the "democratic character" is more flexible and

adaptable than the authoritarian character

(Lewin and Lippitt). There is a great deal of

work to be done on this problem; and it is here

particularly that the psychologists can make an

important contribution to the study of political

behavior. The influence of character on political

democracy has been perceived in general

terms by a number of theorists, and some

psychologists and sociologists have begun to

work on the topic. The dependence of

democratic processes upon the "democratic

character" seems clear in general, but the

nature of diis relationship has been only slightly

documented in the literature. Without doubt, a

sympathetic and imaginative study of the

literature of democratic theory will generate

many important hypotheses for empirical

investigation. The second requirement is not

only a prerequisite but also an outcome of

electorate decisions. This is the factor of

interest and participation? the electorate is

required to possess a certain degree of

involvement in the process of political decision,

to take an appropriate share of responsibility.

Political democracy requires a fairly strong and

fairly continuous level of interest from a

minority, and from a larger body of the

citizenry a moderate-to-mild and discontinuous

interest but with a stable readiness to respond

in critical political situations. Political

disinterest or apathy is not permitted, or at

least not approved. Here the descriptive

documentation provided by opinion studies is

relatively good. The amount of political interest

in the community, its fluctuations through

time, its incidence among various population

groups, its causes and its consequences—on all

these topics we have reasonably systematic

data. Less than one-third of the electorate is

"really interested" in politics, and that group is

by no means a crosssection of the total

electorate. The more interested people are

more likely to affect others and thus to exercise

a greater influence upon the outcome of

elections. The decreasing political interest in

the population, viewed with alarm by some

people who are distressed by die fact that a

smaller proportion of eligible people vote now

than did fifty years ago, 1 Included here is

acceptance of the political sphere as one of the

legitimate elements of social life. In a

democratic society the political sphere must

not be widely viewed as unclean or degraded

or corrupt. Opinion studies have produced

some data on the image of politics and of

politicians among the citizenry.DEMOCRATIC

THEORY AND PUBLIC OPINION 317 is to some

extent due to the increasing feeling people

have that they are impotent to affect political

matters in the face of the complexity and

magnitude of the issues. Participation in the

actual election is not only segmental but also

partial; if everybody eligible to vote actually did

vote, the distribution of support in recent

national elections would have been measurably

different. Finally, interest is not a simple

unidimensional factor. A recent analysis

identified three kinds of interest: spectator

interest (regarding the campaign as a dramatic

spectacle); citizen interest (deciding how to

vote); and partisan interest (securing the

election of one's own candidate). Of these, only

the second is "pure" interest according to some

theorists. The major question raised by this

requirement, both for political theory and for

opinion research, is the fundamental one of its

universality and intensity. People have always

argued whether the vote is a duty or a

privilege, and there have always been

advocates of an unlimited and continuous

requirement of interest. As early as the

Athenian democracy it was said that "we

regard a man who takes no interest in public

affairs not as a harmless but as a useless

character." But is he really so useless to the

operation of democracy? Some recent theorists

and studies have suggested that a sizable group

of less interested citizens is desirable as a

"cushion" to absorb the intense action of highly

motivated partisans. For the fact is that the

highly interested are the most partisan and the

least changeable. If everyone in the community

were highly and continuously interested, the

possibilities of compromise and of gradual

solution of political problems might well be

lessened to the point of danger. It is an

historical axiom that democracy requires a

middle class for its proper operation. Perhaps

what it really requires is a body of moderately

and discontinuously interested citizens within

and across social classes, whose approval of or

at least acquiescence in political policies must

be secured. THE COMPONENTS OF

ELECTORATE DECISIONS The political theory of

democracy also makes requirements regarding

the components of electorate decisions; that is,

the content of the decision. The first

requirement of electorate decisions is the

possession of information and knowledge; the

electorate must be informed about the matters

under consideration. Information refers to

isolatedi8 PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, FALL

1952 3 facts and knowledge to general

propositions; both of them provide reliable

insight into the consequences of the decision.

This is a requirement nearly everyone sets

down for a democratic electorate; politicians

and statesmen, adult educators, journalists,

professors of political science—all of them pay

deference to the need for "enlightened public

opinion." This is another factor on which

opinion researchers have assembled a good

deal of data. What do they show ? One

persistent conclusion is that the public is not

particularly well informed about the specific

issues of the day. A recent survey of the

current status of American public opinion

states that "tests of information invariably

show at least twenty per cent of the public

totally uninformed (and usually the figure is

closer to forty per cent)." And at that, most of

the studies have been based upon simple and

isolated questions of fact (i.e., information) and

only seldom, if at all, upon the historical and

general propositions (i.e., knowledge) which

underlie political decisions. Perhaps the

proportion of the knowledgeable would be

even lower than the proportion of the

informed. At the same time, it must be

recognized that there is a significant middle

ground—a kind of vaguely perceived

impression which reveals to the possessor

certain relationships which are very "real" to

him, which form "reasonable" bases for his

decision, yet which cannot be explicitly

articulated by him in any detail. An obvious

example is the difference between die

Republican and Democratic parties, a

difference visible to many partisans of both.

Thus it often appears that people express

opinions on issues when they seem to know

very little about them. Lack of information may

be a bar to the holding of an opinion in the

minds of the theorists but it does not seem to

be among the electorate (where, of course, it is

not experienced as lack of information at all). In

most campaigns, whether political or

informational, the people best informed on the

issue are the ones least likely to change their

minds. Much of diis represents attitudinal

stability; some of it may represent rigidity.

Information and knowledge are required of the

electorate on the assumption that they

contribute to the wisdom of the decision;

informed citizens make wiser decisions. In diis

country it is clear that the better-educated

people are die best informed and most

knowledgeable, yet it is also clear that other

variables are involved in the development of

wise decisions, e.g., flexibility of

predispositions, a wide range ofDEMOCRATIC

THEORY AND PUBLIC OPINION 319

identifications, a low level of aggressiveness,

etc. Finally, it appears from most studies that

information and knowledge are sought and

used more often as rationalization and

reinforcer than as data to be used in making

what might be called a free decision. The

requirement thus does not seem to be met in

any direct way. But this is really an

oversimplified statement of the requirement.

How can an electorate be expected to be

informed on the wide range of issues which

confront the modern public? For example, the

front page of The New Yor\ Times for one day

alone recently contained stories on the

following events, in each of which is embedded

an issue on which the public might be expected

to inform itself: price ceilings, the Korean war

and the British position in it, the American

defense buildup, Communist riots in France,

the Berlin crisis, a new disarmament proposal,

American military aid to France, official Soviet

spies in this country, and the Mutual Security

Aid Bill. Clearly there is too little time for simply

getting the relevant information, let alone

digesting it into a generalized system of

political opinions. Actually the major decisions

the ordinary citizen is called upon to make in a

modern representative democracy involve

basic simplifications which need not rest upon

a wide range of information so long as they are

based upon a certain amount of crucial

information, reasonably interpreted. After all,

the voter's effective choice is limited; he can

vote Republican, he can vote Democratic, or he

can refrain from voting, and becoming

informed on a number of minor issues usually

does not tip the scales against the weight of

the few things that really matter—

employment, social security, the cost of living,

peace. If the theoretical requirement is "full"

information and knowledge, then democratic

practice does not conform. But for some

theorists the requirement is more

differentiated than that. Representative

government with large-scale political

organization does not require that everyone be

equally informed on everything all the time. To

such a differentiated standard, actual practice

may conform reasonably well. Opinion studies

should not only document this requirement,

but also refine their inquiries into die actual

ways in which information and knowledge are

held and used by the citizen in his vote

decision. At the same time, theorists should

differentiate and elaborate their conceptions of

the intellectual requirements for a democratic

citizenry.320 PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY,

FALL 1952 The second component required of

decisions is the possession of principle; the

electorate is required to possess a body of

stable political principle or moral standards, in

contrast with fluctuating impulses or whims, to

which topical questions can be referred for

evaluation and decision. Such principles are of

two kinds. In the first place, there are the

principles which refer to democratic

procedures (as distinguished from the content

of democratic decisions) and on them there

must be consensus. Everyone, or nearly

everyone, must agree on the rules of the

political game and accept them in advance of

the controversy so diat they will obtain even in

defeat. Among such principles are the rules

that violence must not be involved in the

making of electoral decisions; that the majority

decision must be accepted as final in any

particular instance, until legitimately appealed

to a court, a legislative body, or the citizenry;

that the citizen must have due respect for

constituted authority; that the citizen must

share respect with other parts of the

community and thus be ready for political

compromise. Few data on such questions have

been collected in opinion studies, perhaps

because their wide observance seems so

obvious. It would be instructive to describe

more precisely the citizenry's image of

desirable and actual processes of democracy

and to analyze the factors responsible for it.

The other kind of principle refers to the

substantive bases of political decisions—the

underlying moral or political ends in terms of

which particular issues are determined at

particular times. Just what they are for

different parts of the population is difficult to

say in the absence of more systematic research

devoted to this purpose. At this time, however,

it would seem at least likely that the same

avowed principles underlie political positions at

every point on the continuum from left to right.

Full employment, a high standard of living,

freedom, a better life for one's children,

peace—these are the types of answers we have

now, and we get them from persons of every

political persuasion. Now this is not so empty

as it sounds. Democratic theorists have pointed

out what is often overlooked because too

visible, namely, that an effective democracy

must rest upon a body of political and moral

consensus. If splits in the population are too

sharp or too great, democratic processes

cannot be maintained because of actual,

threatened, or suspected conflict among

partisans. In this circumstance, a seeming

consensus which is accepted at its face value is

far better than no conDownloaded from

http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/ at AAPOR

Member Access on March 8, 2016DEMOCRATIC

THEORY AND PUBLIC OPINION 321 sensus—

and a seeming consensus is sometimes

reflected in loyalty to the same symbols even

though they carry different meanings. A sense

of homogeneity is often an efficient substitute

for the fact of homogeneity. Thus it is not an

empty assertion to say that the role of

substantive principles—like that of some

information—is both to rationalize and to guide

the choice simultaneously. Rationalization has

a social function, too. What this means, then, is

that the selection of means to reach agreed-

upon ends is more likely to divide the

electorate than the selection of the ends

themselves. At the same time, however, the

principles must be applicable to current

political life. Political decisions made today in

the light of principles which support or oppose

the major social reforms identified as the "New

Deal" or the "welfare state" are relevant. But

decisions made simply in conformity to an

historical regional loyalty or to a primary group

loyalty are of dubious relevance; and those

made only in conformity to an ancestral loyalty

or a religious loyalty are of no relevance at all.

When theorists insist that public decisions in a

democracy must be based upon principle and

doctrine, they mean principle and doctrine

which can confront and cope with the major

problems of the age. Yet the studies show that

a large proportion of the party vote today is by

this test unprincipled. If it is nothing more,

then, the requirement of principle or doctrine

means that the electorate must genuinely

accept the procedures and rules involved in

democratic processes, that it must at least

share the symbols describing the substantive

ends to which political action is directed and in

terms of which it is justified, and that it must

make political decisions on the basis of relevant

standards. The first two requirements are met

to a greater extent than the third. THE

PROCESS OF ELECTORATE DECISION The third

set of essentials in democratic theory refers to

the process by which decisions are made. Here

there seem to be three requirements. The first

of the requirement relates to the process of

perception of which information and

knowledge are the end products. This is the

requirement of accurate observation; the

electorate is required to perceive political

realities clearly and objectively, with an

absence or only a small amount of subjective

distortion. It is difficult indeed to see life

steadily and see it whole, and in politics clarity

of perception is made322 PUBLIC OPINION

QUARTERLY, FALL 1952 doubly hard on the one

hand by the predispositional strength which

the citizen brings to the matter and, on the

other, by the deliberate and in many cases

inevitable ambiguity which the political leader

brings there. There is no need to labor this

point. Walter Lippmann made a reputation for

himself thirty years ago by elaborating the

differences between the "world outside and

the pictures in our heads." For the most part,

he said, "we do not first see and then define,

we define first and then see." Recent studies

provide some documentation which refines this

general observation. According to data from

the Elmira study, not only is the citizen's image

of the candidate and the campaign subject to

the influence of preconception, but so is his

view of group support for the candidates and

even of the candidates' stand on political

issues. Given just a minimum of ambiguity to

work with—and that is usually available—

people tend to think their candidate agrees

with them, or at least they manage not to know

where he stands on the particular issue when

they stand on the other side. The stronger the

party affiliation, the greater the misperception.

The consequences of such misperception are

interesting to speculate about. It seems to

decrease the tension within the individual since

it enables him to bring his opinions into an

internal consistency without disturbing his

basic position. At the same time, it increases

the internal solidarity of the parties and thus

increases political tension within the

community by seeming to sharpen the

differences between the parties, particularly

under the stress of a political campaign. Thus

political perception is by no means simply a

matter of concrete observation; it also involves

protective coloration from a total position. And

hence, that democratic theory which assumes

clarity and objectivity of political perception

must be qualified at the outset. The second

important requirement of democratic process

is communication and discussion; the

electorate is required to engage in discussion

and communication on political affairs.

Democratic decisionmaking requires free

examination of political ideas, and this means

discussion. Democratic citizens are supposed to

listen to their political leaders arguing with one

another, to listen to them when they speak

directly to the electorate, to talk back to them,

and to discuss among themselves the public

issues of the day. According to many modern

theorists, this requirement stands at the heart

of the democratic process.DEMOCRATIC

THEORY AND PUBLIC OPINION 323 "Above all,

if it is to be true to its own peculiar nature,

democracy must enlist the effective thought of

the whole community in the operation of

discussion." Now here again, as in the case of

information, public opinion researchers have

assembled a sizable body of data, not only on

the amount and kind of communication and

discussion within the community but also on

the conditions under which it takes place. The

overall picture presented by the opinion

studies looks something like this: There is a 20

per cent nucleus of people who are active and

regular political discussants, another group of

25 per cent who engage in political discussion

on occasion, another 25 per cent who are

activated into discussion only by dramatic

political events, and a residual group of 25 or

30 per cent who do not engage in political

discussion at all. Furthermore, it is particular

groups within the community that give most

attention to politics: the better-educated, the

men, the "joiners"—in short, those groups

most subject to social pressure translated into

expectations of how "our kind of people"

should behave in this respect. And the people

who read and listen to political content in the

mass media also talk and listen to other people,

and thus the concentration of political

communication and discussion is carried one

step further. To complete the picture we need

to ask two other questions which together

bring into consideration another aspect of this

requirement. Democratic citizens are required

not simply to discuss politics, but to discuss

political alternatives in a genuine effort to

clarify and refine public policy. The first

question is, "Who talks to whom?", and the

answer is that people mostly discuss politics

with other people like themselves—"like" in

such characteristics as social position,

occupation, and attitude. Mainly this goes on

inside the family, but even outside it there is a

clear tendency for political discussions to be

carried out intra- rather than inter-social

groups. The second question is, "What do they

see and hear and talk about?" The broad

answer is, "What pleases them"; i.e., what is

congenial to their own point of view. People

usually read and listen to their own side. In

person-to-person discussion of politics, about a

third or more of the talk centers upon topics

not directly involving political preferences—for

example, predictions of and arguments about

who will win an election—and the remainder

consists overwhelmingly of exchange of

mutually agreeable remarks. What this all

means—and this is clearly documented—is that

the people PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, FALL

1952 324 who do the most reading and

listening and talking are the people who

change their minds the least. Lowell did not say

it first but he said it well: "To a great extent,

people hear what they want to hear and see

what they want to see. They associate by

preference with people who think as they do,

enter freely into conversation with them, and

avoid with others topics that are controversial,

irritating or unpleasant. This is not less true of

what they read. To most people, that which

runs counter to their ideas is disagreeable, and

sought only from a sense of duty." In summary,

then, genuine political discussion—not

acrimonious argumentation on the one hand or

mutual admiration for right thinking on the

other, but free and open discussion devoted to

finding a solution to a problem through the

clarification and modification of views—this is

not marked by its magnitude. Perhaps it is

naive to point this out once more; perhaps it is

naive to require it in the first place. We cannot

inquire here into what the requirement of

discussion can really mean in a modern

democracy; whether self-interested argument

is improper, whether genuine discussion goes

on a different level in the political process. But

certainly democratic practice does not conform

fully to the requirements of some theorists:

"The person or party formulating political

principles or policies in advance of discussion,

and refusing to compromise under any

circumstances; or settling such principles or

policies before the process of discussion is

completed and refusing to compromise further;

renders discussion a farce in the first place, and

in the second, limits its usefulness." The third

requirement under process is rationality; the

electorate is required to exercise rational

judgment in political decisions. Philosophers

and economists still talk professionally about

"rational behavior," but sociologists never

really used the concept, psychologists have

given it up, and political scientists seem to be in

process of doing so. The problem of giving the

term a clear meaning acceptable to others is

partly responsible for this state of affairs. The

term, says a recent writer on rational conduct,

"has enjoyed a long history which has

bequeathed to it a legacy of ambiguity and

confusion. Any man may be excused when he is

puzzled by the question how he ought to use

the word and in particular how he ought to use

it in relation to human conduct and to politics."

The difficulty, of course, is not that there is no

reasonably clearDEMOCRATIC THEORY AND

PUBLIC OPINION 325 definition for the term

but that there are several definitions describing

several different kinds of rationality. And the

conformity of democratic practice varies with

each definition. Let us review a few major

meanings and their relationship to democratic

practice. In the first place, we may distinguish

between the rational decision as outcome and

the rational decision as process. In the former

case we speak of rationality as equivalent to a

"right" decision. This assumes that there is one

right answer to every problem, and that the

power of reason can arrive at truths of policy

which should be evident to all—all, that is,

except those ruled by prejudice or emotion.

When this is not simply a euphemism for

describing decisions of which we approve, it

presumably refers to a decision taken in

conformity with an estimate of desirable ends

(it thus assumes a valid analysis of whose

interest lies where) and also in conformity with

a correct estimate of which means will achieve

the given ends. If we leave determination of

self-interest up to the individual involved, then

virtually all electorate decisions are rational by

this definition; if we leave it up to the

"objective observer" then the proportion will

vary arbitrarily with his estimate of the present

situation and the future. Even in philosophy,

this meaning appears to be so ambiguous that

it is difficult to see how we can design empirical

research to test the extent of its observance by

the electorate. If we take rationality as

referring to the process of decision—a more

likely definition—then various possibilities are

available. One meaning requires a certain

independence of the rational process from the

influence of predispositions broadly defined.

Here rationality becomes the "free decision"—

free from coercive imposition; free from

blinding institutional loyalties; free from

personal position (such as class or race); free

from passions and impulses; free, in short,

from any distorting or distracting pressures

which prevent clear observation and calm,

sober reflection. Here the term refers to

logical, syllogistic ratiocination. But this seems

to be an impractical, untenable, undesirable,

and quite unreasonable definition; it takes the

content heart out of politics and leaves the

voter with no real basis on which to evaluate

political proposals. By this standard, at least in

its extreme version, there are almost no

rational voters. As a social philosopher says,

"individuals who on their own initiative form or

change their fundamental beliefs through

genuine critical reflection are so rare that they

may be classed as abnormal."326 PUBLIC

OPINION QUARTERLY, FALL 1952 A second

meaning of rationality is close to, if not

identical with, our requirement of information

and knowledge: the voter should be aware of

the correct state of public affairs at the present

and of the "reasonable" consequences of

alternative proposals for action. By this

definition someone who made up his political

mind on the basis of ends for which there are

no present means of attainment would be

making a non-rational decision, and so would

the person whose estimates of the present

situation or of the future were wrong. Also by

this meaning the voter should be capable of

indicating some relevant grounds for his

decision, and most voters can cite such

grounds. Here we meet the difficult question of

rationalization, as against rationality, but we

can suggest a partial answer. Rationality is

limited by the individual's incapacity to deal

with the real world in all its complexity, so it

must allow for the legitimacy of dealing with

simplified models of reality. In politics, the

voter may "really" decide on the basis of one or

two issues which are dominant for him (for

example, peace or the New Deal) and use other

issues as reinforcing rationalizations (for

example, the military background of a

candidate or corruption in the Federal

administration). A third definition requires the

presence of convincibility or openmindedness

in consideration of political issues. This does

not require the citizen to change his mind but

only to be genuinely open to a change of mind.

Here the time involved seems crucial. If this

means, for example, that the citizen should be

open-minded between June and November of

an election year, then probably fewer than half

the electorate is rational, and very few indeed

in the South and parts of New England. If it

includes the four years of a presidential

administration or the "natural history" of a

major political issue, from birth in controversy

to death in near-unanimity, then the figure

would become quite higher. It is hard for the

researcher to be more specific because of the

difficulty of determining just when "genuine

consideration," as against rationalization, goes

on. Still another meaning of rationality as

process requires that the decision be made in a

state of low psychic tension; that is, that the

decision not be an emotional one but be

marked by a certain amount of detachment

and freedom from passion. This poses a nice

democratic dilemma; the people most rational

by this definition are the people least

interested in the political process and least

involved in its outcome.DEMOCRATIC THEORY

AND PUBLIC OPINION 327 The more interested

people are the more emotional, in this sense,

and the least detached; they are the ones who

ascribe important consequences to the

outcome of the decision and thus find enough

psychic energy to be active about the matter.

Here the rational voter is the independent

voter, that is, the one without sufficient

interest or investment in the election to get

excited about it. Still other meanings are

available. There is the meaning in which

rationality refers to the presence of

deliberately directed behavior to consciously

formulated purposes. Here again, almost all

voters could qualify. There is the meaning in

which rationality refers to a choice of behavior

that is optimal in some sense, and this

definition can be readily satisfied on the

grounds of a subjective optimum if nothing

more. There is the meaning in which a rational

decision is a self-consistent decision. There are

undoubtedly other meanings. If it is not easy to

say what is meant by a rational decision, it is

somewhat easier to say what is not meant by

it. A rational decision is not a capricious

decision, or an impulsive one, or an

unprincipled one, or a decision guided by

custom or habit or tradition or sentiment

alone. But the central problem is to relate the

demand of rationality to the analysis of

decision-making in terms of such

sociopsychological concepts as the reference

group; that is, to see the "rational decision" as

imbedded in a social context which limits it at

the same time that it gives it political meaning.

While the types of rationality are not easy to

define and while they are certainly never

present in a pure or extreme form, they can be

isolated empirically, clarified, and investigated

as to their frequency, their functions, and their

preconditions. THE OUTCOME OF ELECTORATE

DECISIONS Finally, there is one basic

requirement which might be included under

the need for principle but which seems to

deserve independent treatment in view of its

central importance with reference to the

outcome of the decision. This is the

requirement of community interest; the

electorate is supposed to come to political

decisions on consideration of the common

good rather than, or in addition to, self-

interest. In several formulations of democratic

theory, the electorate is required to devote

thought to what is good for the community as a

whole instead of relying exclusively upon

calculation of what is good for oneself or one's

own group. The classical formulation comes

from328 PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, FALL

1952 John Stuart Mill: "In any political election .

. . the voter is under an absolute moral

obligation to consider the interests of the

public, not his private advantage, and give his

vote, to the best of his judgment, exactly as he

would be bound to do if he were the sole voter,

and the election depended upon him alone."

Now here again the problem of definition is a

central one. How is the researcher to

distinguish between honest conclusion and

forced rationalization, as in the slogan, "What's

good for me is good for the country"? How

distinguish the "immediate and apparent

interest" from the "ultimate and real interest"?

Does self-interest refer only to the criterion of

direct self-gain or to that of benefit to one's

group or class, and over what period of time?

Does community interest refer to agreement

on procedures, or to an outside criterion (and if

so, what), or to the residual decision after the

various self-interests have balanced themselves

out, or to genuine concern for other groups, or

to restraint upon self-interest, or to deviation

from the predominant vote of one's group? The

more one looks into the matter, the more it

appears that one man's self-interest is another

man's community interest, and that many

people sincerely identify the one widi the

odier. Nor have the theorists overlooked this.

"Men come easily to believe that arrangements

agreeable to themselves are beneficial to

others," said Dicey. "A man's interest gives a

bias to his judgment far oftener than it corrupts

his heart." And from Schumpeter: "To different

individuals and groups the common good is

bound to mean different things. This fact,

hidden from the utilitarian by the narrowness

of his outlook on the world of human

valuations, will introduce rifts on questions of

principle which cannot be reconciled by

rational argument." In a current study of

opinion formation (the Elmira study), we

concluded that it is more satisfactory to

analyze this question in terms of the forces

making for political cleavage and political

consensus within the community. The health of

a democratic order depends on achieving a

nice balance between them: enough cleavage

to stimulate debate and action, enough

consensus to hold the society together even

under strain. Political parties in a democracy

should disagree—but not too much, too

sharply, nor too fundamentally. The evidences

of cleavage are clear to everyone. Cleavage

along class and religious and regional lines in

addition to direct attitudinal differences on

basic issues of foreign and domestic policy—

these are so familiar as to require

noDEMOCRATIC THEORY AND PUBLIC OPINION

329 elaboration. At the same time there are

important evidences of consensus, of political

cohesion, which deserve more attention than

they usually get. In the first place, there is the

basic fact that group memberships and

identifications overlap political choices; sizable

political minorities are found in various social

groups and this provides a kind of glue to hold

the community together. In addition, even at

the height of a presidential campaign there are

sizable attitudinal minorities within each party

and each social group on political issues, and

thus sizable attitudinal agreements across

party and group lines. Such overlappings link

various groups together and prevent their

further estrangement. All of this means that

democratic politics in this country is happily not

total politics—a situation where politics is the

single or central selector and rejector, where

other social differences are drawn on top of

political lines. Cross-pressures in political

allegiances, based upon a pluralistic system of

values, are thus highly important to the society.

So the question of self and community interest

may best be seen as the question of cleavage

and consensus. The multiplicity and the

heterogeneity of identifications and

associations in the great society develop an

overlapping, pluralistic social organization

which both sharpens and softens the impact

and the consequences of political activity.

CONCIAJSION The political theory of

democracy, then, requires that the electorate

possess appropriate personality structures,

that it be interested and participate in public

affairs, that it be informed, that it be

principled, that it correctly perceive political

realities, that it engage in discussion, that it

judge rationally, and that it consider the

community interest. Now this combination of

requirements sets a high—an ideal— standard

for the political process. And since this is a

composite list, from a variety of sources, it is

not necessarily a matter for disillusionment or

even disappointment that the democratic

electorate does not conform to every

requirement in the full degree. There is always

an appropriate observation from Lord Bryce:

"Orthodox political theory assumes that every

citizen has, or ought to have, thought out for

himself certain opinions, for example, ought to

have a definite view, defensible by arguments,

of what the country needs, what principles

ought to be applied in governing it, of the men

to whose hands330 PUBLIC OPINION

QUARTERLY, FALL 1952 the government ought

to be entrusted. There are persons who talk,

though certainly very few who act, as if they

believed this theory, which may be compared

to the theory of some ultra-Protestants that

every good Christian has or ought to have, by

the strength of his own reason, worked out for

himself from the Bible a system of theology."

Opinion studies in recent years have done

much to fill in the picture of what actually

happens in democratic decision-making. As is

evident even from this brief survey, they have

done so in three ways: first, by documenting

the theoretical assumptions with facts about

actual political behavior; second, by clarifying

the concepts and assumptions of democratic

theory, if in no other way simply by insisting

upon researchable formulations; and third, by

differentiating and reformulating the general

theoretical propositions in more exact terms.

Further systematic exploration of this subject

within a sharper, more valid, and more

sophisticated framework of political theory

should make a rich contribution to each side.

The difficulties of collaboration between

political theorists on the one hand and opinion

researchers on the other must not be allowed

to stand in the way of joint work, for the

theorists can provide a systematic statement in

terms of which public opinion studies can be

meaningfully organized, and the empirical

researchers can document the theoretical

requirements. The theorists can suggest new

concepts and hypotheses to the researcher,

and the researcher can force the theorists to

sharpen and differentiate—yes, and quantify—

their formulations. Of course there are

problems but they should be negotiated or

overcome. For example, the theorists tend to

use descriptive categories (e.g., rationality) and

the researchers prefer predictive categories

(e.g., group memberships) in "explaining"

political preferences. Hard and joint thinking on

such problems should bring returns. The

investigation of the realities of democratic

processes at the level of the electorate is a

useful service and it should be carried forward.

Opinion studies can help a democracy not only

to know itself in a topical and immediate way

but also to evaluate its achievement and its

progress in more general terms. In this

framework, the study of public opinion can

make a telling contribution in the basic,

continuous struggle to bring democratic

practice more and more into harmony with the

requirements and the assumptions—that is,

with the ideals—of democratic theory.

Understanding Public Opinion in Social

Science Research

Understanding Public Opinion in Social Science

Research. The concept of public opinion,

deeply rooted in historical origins and evolving

through centuries, has been a subject of

scholarly debate. This paper traces the

historical development of the term 'public

opinion' from its early connotations to its

current complexities, exploring its

conceptualization, evolution, and debates.

Scholars' perspectives, ranging from Rousseau

to Locke and anti-democratic thinkers like Plato

and Aristotle constitute are discussed to

understand the meaning and evolution of the

term public opinion. The objective of this paper

is to explore the meaning, type and essence

what constitute the term ‘public’ and ‘opinion’.

It majorly relies on the work of Price to

understand the how the term public and

opinion are constituted and evolved in the

democratic societies and also distinguishes

how the term opinion and attitude in the larger

spectrum. Elaborating the formation of opinion

this paper explores the role of schemata,

values, and group identification. Furthermore,

it also demonstrates the impact of immediate

stimuli in social settings on the expression of

opinions, highlighting the dynamic nature of

opinion formation. The last part of the paper

highlights conceptualization of ‘Public Opinion’,

its historical and contextual evolution since

18th century and the influence of intellectuals

such as Madison, Bentham, and Mill. It also

emphasizes the role of American Association

for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) in the

development of the discipline of public opinion

across the regions in 20th century. Finally this

paper highlights the relevance of public opinion

research in the contemporary democratic

settings and challenges in pursuing objectivity

in this domain. Methodologically this paper

relies on exploratory and comparative analysis.

I. INTRODUCTION Public opinion, a pivotal

concept in the realm of social sciences, traces

its historical roots to the era of Rousseau,

gaining prominence with the advent of survey

research in the early 19th century. The

definition of public opinion remains a subject of

scholarly contention, with Childs (1939)

characterizing it as "a simple aggregation of

individual views" (Price 1992, p. 2). The

historical antecedents of the concept, however,

diverge from ancient Greek political thought,

where the collective or aggregative perspective

was marginalized and criticized by luminaries

such as Plato and Aristotle. Their anti-

democratic stance posited that expert opinions

superseded those of the masses, viewing the

amalgamation of 'public' and 'opinion' as

yielding either common sense or nonsense.

Vincent Price notes that it was only during the

liberal and democratic philosophies of the

1700s that attempts were made to reconcile

these terms in a different light (Price 1992, p.

6). Locke, in particular, imbued the term

'opinion' with significance, aligning it with

expert views, a departure from the ancient

Greek philosophers' interpretation. The term

'public,' on the other hand, has undergone

various historical interpretations, often aligning

with the collective will of the people. Price

elucidates that the term 'public' originally

connoted both 'of the people' (referring to

common access) and 'for the people' (referring

to the common good), evolving over time to

signify 'by the people' (carried out by the

common people, as understood today) (Price

1992, p. 8). Thus, 'public' and 'opinion' exhibit

distinct conceptual and historical trajectories,

with the amalgamation into 'public opinion'

receiving academic attention only in the first

half of the 20th century. To unravel the

historical development of the concept of

'public opinion,' a comprehensive exploration

of the evolution, conceptualization, and

debates surrounding the terms 'public' and

'opinion' becomes imperative. II. THE

CONCEPTION OF PUBLIC The notion of public

has been scrutinized through various lenses,

including crowd, mob, citizen, people, mass,

and group. In public opinion research, the

categorization of the public varies based on

research objectives, methods, and contexts.

Some view the public as the entire

geographical population, while others restrict it

to those informed about a specific issue.

Further distinctions emerge concerning

religion, caste, gender, region, or other identity

parameters. Vincent Price identifies several

types of public, one being the 'General Public.'

Allport's (1937) definition, as highlighted by

Price, characterizes the general public as "a

population defined by geographical,

community, political jurisdiction, or other

limits" (Price 1992, p. 36). This encompassing

definition, dominating societal and academic

discourse, has faced challenges. Scholars like

Gallup, Roper, Archibald, and Price advocate

for an inclusive approach, considering all

members of society in a populist and

democratic manner. In contrast, Bryce,

Lippmann, Neuman, and Key argue that not all

individuals are sufficiently informed or

potential respondents for research on specific

issues (Price 1992, Pp. 36-37). www.ijisrt.com

IJISRT23DEC1569

1433 Volume 8, Issue 12, December 2023

International Journal of Innovative Science and

Research Technology ISSN No:-2456-2165 A.

The Voting Public Within the taxonomy of

publics, the Voting Public stands as a

paramount category, representing the

electorate in democratic societies. This

constituency comprises citizens who have

acquired the right to vote and are duly enlisted

in the electoral roll issued by the government.

It serves as a crucial operational definition in

the realm of research, effectively sieving out

uninformed masses from analyses concerning

issues that shape the government. In both pre

and post-polling surveys, the Voting Public is

utilized as the universe for research endeavors.

However, the qualification as a member of the

Voting Public does not guarantee an

individual's comprehensive awareness of the

issues under scrutiny in surveys or research. B.

The Attentive Public The Attentive Public

encompasses individuals possessing substantial

information and a likelihood of responding to

specific issues. Devine's observations indicate

that only 70% of voters occasionally and 50%

are predominantly attentive voters (Price 1992,

p. 38). This segment is well-informed and

actively engages in political matters through

debates and the dissemination of awareness.

As Lippmann (1925) contends, the Attentive

Public comprises those who consistently pay

attention to public affairs, engage thoughtfully

with public issues, and occasionally discuss

these matters with others (Price 1992, Pp. 38-

39). Devine, employing five survey measures in

an American context, identifies the Attentive

Public based on reported interest in politics,

interest in national election campaigns,

discussions about politics, exposure to

newspaper news about politics, and reading

about politics in magazines. In the Indian

context, additional spaces beyond traditional

media, such as tea shops, common meeting

places, lunch breaks, and informal social

gatherings, contribute to the identification of

the Attentive Public. C. The Active Public

Approximately 15% of the Attentive Public, as

identified by Neuman, constitutes the Active

Public. The distinction between political

activists and the Active Public is nuanced, with

Price noting that the engagement of this group

in political affairs spans formal means of

participation, such as monetary contributions,

organizational memberships, and attendance

at rallies, as well as active informal

participation in public discussions and debates

(Price 1992, p. 40). The Elite Public, exemplified

by political activists, affluent capitalists,

funders, religious and social organizations, and

certain educational communities, embodies the

epitome of the Active Public in the Indian

context. D. Issue Public: While the

aforementioned categories delineate levels of

awareness and participation in political affairs,

the Issue Public is characterized by its focus on

specific matters. It can encompass individuals

from all the above categories depending on the

nature of the issue at hand, resulting in four

varieties: Issue General Public, Issue Voting

Public, Issue Attentive Public, and Issue Active

Public. Notably, Price provides in-depth

elucidation on the last two types of Issue

Public. By way of illustration, a query regarding

the method of crop harvesting posed to the

general populace may yield a high percentage

of uninformed responses, yet the same

question posed to attentive farmers

significantly diminishes the likelihood of

uninformed or inattentive responses. In short,

these four categories collectively contribute to

the formation of public opinion, delineating a

journey from the amorphous concept of Mass

to the nuanced construct of the Public.

Subsequent sections will delve into a brief

review of the idea of Public, followed by an

exploration of the types and definitions of

Opinion. III. WHAT CONSTITUTES OPINION? The

interchangeability of the terms "opinion" and

"attitude" has been a notable phenomenon in

academic, particularly psychological, discourse,

as well as in practical discussions within

society. The systematic exploration of opinions

garnered increased attention from researchers

and policymakers during the early 1900s,

coinciding with advancements in scientific

techniques. Notably, the 1920s and 1930s

witnessed an accelerated adoption of survey

techniques to measure opinions and attitudes.

A significant milestone in this domain was

marked by Gallup, Crossley, and Roper's

pioneering study, aimed at enhancing the

accuracy of predicting the 1936 American

Presidential election. Subsequent to this

endeavor, the establishment of the Public

Opinion Quarterly in 1937 and the American

Association for Public Opinion Research

(AAPOR) a decade later underscored the

growing significance of opinion research. The

historical trajectory of the concepts of opinion

and attitude reveals a close interrelation. Doob

(1948) defines public opinion as "attitudes on

an issue when individuals are members of the

same social group" (Doob 1948, p.35), while

Childs (1965) characterizes opinion as "an

expression of attitude in words" (Childs 1965,

p. 13). Despite the interchangeability in some

literature, a nuanced distinction persists.

Opinion is often associated with observable

and verbal manifestations, involving conscious

expressions of support or opposition

contingent on situational and behavioral

contexts. Conversely, attitude is construed as

covert and psychological, translating affective

cognition into preferences or aversions, with

global relevance and independence from

contextual factors. In the realm of researching

or studying public opinion, the data on these

two terms frequently converge,

interdependently shaping the understanding of

public sentiment. Vincent Price introduces a

threefold categorization of opinion,

encompassing expression, thoughtfulness, and

the adaptation of attitudes towards specific

issues. Expressive opinion hinges on the notion

that a person may hold a judgment internally

without expressing it, emphasizing that an

unexpressed opinion lacks the essence of

opinion unless articulated. Despite a

definitional commitment to overt expressions,

analysts acknowledge the existence of

unexpressed, private, internal, and latent

opinions (Price 1992, p. 47). The second

category, opinion as thoughtful, distinguishes

itself from attitude by emphasizing the decision

content, transforming opinion into a realm of

www.ijisrt.com

IJISRT23DEC1569

1434 Volume 8, Issue 12, December 2023

International Journal of Innovative Science and

Research Technology ISSN No:-2456-2165

rationalization and thoughtfulness. While the

inculcation of attitude involves liking or

disliking, thoughtfulness over one's attitude

and its culmination results in the emergence of

an opinion. The third category, adaptation of

attitude, signifies the outcome of attitude

processes on a specific issue, conceptualizing

opinion as a product of attitude. In the realm of

psychology, opinions are further classified into

overt and covert opinions, both of which can

be effectively captured through survey

research. IV. OPINION FORMATION The

advancement of tools and methodologies in

opinion research has given rise to various

theoretical concepts aiming to expound on the

intricate nature of opinions and the underlying

processes. In his exploration of opinion

formation, Vincent Price meticulously examines

three crucial concepts: Schemata, values, and

group identification. These concepts share

deduced from cognitive processes rather than

Considered more basic and foundational than

opinions, which are perceived as situational

Employed as theoretical frameworks to

elucidate overt expressions of opinion (Price

1992, p. 52). Schemata, as defined by Fiske &

Taylor, represent a cognitive structure

embodying one's general knowledge about a

given concept or stimulus domain.

Encompassing basic conceptual information

and its interrelation with other concepts,

schemata play a pivotal role in connecting

diverse information to form an opinion. They

also guide the interpretation of information,

influencing the selection of data aligned with

existing schemata (Fiske & Taylor 1991).

Consequently, the content, format, design, and

illocutionary forces of news dissemination

shape schemata and therefore public opinion

(Fiske & Taylor 1991). The second category,

values, is inherently prescriptive and functions

in evaluating opinions at the final stage of

formation. Diverging from attitudes, which

constitute bundles of beliefs, values serve as

guiding beliefs steering opinions toward their

endpoint and shaping modes of conduct.

Values are inherently tied to goals (terminal

values) and processes (instrumental values)

designed to achieve those goals (Rokeach

1973). The third category influencing opinion

formation revolves around the individual's

relation to self-respect, identity, or group

identification. Social identity emerges as a

pivotal factor filtering the value system and

ultimately determining individual opinion. Price

contends that social identification plays a

central role in forming opinions on public

issues, particularly within the "conflict system"

of elite politics (Price 1992, p. 57).

Consequently, group identity stands as a

paramount factor in shaping public opinion and

decisions. Studies, such as those conducted by

Converse, underscore the significance of group

identity, with 50% of respondents affirming

allegiance to their group identity compared to

3% or 4% expressing adherence to abstract

ideologies like liberal or conservative. This

phenomenon is evident in Indian politics,

where caste identity often dictates voting

patterns—a topic that will be further explored

in subsequent chapters. In short, these

categories function as information centers

continuously connecting and formulating

opinions within individuals. The expression of

the entire process of opinion formation by

individuals or the public is often triggered by

immediate stimuli such as discussions,

processions, informal conversations, or social

settings like gatherings over drinks or tea. In

the Indian context, the expression of public

opinion is notably observed in tea and pan

shops, evening gatherings among friends,

canteens, and increasingly on social media

platforms such as Facebook and WhatsApp.

Before delving into the details of public opinion

formation, functioning, and impacts, a brief

exploration of the history of the term "public

opinion" will be undertaken in the following

section. V. UNDERSTANDING PUBLIC OPINION

The conceptualization of "Public Opinion" has

evolved over time, intricately connected to

historical events and literary developments.

The term itself, referring to the collective

viewpoint of the people, gained prominence in

English and French writings during the first half

of the 18th century. Scholars like Habermas

and Ozouf emphasize the significant role of

French intellectuals in shaping the essence of

the public sphere, common will, public spirit,

and general will, culminating in the concept of

public opinion as ‘publicness’ developed in

French societies (Habermas 1989 and Ozouf

1988). The emergence of the public sphere in

political discourse can be traced back to

influential forces such as the printing technique

in the 15th century, the growth of business and

merchant classes, and the acceleration of

Protestant reforms in the 16th century. These

developments led to the establishment of

spheres and ideas independent of Church

dominance and religious interventions. The

professionalization of arts, the rise of reading

clubs, the publication of moral literature, and

challenges posed by Martin Luther and Calvin

to ecclesiastical authority all contributed to the

development of capitalism and the emergence

of independent social institutions in Europe,

particularly in England, by the early 18th

century (Habermas 1989). Key institutions

fostering the evolution of the essence, if not

the explicit concept, of public opinion included

"the coffee houses of England (2000 in London

by the early 18th century), the salons of Paris,

and the table societies of Germany" (Speier

1950). During this period, as Price underscores,

Habermas noted the rational and egalitarian

features of public opinion. Public opinion,

during this epoch, was perceived as emanating

from reasoned discourse, active conversation,

and debate aimed at determining the common

www.ijisrt.com

IJISRT23DEC1569

1435 Volume 8, Issue 12, December 2023

International Journal of Innovative Science and

Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165 IJISRT23DEC1569

www.ijisrt.com

1436 will or general good—distinct from a

mere clash of individual interests (Price 1992,

p-10). The 18th century witnessed a significant

space allocated to debates and free

discussions, freeing them from the shackles of

domination. The ideas of freedom of

expression, secularism, and the sovereignty of

the public were integral to these debates. It

marked a period when the concepts of

individualism and public emerged concurrently,

often in conflict—a dynamic that persisted into

the 20th century. In other words, the 18th

century, public opinion was intricately linked to

discussion, the free flow of information, and

the reflection of the common good. It

functioned as a powerful tribunal to scrutinize

the actions of the state. Yet, aspects of our

contemporary understanding of public opinion

found their origins in later writings on

representative democracy by figures like

Madison, and English utilitarian theorists

Bentham and Mill (Price 1992, p. 12). Minar

characterizes public opinion for utilitarians as

the agglomerate interests of the community,

asserting that the utilitarian democratic model

is the most characteristic modern outlook on

public opinion (Price 1992, p. 13). While Mill,

Bentham, and Rousseau had differing

perspectives on the evolution of public opinion,

Rousseau, akin to Mill and Bentham, advocated

for the regular publication of government

activities to safeguard against the abuse of

power and legitimize government rule. From

these explorations, it is evident that although

the term "public opinion" was not commonly

used in practical governmental practices and

philosophical writings, its essence gained

legitimacy and significance in the 19th and

early 20th centuries. These developments in

theoretical discourse accelerated the need for

more empirical methods to explore public

opinion. However, in the early 20th century,

the focus shifted towards sociological and

psychological concerns rather than political and

philosophical ones. Analysts began to

concentrate on understanding the social and

behavioral aspects of public opinion (Price

1992, p. 15). Scholars like Binkley noted a shift

in inquiry towards the function and powers of

public opinion in society, the means of its

modification or control, and the relative

importance of emotional and intellectual

factors in its formulation (Binkley 1928, p. 393).

This shift in focus and the changing political

landscapes worldwide prompted the

emergence of academic sub-disciplines such as

collective behavior, social psychology, attitude

and opinion research, propaganda analysis,

political behavior, and mass communication

research (Price: 1992, p-15). Presently, studies

on public opinion have a much broader scope,

impacting political, social, market, religious,

economic, and spiritual domains, and vice

versa. VI. FORMATION AND EXPRESSION OF

PUBLIC OPINION The process of forming and

expressing opinions on particular issues varies

widely among the public. Consequently,

opinions related to various issues can manifest

in diverse forms and be assessed through

quantitative or qualitative methods.

Quantitative classification involves providing

respondents with predetermined options for a

specific question, as exemplified by the query,

"Do you know about the Indian Prime

Minister?" Quantitative opinion classification

No response. The reasons behind these diverse

responses can be explored through various

avenues (Erikson, Robert, Luttbeg, and Tedin

2015, pp. 20-22). While these options help

gauge the awareness level of respondents, they

do not capture the depth of public opinion on a

particular issue. Scholars like Schuman and

Presser argue that providing options can

constrain responses (Schuman and Presser

1981). Conversely, qualitative classification of

opinion involves open-ended questions that do

not provide predefined options. For instance,

asking, "Do you know about the Indian Prime

Minister, or what do you know about the

Indian Prime Minister?" elicits varied

responses, ranging from basic knowledge to

expert-level understanding (Erikson, Robert,

Luttbeg, and Tedin 2015, Pp. 19-22).

Understanding political information levels

among the adult public, as discussed by Erikson

et al., provides insights in the context of the

United States. The level of opinion holding,

whether low or high, also depends on the

specific issue being addressed. Price

emphasizes certain criteria for observing

"opinion holding," noting that changes in the

interviewer's words, timing, actions, and

gestures can influence public opinion and

affect study outcomes. This consideration sets

the stage for a clearer understanding of

subsequent chapters. A. Wording and

Sentences: The choice of words and sentence

structure in a questionnaire significantly

imp

"Do you support demonetization brought by

you support demonetization?" While these

questions may seem similar, Q. A. is a double-

barreled question, introducing both

'demonetization' and 'Modi' as stimuli. This

complexity may lead to varied responses based

on respondents' feelings towards each stimulus

as also suggested by Price (1992). Volume 8,

Issue 12, December 2023 International

Journal of Innovative Science and Research

Technology ISSN No:-2456-2165 B. Time and

Issue The timing of questions can influence

responses. Asking the same questions

immediately after a policy's inauguration may

yield different responses compared to asking

the same questions a year later. Certain

questions may attract higher responses, while

others may lead to more skipped answers. For

instance, questions about supporting terrorism

in Kashmir may receive high participation,

whereas questions about alternative forms of

government if India were not a democracy may

primarily attract responses from experts or

attentive individuals. C. Choice The options

given significantly shape public opinion. The

dichotomous choice of supporting or opposing

is common in public opinion research, and

including options like 'don't know' allows

respondents to abstain if they lack an opinion.

D. Depth of Knowledge Public knowledge varies

across issues, resulting in different types of

opinions. Price outlines categories such as

expert opinion, general or commonsensical

opinion, wrong opinion, no opinion, and un-

opinion, with the depth of knowledge varying

based on the issue (Price 1992, p. 65). E. Impact

Factor Opinions can range from intellectual

analysis to future actions. While intellectual

opinions may not translate into future

applicability, political activists' opinions often

lead to future action plans and involvement in

day-to-day politics. F. Contextual Settings The

formation of opinion also differs according to

the context and circumstances. For example, as

a researcher working on a project sponsored by

the European Union and the Ministry of

External Affairs, Government of India, in the

year 2014, I (accompanied by a female

researcher from Kashmir University) was

supposed to interview ex-militants in Jammu

and Kashmir. As a non-Kashmiri residing in

Delhi, the image of Kashmir I had in my mind

included a picture of Dal Lake in Srinagar,

snowfall, and icy mountains. During interviews

and visits to different remote areas of Kashmir,

I observed three responses to the 'no question

asked' about 'what is the condition of the

people in the area?' (Kumar 2014) The

Srinagar and adjacent districts Response: "Aap

log kya jano hamari sthiti kaisi hai aap to Delhi

se aaye ho na (Since you are from Delhi, how

would you know -

Case 2: Place: Kupwara region (which is closer

to the border and known for insurgency)

Response: "Aap log kya jano hamari sthiti kaisi

hai aap to Bharat se aaye ho na (Since you are

from India, how would you know - what is our

place whose half area is in Pakistan Occupied

Kashmir, POK, and where Army and police

rarely go) Response: "Aap log kya jano hamari

sthiti kaisi hai aap to Kashmir se aaye ho na

(Since you are from Kashmir, how would you

know - what is our condition?)" (Kumar 2014)

The above example from the field reveals a lot

about the circumstances, society, history,

culture, and politics, and how these factors

construct the opinion of the people. In this

context, Noelle-Neumann argues that a full

understanding of public opinion is not possible

unless and until the climate of opinion is also

examined (Price 1992, p. 67). Thus, the process

of forming and expressing public opinion is

complex and multifaceted, influenced by

various factors ranging from wording and

choices to the context and circumstances in

which opinions are sought. A nuanced

understanding of these dynamics is crucial for

meaningful research and analysis of public

opinion. VII. TYPES OF PUBLIC OPINION The

preceding discussion on the characteristics of

forming and holding opinions provides valuable

insights into the considerations essential for

collecting public opinion. This examination

serves as a foundation for crafting

questionnaires, conducting interviews, and

analyzing data. Building on these factors,

various types of public opinion can be

elucidated. A. High-Low Rate Opinion: The

depth of opinion holding, whether low or high,

is contingent upon the information available to

respondents. The level of information is

intricately linked to the issue at hand and the

individual's interest. For instance, the study

conducted by Erikson, Luttbeg, and Tedin

focused on the American President Nixon's

decision on Antibalistic Missiles. The findings

revealed that 41% of the public had an opinion

(23% aware and supported, 18% aware and

opposed), while 59% had no opinion (28%

aware but neutral, 31% unaware with no view).

The scholars concluded that the "extremely low

rate of opinion holding on ABM was largely

because of the extreme complexity of the

issue" (Erikson, Luttbeg, and Tedin 2015, p. 19-

20). Thus, both the issue's complexity and the

question's format significantly influence the

opinion rate in survey research. B. Nonopinion

Nonopinion refers to situations where

individuals either choose not to express an

opinion or genuinely lack a viewpoint on a

particular issue. Understanding the factors

contributing to nonopinion is crucial for

researchers, shedding light on the limits of

public awareness or interest in specific topics.

C. Doorstep Opinion Doorstep opinions are

spontaneous and immediate responses

provided by individuals in everyday settings.

These opinions are often shaped by the

situational context and can offer valuable

insights into the public's initial, unfiltered

reactions to various issues. Studying doorstep

opinions provides researchers with a unique

perspective on www.ijisrt.com

IJISRT23DEC1569

1437 Volume 8, Issue 12, December 2023

International Journal of Innovative Science and

Research Technology ISSN No:-2456-2165 the

immediate impact of events or policies on

public sentiment. In short, these types of public

opinion, ranging from high-low rate opinions to

non-opinions and doorstep opinions, showcase

the nuanced nature of public sentiment.

Researchers must consider these variations and

factors when designing surveys or conducting

studies to ensure a comprehensive

understanding of the diverse opinions held by

the public. VIII. CHALLENGES TO THE STUDY OF

PUBLIC OPINION The principal challenge in the

study of public opinion lies in reconciling two

Enlightenment values: rational individual

opinion and non-rational, emotional aspects of

public opinion. The more concrete emphasis on

the scientific investigation of public opinion

began in the early 20th century. However,

these investigations were also applied to the

philosophical examination of the public

conscience, thinking, and opinion. Over time,

the study of public opinion has solidified its

inevitability and growing significance,

accompanied by a multitude of advancements

in the analysis, tools, and techniques for

understanding public opinion. Nevertheless,

practitioners and analysts in the field of public

opinion have encountered multiple challenges.

Price has categorized these challenges into five

types within this domain. Firstly, dating back to

the era of Plato and Aristotle, public opinion,

both in its essence and actuality, has been

subject to critical scrutiny. These philosophers

harbored profound doubts regarding the

capacity and expertise inherent in public

opinion, particularly within the democratic

framework, citing a deficiency in expert

elements. Lippmann's seminal work, 'Public

Opinion' (1922), similarly manifests a lack of

confidence in the legislative and administrative

capabilities of public opinion. Bryce contends

that "public questions come in the third or

fourth rank among the interests of life" (Bryce

1888, p. 8). Lippmann further posits that

ordinary citizens lack adequate and accurate

knowledge about public affairs, characterizing

the political world as "out of reach, out of

mind, out of sight" (Lippmann 1922, p. 29). The

trust placed in public information agencies

contributing to the formation of public opinion

is vigorously contested by Bryce, Lippmann,

and scholars following similar lines,

underscoring the perceived lack of competency

in public opinion. The contemporary situation

in India and the process of shaping public

opinion, significantly reliant on media and

social media, warrant discussion to

comprehend the objectivity, accuracy,

expertise, and competency of public opinion. In

the current landscape where media agencies

are predominantly influenced by corporate

entities or subject to the control of ruling

individuals or political parties, questions arise

about the accuracy and impartiality of

information, thereby influencing public

opinion. The prevalence of fake news, paid

news, and the dissemination of highly

ideological and interest-driven information

raises doubts about the competency of public

opinion. Despite these inaccuracies, the study

of public opinion maintains its heightened

relevance in exploring the veracity of public

sentiment, irrespective of its ethical or moral

standing. Consequently, the original intent

behind the formation or examination of public

opinion, aiming to represent the genuine needs

of the people and provide legitimacy to the

government, has evolved beyond the ethical

and moral confines of public opinion,

transitioning into the realm of understanding

and shaping the existing public opinion among

the masses. Secondly, the examination of

'Public Opinion' by Lippmann indeed

underscores the public's inadequacy in forming

accurate opinions. However, scholars such as

John Dewey, Lasswell, and Schattschneider

contribute an additional dimension to the

study, addressing the challenges within public

opinion. Dewey posits that the primary issue

lies not predominantly in the public's

incompetence but rather in the insufficient

methodology of public opinion communication

and formation. Advocating for the rational and

judgmental faculty of the public, Dewey

emphasizes the role of education in enhancing

public awareness, urging the improvement of

resources in investigating public opinion. He

asserts, "the essential need, in other words, is

the improvement of the methods and

conditions of debate, discussion, and

persuasion. That is the problem of the public"

(Dewey 1927, p. 208). Similarly, Lasswell, in

"Democracy through Public Opinion," explores

alternative approaches for improved results in

public opinion and the sustenance of

democratic institutions. On a different note,

Schattschneider identifies substantial potential

in the reasoning abilities of the public,

contending that modern individuals possess

the capacity to navigate governmental affairs.

He argues that people, with increased

involvement in day-to-day government affairs,

can make informed choices and reflections

(Schattschneider 1957). Therefore, the

necessity for a competitive political system

arises, wherein the public can form opinions

more effectively with clear alternative options.

Examining the scenario of Indian public

opinion, these issues gain significant relevance.

As the largest democracy globally, with a

substantial constitution, Indian democracy has

endured for over 70 years. The survival of

Indian democracy can be attributed to the

proper reformation of public awareness and

opinion, notwithstanding various ideological

rumors. This endurance stems from the

simultaneous existence of critical public

judgment and ideological ignorance or

adherence. While individuals vote based on

caste and religious considerations, they also

evaluate the performance of the incumbent

party, resulting in strong anti-incumbency

practices in Indian electoral behavior.

Furthermore, mass ignorance toward certain

significant issues is counteracted by mass

intelligence and preferences on matters of

importance. The juxtaposition of Plato's ideas

and Schattschneider's relevance in Indian

politics emphasizes the intricate dynamics

shaping public opinion in the Indian context.

www.ijisrt.com

IJISRT23DEC1569

1438 Volume 8, Issue 12, December 2023

International Journal of Innovative Science and

Research Technology ISSN No:-2456-2165

Thirdly, this perspective is rooted in the notion

that there can never be an absolute public

opinion; rather, it will always represent the

viewpoint of a specific group, namely the

majority. Within this context, two dangers

associated with public opinion emerge: the

dominance of the majority and the potential

for the minority to become the dominator.

Plato contends that public opinion is perilous as

it lacks the voice of the expert. Furthermore, if

the public opinion of the majority prevails, it

does so at the expense of minority viewpoints.

This nuanced discussion has been expounded

upon by Tocqueville in the context of

democracy in America (Tocqueville 1956

[1835]). Consequently, the peril of

majoritarianism manifests in two ways—firstly,

the absence of expert opinion, and secondly,

the marginalization of minority perspectives.

Another peril within public opinion is

articulated by scholars addressing the concept

of power elites. Proponents such as Robert

Dahl and Michael assert that democracy or

power invariably resides in the hands of a

select group of influential individuals, i.e., the

political elite. The transfer of power cyclically

revolves among these elites, and even the

formation of public opinion merely reflects the

reiteration of the viewpoints of these powerful

political elites. An additional illustrative

example elucidating the tyranny of the majority

in the Indian context is discernible in the realm

of language policies. The sway held by linguistic

majorities, often coupled with strategic

political machinations, recurrently results in

the marginalization of linguistic minorities,

underscoring the hazards associated with

majoritarianism within the complex fabric of a

diverse and pluralistic society. Take, for

instance, the state of Maharashtra, where

Marathi predominates as the majority

language. The Marathi-speaking populace,

backed by robust political backing, has, on

occasions, pursued policies emphasizing the

preeminence of Marathi across various

spheres, ranging from educational initiatives to

administrative functions. This linguistic

majoritarian inclination has, at times, led to the

neglect or sidelining of linguistic minorities,

such as the Gujarati-speaking community in

specific pockets of the state. In this scenario,

political entities aligned with the linguistic

majority frequently orchestrate language

policies geared toward the advancement and

imposition of the majority language. The

discourse encompassing language

metamorphoses into a strategic instrument

through which the linguistic majority reinforces

its ascendancy, consigning linguistic minorities

to the fringes. This dynamic can culminate in a

scenario where the linguistic rights and cultural

expressions of minority groups find themselves

eclipsed or stifled to accommodate the

linguistic predilections of the majority. Similar

instances can be observed in other states, like

Tamil Nadu or West Bengal. Herein, it’s very

challenging to come an objective Judgment on

public opinion. Fourthly, the susceptibility of

the public to emotional persuasion is a

noteworthy aspect. Kornhauser observes that

appeals to emotions constitute an integral

component of political dynamics (Price 1992, p.

20). Lippmann underscores this by stating, “the

formation of a singular general will out of a

multitude of disparate wishes is not a Hegelian

mystery, as imagined by many political

philosophers, but an art well-known to leaders,

politicians, and steering committees. It consists

essentially in the use of symbols, which evoke

emotions after they have been detached from

their ideas” (Lippmann 1925, p. 47). The

ascendancy and triumph of fascist parties in

Europe serve as a pertinent exemplification of

the aforementioned argument. In the Indian

context, the success of the BJP in the general

election of 2014, propelled by persuasive

forces such as ‘religion and development,’ also

translates into victories for the BJP in various

state assembly elections until 2018. However,

predicting the efficacy of similar persuasive

strategies by the party in subsequent elections

remains uncertain. Nevertheless, the prevailing

reality in Indian society and politics

underscores the enduring influence of religion

and caste as potent persuasive forces that

shape or reshape public opinion among the

masses. Finally, the domination of the elite

stands out as a pivotal factor in generating and

regenerating public opinion. Ginsberg astutely

observes that public opinion in modern

democracies functions as the 'domestication of

mass belief' (Ginsberg 1986). Scholars such as

Mills, Habermas, and Chomsky, in addition to

Dahl and Michael, have extensively expounded

on the role of elites in influencing public

opinion. Mills posits that in the American

context, the population has been transformed

into a market that consumes public opinion

rather than being a public that produces ideas

and opinions (Habermas 1962). This

transformation of the public into a market for

consuming public opinion has become a

routine phenomenon in India as well. The

media has evolved into an agent for the

dissemination of rumors and the production of

information, with the public consuming these

elements to form their opinions. IX.

CONCLUSION In conclusion, this research paper

presents a comprehensive understanding the

concept of public opinion within the ambit of

social science research. The historical journey,

tracing its roots from influential philosophers

like Rousseau and Locke to its evolution in the

18th century and subsequent complexities in

terms of conceptualization, meaning and

development has been explore in detail in the

first part of the paper. To elaborate the terms

‘public and ‘opinion’ are explained by defining

their variants and types historically. The types

of public consists of General Public, Voting

Public, Attentive Public, Active Public, and Issue

Public; whereas ‘opinion is meticulously

differentiated from the term attitude and other

related terms which are mostly used in the

disciplines of psychology and philosophy.

www.ijisrt.com

IJISRT23DEC1569

1439 Volume 8, Issue 12, December 2023

International Journal of Innovative Science and

Research Technology ISSN No:-2456-2165 The

second part of the paper demonstrates the

process of opinion formation and shows how it

involves the concepts such as schemata, values,

and group identification. These foundational

elements serve as theoretical explanations for

the overt expressions of public sentiment,

highlighting the dynamic nature of opinion

formation in response to changing

circumstances. The third part significantly

focuses on the historical exploration of the

term "public opinion" from its early usage in

the 18th century to its contemporary relevance

establishes connections with significant events,

literary developments, and philosophical ideas.

In the 20th century, the research domain was

expanded to cover the scope of inquiry into

sociological and psychological aspects of public

opinion, leading to the establishment of

academic sub-disciplines. The role of

organizations like the American Association for

Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) in shaping

the discipline and the challenges in procuring

objectivity in public opinion survey research in

the contemporary democratic settings remains

the major concern of this paper. REFERENCES

[1]. Binkley, R. C. (1928). The concept of public

opinion in the social sciences. Social Forces, 6,

389-396. [2]. Blumer, H. (1948). Public opinion

and public opinion polling. American

Sociological Review, 13, 542-554. [3]. Bryce, J.

(1888). The American commonwealth (Vol. 3).

London: Macmillan. [4]. Childs, H. L. (1939). By

public opinion I mean... Public Opinion

Quarterly, 4, 53-69. [5]. Cooley, C. H. (1902).

Human nature and the social order. New York:

Charles Scribner. [6]. De Tocqueville, A. (1956).

Democracy in America [1835]. [7]. Dewey, J.

(1927). The Public and Its Problem. New York:

Holt, Rinehart & Winston. [8]. Doob, L. W.

(1948). Public opinion and propaganda. Henry

Holt. [9]. Erikson, Robert S., Luttbeg Norman,

R., and Tedin Kent L. (2015). American Public

Opinion: Its Origin, Content and Impact. New

York: John Willey and Sons. [10]. Fiske, S. T., &

Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. Mcgraw-

Hill Book Company. [11]. Ginsberg, B. (1986).

The captive public: How mass opinion

promotes state power. New York: Basic Books.

[12]. Habermass, J. (1989). The structural

transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry

into a category of bourgeois society. (T. Burger,

Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [13].

Hucker, D. (2012). International history and the

study of public opinion: towards

methodological clarity. The International

History Review, 34(4), 775-794. [14]. Kalton, G.

(1983). Introduction to survey sampling. Delhi:

Sage Publication. [15]. Kumar, S. (2014). Field

Experience as Field Investigator while working

on a research project titled “The Role of

Governance in the Resolution of

Socioeconomic and Political Conflicts in India

and Europe” www.ijisrt.com

housed at the Department of Political Science,

University of Delhi, funded by European Union

and Ministry of External Affairs, Government of

India. [16]. Lasswell, H. D. (1941). Democracy

through public opinion. Menasha, WI:George

Banta. [17]. Lippmann, W. (1922). Public

opinion. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

[18]. Madison, J. (1966). The Federalist papers.

New York: Doubleday. (Original work published

1788) *19+. Ozouf, M. (1988). “Public Opinion”

at the end of the Old Regime. Journal of

Modern History, 60, S1-S127. [20]. Price, V.

(1992). Public opinion. London: Sage

Publications. [21]. Rokeach, M. (1973). The

nature of human values. Free press. [22].

Schattschneider, E. E. (1957). Intensity,

visibility, direction and scope. American

Political Science Review, 51(4), 933-942. [23].

Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981). The

attitude-action connection and the issue of

gun control. The Annals of the American

Academy of Political and Social Science,

455(1), 40-47. [24]. Speier, H. (1950).The

historical development of public opinion.

American Journal of Sociology, 55, 376-388.

1. Who among the following strongly said

that “Man is a Political Animal”?

2. A. Socrates

3. B. Plato

4. C. Aristotle

5. D. None of the Above.

6. Answer C

7. 2. Traditional approach gives stress on:

8. A. Values.

9. B. Facts.

10. C. Objectivity.

11. D. Precision.

12. Answer A

13. 3. ‘Credo of Relevance’ Signaled

14. A. Modernism.

15. B. Behaviouralism.

16. C. Post-Behaviouralism.

17. D. Rationalism.

18. Answer B

19. 4. ‘The Intellectual God Father’ of

Behaviouralism is

20. A. Charles. E. Merriam

21. B. David Easton.

22. C. Laswell.

23. D. None of the above.

24. Answer A

25. 5. Hobbes's Theory of Social Contract is

explained in his book.

26. A. Republic.

27. B. Prince.

28. C. Social Contract.

29. D. Leviathan.

30. Answer D

31. 6. ‘Two Treatises of Government’ Was

Written By

32. A. John Locke.

33. B. J.J Rousseau.

34. C. Thomas Hobbes.

35. D. Spencer.

36. Answer A

37. 7. Which one of the following is not

relevant to the Traditional Approach.

38. A. Philosophical

39. B. Historical.

40. C. Institutional

41. D. Behavioral.

42. Answer D

43. 8. Integration of Political Science with

other Social Sciences Is a basic

principle of

44. A. Traditionalism.

45. B. Behaviouralism.

46. C. Liberalism.

47. D. Post – Behaviouralism.

48. Answer B

49. 9. The success of democracy depends

upon

50. A. Periodic Elections.

51. B. Voting.

52. C. Campaigning in The Elections.

53. D. All the above

54. Answer D

55. 10. Which of the following is a

permanent feature of a representative

form of government?

56. A. Voting.

57. B. Decision Making.

58. C. Military Force.

59. D. None of The Above.

60. Answer A

61. 11. “A right is a claim recognized by

society and enforced by the state” who

said this?

62. A. Laski

63. B. Bosanquet

64. C. Rousseau

65. D. Green

66. Answer B

67. 12 Who described democracy as “a

form of government in which everyone

has a share”?

68. A. John Seeley

69. B. J.S Mill

70. C. Bryce

71. D. None of The Above

72. Answer A

73. 13. Who said “Rights are those

conditions of social life without which

no man can be his best self”

74. A. Hobhouse

75. B. Bosanquet

76. C. Laski

77. D. Hegel

78. Answer C

79. 14. Who wrote the book ‘A Grammar

of politics’

80. A. Laski

81. B. Hegal

82. C. J.S Mill

83. D T.H Green

84. Answer A

85. 15. The concept of Greek, ‘Justice’ was

86. A. Legal

87. B. Moral

88. C. Social

89. D. Political

90. Answer B

91. 16. The origin of democracy can be

traced back to

92. A. Ancient Greek City States

93. B. Medieval Period

94. C. Modern Era

95. D. Feudalism

96. Answer A

97. 17. Who among the following said,

“Liberty is the opposite of over

government”?

98. A. Seeley

99. B. Prof. Ramsay Muir

100. C. Laski

101. D. J.S Mill

102. Answer A

103. 18. What is meant by Social

Justice.

104. A. All should have the same

Political Rights.

105. B. All should have the same

Economic rights.

106. C. All kinds of discrimination and

privileges based on caste, color, creed,

and sex should be

107. eliminated.

108. D. All should have the right to

freedom of religion.

109. Answer C

110. 19. A democratic society is one

in which

111. A. Government is popularly

elected.

112. B. Liberty is given the highest

value.

113. C. The spirit of equality and

fraternity prevails.

114. D. All the above.

115. Answer D

116. 20. Who wrote the book

‘Politics’

117. A. Socrates

118. B. Plato

119. C. Aristotle

120. D. Rousseau

121. Answer C

122. 21. Behavioral approach in

political science is “an attempt to make

the empirical content of political

science more scientific” who said this?

123. A. Charles. E. Merriam

124. B. David Easton

125. C. Powell

126. D. Robert A Dahl

127. Answer A

128. 22. Eight principles of

the Behavioral Approach of political

science is generally known as:

129. A. Regularities

130. B. Pure Science

131. C. Verifications

132. D. Intellectual Foundations

133. Answer D

134. 23. Who wrote the book ‘On

liberty’?

135. A. Henry Maine

136. B. J.S Mill

137. C. T.H Green

138. D. Laski

139. Answer B

140. 24. ‘A theory of justice ‘is the

work of

141. A. J.S Mill

142. B. Bodin

143. C. John Rawls

144. D. Montesquieu

145. Answer C

146. 25. The term ‘Globalization’ was

coined by

147. A. Kaplan

148. B. Theodore Levitt

149. C. Burton

150. D. Spiro

151. Answer B

152. 26. Democracy is the rule of

153. A. Voters

154. B. People

155. C. Members of parliament

156. D. Political Parties.

157. Answer B

158. 27. Who defined democracy as

“Government of the people, by the

people, for the people”?

159. A. Woodrow Wilson

160. B. Lord Bryce

161. C. Abraham Lincoln

162. D. Laski

163. Answer C

164. 28. Lord Bryce has written,

“That form of government in which the

ruling power of a state is legally

vested, not in any particular class, but

in the members of the community as a

whole”. Which form of government he

is referring to?

165. A. Democracy

166. B. Parliamentary Government

167. C. Federal Government

168. D. Unitary Government

169. Answer A

170. 29. The two words ‘demos’ and

‘Kratos’ from which democracy draws

its origin belong to

171. A. Latin Language.

172. B. Greek Language.

173. C. French Language.

174. D. Spanish Language.

. Answer B

176. 30. The two forms of democracy

are

177. A. Parliamentary and

presidential.

178. B. Direct and indirect.

179. C. Monarchical and Republican.

180. D. None of the above.

181. Answer B

182. 31. Which one of the following

theories of democracy accords high

priority to the political rights of

citizens?

183. A. Pluralist theory of democracy.

184. B. Elitist of democracy.

185. C. Marxist theory of democracy.

186. D. Liberal theory of democracy.

187. Answer D

188. 32. Which theory of democracy

attaches great importance to the

economic rights of man?

189. A. Marxist theory

190. B. Elite Theory

191. C. Pluralist Theory

192. D. All the above

193. Answer A

194. 33. The term ‘liberty’ has been

drawn from the Latin term

195. A. Libel

196. B. Lingua

197. C. Labor

198. D. Liber

199. Answer D

200. 34. One of the major factors

that have stimulated the globalization

process is

201. A. Effective utilization of

resources.

202. B. Increase in income and

wealth.

203. C. Willingness to cooperate.

204. D. Rapid Improvement in

technology.

205. Answer D

206. 35. Removing barriers or

restrictions said by the government is

called

207. A. Liberalization

208. B. Investment

209. C. Favorable trade

210. D. Free trade

211. Answer A

212. 36. Globalization by connecting

countries leads to

213. A. Lesser competition among

producers.

214. B. Greater competition among

producers.

215. C. No competition between

producers.

216. D. None of these.

217. Answer B

218. 37. ‘Euro centrism’ as the term

for an ideology was coined by whom?

219. A. Karl Marx

220. B. Green

221. C. Samir Amin

222. D. Rousseau

223. Answer C

224. 38. During the enlightenment of

the 18th century:

225. A. Scholars emphasized the

supernatural.

226. B. Scholars denied the possibility

of a scientific study of humans.

227. C. Several scholars believed

human social life could be studied

scientifically.

228. D. None of these.

229. Answer C

230. 39. Economics deals with

231. A. Production of goods and

services.

232. B. Consumption of goods and

services.

233. C. Distribution of goods and

services.

234. D. All the above.

235. Answer D

236. 40. The social science that deals

with human use of the natural

environment is:

237. A. Genetics

238. B. Geography

239. C. Political science

240. D. Sociology

241. Answer B

242. 41. Political science stresses the

study of:

243. A. Government

244. B. State

245. C. Power

246. D. All the above

247. Answer D

248. 42. Psychology deals with

249. A. Only violent behavior.

250. B. Only normal behavior.

251. C. Mental states of individual

humans.

252. D. Groups of people in

interaction

253. Answer C

254. 43. The study of human group

behavior is the definition of

255. A. Psychology

256. B. Sociology

257. C. Geology

258. D. None of the above

259. Answer B

260. 44. The social sciences lack

261. A. Theories

262. B. Concepts

263. C. Scientific laws

264. D. Generalizations

265. Answer C

266. 45. Ethical neutrality is the

opposite of

267. A. Objectivity

268. B. Generalization

269. C. Judgmental Social science

270. D. Participant observation

271. Answer C

272. 46. Anthropology is restricted

to the study of:

273. A. Primitive people only.

274. B. Pre-historic people only.

275. C. Modern people only.

276. D. None of these.

277. Answer D

278. 47. Objectivity means

279. A. Precision

280. B. Taking nothing for granted

281. C. Eliminating bias

282. D. Repeating observations

283. Answer C

284. 48. The study and analysis of

preliterate societies is one of the chief

concerns of

. A. Sociology

. B. Psychology

. C. Anthropology

288. D. History

289. Answer C

290. 49. The social sciences were

initially concerned with the

consequences of

291. A. American Revolution

292. B. The French Revolution

293. C. The Russian Revolution

294. D. The Industrial Revolution

295. Answer D

296. 50. The study of traits that

appear in specific populations as an

adaptation to a specific environment is

called

297. A. Physical Anthropology

298. B. Cultural Anthropology

299. C. Demography

300. D. Psychology

301. Answer A

302. 51. Furnishing historical data

about the past with no written records

Is the task of

303. A. Archeology

304. B. Cultural geography

305. C. History

306. D. Anthropology

307. Answer A

308. 52. The most experimental of

social sciences is

309. A. Sociology

310. B. Psychology

311. C. Archeology

312. D. Economics

313. Answer B

314. 53. The discipline that studies

such disparate subjects as the

environment religion, politics,

criminality,

315. organization and so on is

316. A. History

317. B. Sociology

318. C. Political science

319. D. Psychology

320. Answer B

321. 54. Which of the following does

not fall within the preview of the

political liberty

322. A. Right to vote.

323. B. Right to contest elections.

324. C. Right to criticize the

government.

325. D. Right to move the court for

the enforcement of rights.

326. Answer D

327. 55. Political liberty ensures

328. A. Protection against oppressive

rule

329. B. Economic equality

330. C. Basic Amenities of life

331. D. None of the above

332. Answer A

333. 56. Who said “Political liberty

without economic equality is a myth”

334. A. T.H. green

335. B. J.S Mill

336. C. G.D.H Cole

337. D. H.J. Laski

338. Answer C

339. 57. Liberty and equality are

340. A. Complementary to each other

341. B. Contradictory to each other

342. C. Unrelated to each other

343. D. None of the above

344. Answer A

345. 58. Which of the following best

describes eurocentrism?

346. A. Eurocentrism is a style of

analysis in which European societies are

compared to non –

347. European societies to produce

an unbiased comparison of the relative

merits of each.

348. B. Eurocentrism is a thought

style in which the assessment and

evaluation of non-European

349. societies are couched in terms of

the cultural assumptions and biases of

Europeans.

350. C. Eurocentrism describes

studies or scholarly work that only

consider European political or

351. economic systems.

352. D. All the above.

353. Answer B

354. 59. The credit for developing a

behavioral approach to the study of

political science goes to

355. A. The American political

scientists.

356. B. The British political scientists.

357. C. The German political

scientists.

358. D. The Political scientist of the

third world.

359. Answer A

360. 60. Though the Behaviorist

Approach to the study of political

science was developed after the first

361. world war it gained popularity

only

362. A. In the thirties of the twentieth

century.

363. B. After the second world war.

364. C. In the sixties of the twentieth

century.

365. D. In the eighties of the

twentieth century.

366. Answer B

367. 61. The behaviorist approach to

the study of political science was

developed as a protest against

368. A. The historical approach.

369. B. The philosophical approach.

370. C. Descriptive-institutional

approach.

371. D. All the above.

372. Answer D

373. 62. The behaviorist approach

differs from the traditional approach

for the study of political science in so

far as

374. A. It is analytical

375. B. It is general rather than

particular

376. C. It is explanatory rather than

ethical

377. D. It has all the above features

378. Answer D

379. 63. Which one of the following

is regarded as the most important

contribution of behaviouralism to

political science

380. A. It greatly helped in theory

building

381. B. It developed several new

concepts

382. C. It developed several new

tools of research

383. D. It emphasized the important

role which history can’t play in research

384. Answer C

385. 64. Civil liberty is inherent in

the laws of

386. A. State

387. B. Nature

388. C. Society

389. D. All the above

390. Answer A

391. 65. Who said: “Where there is

no law there is no freedom”?

392. A. T.H. Green

393. B. Locke

394. C. Hobbes

395. D. Mac Iver

396. Answer B

397. 66. Which one of the following

statements is correct

398. A. Liberty means the absence of

all restraints

399. B. Liberty means the power to

do whatever one pleases

400. C. Liberty means the absence of

objection

401. D. Liberty is not the total

absence of restraint but the existence

of socially acceptable restrains

402. Answer D

403. 67. The concept of natural

liberty is associated with

404. A. Divine origin theory

405. B. Social contract theory

406. C. Force Theory

407. D. Evolutionary theory

408. Answer B

409. 68. Who among the following

was the chief exponent of natural

liberty

410. A. Rousseau

411. B. Laski

412. C. Plato

413. D. Herbert Spencer

414. Answer A

415. 69. Political liberty is often

taken as synonymous with

416. A. Democracy

417. B. Majority rule

418. C. Freedom

419. D. Independence of division

420. Answer A

421. 70. Which one of the following

statements is not correct?

422. A. Civil liberty is basic to other

kinds of liberties

423. B. Civil liberty is granted only to

the citizens

424. C. Civil liberty is available to

both citizens and non-citizens

425. D. Civil liberty exists only in civil

society

426. Answer B

427. 71. Which one of the following

statements is not correct

428. A. Economic liberty means

freedom from fear and starvation

429. B. Self-government in the

industry is an important feature of

economic liberty

430. C. Economic liberty means

common ownership of the means of

production and distribution

431. D. Economic liberty aims at

establishing a self-sufficient society

432. Answer C

433. 72. The term ‘Social Sciences’

first appeared in the work of

434. A. William Thomson

435. B. J. Schumpeter

436. C. Aristotle

437. D. Harry Johnson

438. Answer A

439. 73.’ Republic’ is the work of

440. A. Socrates

441. B. Plato

442. C. Aristotle

443. D. None of these

444. Answer B

445. 74. The book ’Principles of

Political Science’ was written by

446. A. Socrates

447. B. Gilchrist

448. C. Machiavelli

449. D. Jean Bodin

450. Answer B

451. 75. In Renaissance human

reason placed above

452. A. Culture

453. B. Faith

454. C. Arts

455. D. Literature

456. Answer B

457. 76. The conflict between

religious learning and believes and

rationality learning and beliefs is the

basic

458. characteristics of

459. A. Modern Era

460. B. Educated Society

461. C. Renaissance

462. D. None of These

463. Answer C

464. 77. The period from 1453 to the

end of the 17th century was

characterized by the rebirth and

proliferation of

465. A. Modern knowledge

466. B. Ancient knowledge

467. C. Modern thinking

468. D. Ancient thinking

469. Answer B

470. 78. Enlightenment was to a

large extent based on

471. A. Profit Motive

472. B. Humanitarian Principles

473. C. Practical wisdom

474. D. All the Above

475. Answer B

476. 79. Enlightenment thinkers

opened new and very significant areas

of

477. A. Observation

478. B. Field Study

479. C. Inquiry

480. D. Thinking

481. Answer C

482. 80. In the period of

enlightenment as the organizing

principle of knowledge, rationality

replaced

483. A. Culture

484. B. Civilization

485. C. Religion

486. D. Speculation

487. Answer C

488. 81. The period of

enlightenment was in

489. A. 1650 CE and 1700 CE

490. B. 1500 CE and 1550 CE

491. C. 1400 CE and 1450CE

492. D. None of these

493. Answer A

494. 82. Which of the following is

not correctly matched

495. A. Herodotus – Political Science

496. B. Auguste Comte – Sociology

497. C. Adam Smith – Economics

498. D. Sigmund Fraud - Psychology

499. Answer A

500. 83. Who is regarded as the

‘Father of History

501. A. Plato

502. B. Aristotle

503. C. August Comte

504. D. Herodotus

505. Answer D

506. 84. The age of _____ saw a

revolution within natural philosophy

507. A. Reformation

508. B. Renaissance

509. C. Enlightenment

510. D. Modern Age

511. Answer C

512. 85. The history of the social

sciences begins in the routes of the

ancient _______

513. A. Philosophy

514. B. Epics

515. C. Epigraphy

516. D. Literature

517. Answer A

518. 86. ________ is regarded as the

father of Political Science.

519. A. Herodotus

520. B. Aristotle

521. C. Plato

522. D. Rousseau

523. Answer B

524. 87. The term sociology was

derived from the Greek term logos and

_____ word socius meaning

‘companion’

525. or ‘society’

526. A. French

527. B. Latin

528. C. German

529. D. Austria

530. Answer B

531. 88. _____ is central to the

procedures of the scientific method

532. A. Oral History

533. B. Comparison

534. C. Objectivity

535. D. Customs

536. Answer C

537. 89. _____ affect the objectivity

of the study

538. A. Personal Bias

539. B. Morality

540. C. Customs

541. D. Ethics

542. Answer A

543. 90. The word Psychology comes

from the ancient Greek psyche which

means _____

544. A. Society

545. B. Man

546. C. Mind

547. D. Brain

548. Answer C

549. 91. Positivism is advocated by

_____

550. A. Karl Marx

551. B. Herbert Spencer

552. C. Auguste Comte

553. D. Durkheim

554. Answer C

555. 92. The term Ethical Neutrality

is related to the

556. A Knowledge

557. B Social Research

558. C Philosophy

559. D Commerce

560. Answer B

561. 93. The Book ‘Das Capital’ was

written by

562. A-Max Weber

563. B Karl Marx

564. C Herbert Spencer

565. D Laski

566. Answer B

567. 94. A set of moral principles and

values are called

568. A Methods

569. B Rules

570. Tools

571. D Ethics

572. Answer D

573. 95. ‘General view of positivism’

was written by?

574. A Hebert Spencer

575. B Max Weber

576. C Auguste Comte

577. D Talcott Parsons

578. Answer C

579. 96. The word ________ is from

the Greek for ‘human being’ or

‘person’

580. A. Socius

581. B Anthropos

582. C Logos

583. D Oikos

584. Answer B

585. 97. ______ is commonly used as

an umbrella term to refer to a plurality

of fields

586. A. Natural Sciences

587. B. Human Sciences

588. C. Social Sciences

589. D. Psychical Sciences

590. Answer C

591. 98. Enlighten thought laid the

groundwork for the development of

592. A. Religious notions

593. B. Speculations

594. C. Social Scientific Thought

595. D. All the above

596. Answer C

597. 99. Which one of the following

has been wrongly listed as the basis of

behaviouralism moment by David

598. Easton

599. A. Quantifications

600. B. Values

601. C. Systematization

602. D. Pure science

603. Answer B

604. 100. The branch of philosophy

that studies assumptions about the

nature of reality and existence are

605. A. Epistemology

606. B. Ontology

607. C. Methodology

608. D. Phenomenology

609. Answer B

610. Read: MCQ on Indian

Constitution

The Elephant is a symbol of which Indian

political party?

1. National Congress Party

2. Communist Party of India

3. Bahujan Samaj Party

4. Rashtriya Janata Dal

Who among the following is one of the

founder members of Bhartiya Jana Sangh?

1. KM Munshi

2. Baldev Singh

3. Minoo Masani

4. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee

When was the first general election held

in India?

1. 1953-54

2. 1951-52

3. 1949-50

4. 1948-49

In the context of Elections in India, the

term VVPAT stands for:

1. Voter Visit Poll Account Trail

2. Voter Vivid Press Audit Trail

3. Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail

4. Voter Verifiable Paper Account Trail

Which of the following statements is

correct in the context of Indian

Democracy?

1. allows people to choose their

representatives

2. allows people to take over the country

in cases of financial emergency.

3. commands people to pay taxes for

pilgrimage.

4. allows the military to rule the country.

As of 10 April 2022, how many general

elections have been held to the Lok

Sabha?

1. 19

2. 15

3. 21

4. 17

EVM or Electronic Voting Machine was

used for the first time in which state?

1. Bihar

2. Kerala

3. Gujarat

4. Uttar Pradesh

By whom are political parties in India

recognised ?

1. Election Commission of India

2. The Finance Commission

3. State Election Commission

4. None of the above

Which party government announced the

formation of a second backward classes

commission in 1978?

1. Indian National Congress Party

2. Bharatiya Janata Party

3. Janata Party

4. United Democratic Party

Which among the following States has the

largest number of Lok Sabha seats?

1. West Bengal

2. Gujarat

3. Assam

4. Rajasthan

3. According to the new rules, RUPPs enjoy all

the benefits available to recognized political

parties, including reserved symbols and free

broadcast facilities.

Which of the statements given above is/are

correct?

1. 1 and 2 only

2. 2 and 3 only

3. 1 and 3 only

4. 1, 2 and 3

Which of the following parts of the Indian

Constitution consists of articles relating to

elections?

1. Part V

2. Part VII

3. Part X

4. Part XV

5. None of the above

The statement is not correct-

1. Bikaner State had its own Gram

Panchayat Act even before 1928.

2. The first elections under the Rajasthan

Panchayat Samiti and Zilla Parishad Act,

1959 were held in September-October,

1959.

3. The Panchayati Raj system was first

inaugurated in the country by the then

Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru on

October 2, 1959 in Nagaur, Rajasthan.

4. In 1952, the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj

Act came into force and gram

panchayats were established

throughout the state.

5. The Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act of

1952 was enforced only in urban areas.

Which of the following statements about the

reasons for conducting elections is false?

1. Elections enable people to judge the

performance of the government.

2. People select the representative of their

choice in an election.

3. Elections enable people to evaluate the

performance of the judiciary.

4. People can indicate which policies they

prefer.

5. None of the above

How many seats were won by Telugu

Desam Party (TDP) in Lok Sabha elections

2024 in the state of Andhra Pradesh?

1. 21

2. 12

3. 16

4. 10

If a research project is set up so that

everybody in the population of interest

has an equal chance of being included in

the sample, the research involves :

1. quota sampling

2. judgemental sampling

3. probability sampling

4. convenience sampling

Which of the following refers to a method

of sampling in which a core group of

participants who are initially sampled for

a research study recruit or recommend

other potential participants ?

1. Simple random sampling

2. Snowball sampling

3. Quota sampling

4. Stratified random sampling

Identify the sampling issues that are

problematic in online surveys:

(A) Many people use more than one internet

service provider.

(B) Every person has only one (unique) email

address.

(C) A house hold may have one computer but

several users.

(D) Internet users are a biased sample of the

population.

Choose the correct answer from the options

given below:

1. (A), (B) and (C) Only

2. (B), (C) and (D) Only

3. (A), (B) and (D) Only

4. (C) and (D) Only

If there is linear trend present in the

population, then which of the following

methods is the most efficient sampling

technique?

1. Cluster Sampling

2. Systematic Sampling

3. Stratified Sampling

4. Simple Random Sampling

In sampling, the lottery method is used

for

1. Interpretation

2. Theorisation

3. Conceptualisation

4. Randomisatio

From the list given below, identify those which

are called ‘Non-Probability Sampling’

procedures:

(i) Simple random sampling

(ii) Dimensional sampling

(iii) Snowball sampling

(iv) Cluster sampling

(v) Quota sampling

(vi) Stratified sampling

Choose the correct option:

1. (i), (ii) and (iii)

2. (ii), (iv) and (v)

3. (i), (iii) and (iv)

4. (ii), (iii) and (v)

A college principal conduct an

ethnographic probe into the problems

faced by tribal students. Which method of

sampling will be most appropriate?

1. Random sampling

2. Stratified sampling

3. Cluster sampling

4. Systematic sampling

A sampling technique in which initially

sampled respondents contact and recruit

others in their social network for

participation in the research is called

1. Convenience sampling

2. Snowball sampling

3. Quota sampling

4. Systematic sampling

When a sample is chosen because it is

available to the researcher, it is known as

1. Probability sampling

2. Convenience sampling

3. Systematic sampling

4. Objective sampling

Which of the following sampling

procedures will be appropriate for

conducting researches with empirico-

inductive research paradigm?

1. Simple random sampling procedure

2. Systematic sampling procedure

3. Stratified sampling procedure

4. Any of the non-probability sampling

procedures

Which of the following are NOT probability

sampling techniques?

A. Simple Random

B. Stratified

C. Snowball

D. Cluster

E. Convenience

Choose the correct answer from the options

given below:

1. A and E only

2. C and E only

3. B and D only

4. B and C only

Snowball sampling technique falls under

the category of:

1. Probability sampling

2. Non-probability sampling

3. Random sampling

4. Quota sampling

Which of the following samples are non-

random or non-probability samples?

(A) Systematic sample

(B) Quota sample

(C) Cluster or area sample

(D) Purposive sample

(E) Replicated sample

Choose the correct answer from the options

given below:

1. (A), (C) Only

2. (B).(C), (D) Only

3. (A), (D), (E) Only

4. (B), (D) Only

Snowball sampling is the process of

selecting a sample using

611. Networks

612. Groups

613. Snowballs

614. Computer Programs

The 9th Schedule to the Constitution of

India was added by the:

1. Third Amendment Act

2. Fourth Amendment Act

3. First Amendment Act

4. Sixth Amendment Act

5. None of the above

How many languages have been listed in

8th schedule of Indian constitution?

1. 18

2. 22

3. 15

4. 14

5. None of the above

Which schedule of the Indian Constitution

contains provisions regarding "anti-

defection"?

1. 10th Schedule

2. 4th Schedule

3. 9th Schedule

4. 7th Schedule

Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and

Land Reforms Act was passed in which of

the following years?

1. 1948

2. 19950

3. 1960

4. 1975

With reference to Seventh Schedule of

the Indian Constitution, The subject

'infectious or contagious diseases' is a

part of:

1. State List

2. Union List

3. Residuary Powers

4. Concurrent List

Which Schedule contains

provisions relating to the emoluments,

allowances, and privileges as to the

President and Governors of States?

1. Second Schedule

2. Third Schedule

3. Fourth Schedule

4. First Schedule

The 9th Schedule to the Constitution of

India was added by the:

1. Third Amendment Act

2. Fourth Amendment Act

3. First Amendment Act

4. Sixth Amendment Act

Which one of the following Schedules of

the Constitution of India contains

provisions regarding anti-defection?

1. Second Schedule

2. Fifth Schedule

3. Eighth Schedule

4. Tenth Schedule

How many languages were initially

included in the Eighth Schedule of the

Indian Constitution?

1. 14

2. 18

3. 16

4. 22

How many items are there in the

11th Schedule of the Constitution of India?

1. 22

2. 24

3. 29

4. 32

Anti-defection law is given in which

schedule of Indian constitution?

1. Second Schedule

2. Tenth Schedule

3. Third Schedule

4. Fourth Schedule

Under Schedule VII of the Constitution,

the subject 'Education' lies under which

List ?

1. State List

2. Sub List

3. Union List

4. Concurrent List

According to the Indian constitution, how many

languages have been given the status of official

language?

A. 15

B. 18

C. 22

D. 25

1. D

2. B

3. C

4. A

5.

he Constitution of India contains

________ schedules.

1. 11

2. 12

3. 14

4. 13

created by nes free servic                                                                  

download pdf file 

dounload notes