What is Public Opinion?

Public opinion can be defined as the preferences and views of the adult population on issues relevant to government. According to political scientists Robert Erikson and Kent Tedin, it represents citizens’ attitudes toward public matters and serves both as a form of collective behavior and as a mechanism of social control. Although public opinion is closely associated with democratic government and elections, its influence extends beyond politics into everyday social life, affecting preferences, behaviors, and social norms. The concept also implies recognition that different viewpoints may exist and deserve consideration.

Social scientists have developed three main perspectives on public opinion. The individual perspective views it as the aggregate of opinions held by individuals within a population. The collective perspective sees public opinion as something that emerges through discussion, debate, and interaction among people, making it more than simply the sum of individual attitudes. A third perspective focuses on public opinion as a communication process through which people form publics, exchange ideas, and influence one another. This approach integrates both individual and collective dimensions of opinion formation.

A common element across these perspectives is the importance of public debate. In the rational model of public opinion, individuals develop their views by considering evidence, listening to arguments, and engaging in thoughtful discussion. Opinions are expected to result from deliberation and informed judgment. This model assumes that citizens possess both the motivation and ability to acquire information and participate in reasoned debate. Consequently, the “public” is often understood as a group of politically informed and engaged citizens.

However, critics argue that this idealized model does not fully reflect reality. Public opinion polls assume that everyone has an opinion and that all opinions carry equal weight, creating the impression that citizens are uniformly informed. In practice, many people lack detailed knowledge about political issues, ideologies, and candidates. Rather than relying on extensive information, individuals often use mental shortcuts, personal impressions, and intuition to make sense of politics. This raises concerns about the quality of public opinion and the possibility that majority pressure may produce conformity and mediocrity rather than well-reasoned judgments. Thus, public opinion remains both a crucial democratic force and a complex social phenomenon shaped by communication, debate, and social influence.

                       How Attitudes and Values are Formed

Public opinion develops through a combination of early socialization and later life experiences. Individuals often acquire their initial beliefs from their families, particularly their parents, during childhood. As they grow older, these views are shaped and modified through interactions with institutions such as schools, churches, and the news media, especially during major national events or crises. Because people’s experiences differ according to factors such as region, race, religion, ethnicity, social class, and education, public opinion tends to divide along these social lines. In extreme cases, deep disagreements and uncompromising demands can lead to polarization and the emergence of opposing, irreconcilable groups.

Scholars have highlighted several mechanisms that influence opinion formation. Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann proposed the “spiral of silence” theory, which argues that people who believe they hold minority opinions may remain silent for fear of social isolation. This silence can make the majority opinion appear stronger than it actually is, further discouraging dissent. Similarly, Philip Converse found that many people do not hold stable or ideologically consistent opinions, often expressing attitudes that are changeable and sometimes contradictory.

Another important influence is the use of “elite cues,” where individuals rely on the positions of trusted leaders or experts rather than detailed knowledge of an issue. Perceptions of public opinion also affect individual views, even when those perceptions are inaccurate. People may incorrectly assume that others share their beliefs (false consensus), misunderstand the distribution of opinions (pluralistic ignorance), or overestimate the influence of media messages on others (the third-person effect).

Opinion formation is highly dependent on context. The attitudes, values, identities, and social cues that are most salient in a given situation can shape how individuals respond. As a result, the same person may express different opinions depending on the circumstances, which also explains why small changes in survey wording can produce significantly different results.

                                     Uninformed Masses

An all-too-obvious gap between the expectation of an informed citizenry put forward by democratic theory and the discomforting reality revealed by systematic survey interviewing is identified by Neuman (1986) as the ‘‘paradox of mass politics.’’ Where pluralists see a public made up of many competing interests, each with its own leadership, Neuman discriminates among three levels of competence: an uncomfortably tiny percentage of citizens with some input into policy; uninterested and inactive know-nothings, who make up roughly one-fifth of the potential electorate; and a large middle mass whose members, if they vote, do so largely out of a sense of duty but with only a very limited understanding of the issues their vote is meant to decide.

                        Mass Media and the Public Opinion

The relationship between public opinion and the mass media has been a central concern of social and political theorists. Ferdinand Tönnies argued that the press and organized associations increasingly took over the role of expressing and shaping public opinion. Similarly, Walter Lippmann questioned the idea that ordinary citizens could acquire sufficient knowledge to understand complex political issues. He maintained that people often perceive the world through simplified images and stereotypes provided by the media, making them vulnerable to elite influence. In his view, the public’s primary role is not to directly manage policy but to identify problems and decide which leaders or institutions should address them. Nevertheless, the public remains an important democratic force capable of defending democratic procedures and holding leaders accountable.

Mass media play a significant role in measuring and influencing public opinion. Noam Chomsky, in Manufacturing Consent (1988), analyzes how the mass media manipulates public opinion and perpetuates the interests of those in power. The book argues that the mass media in the United States and other Western countries operate as a "propaganda model," in which a small group of powerful corporations and individuals control the flow of information and shape public opinion to align with their own interests. This is achieved through a combination of censorship, self-censorship, and the creation of a "filter" that screens out information that is inconvenient or contradicts the dominant narrative. Chomsky highlights five of those types of filters: ownership, advertising, sourcing, "flak", and "anti-communism".     

One of the key components of the propaganda model is the "ownership" filter, which refers to the fact that a small number of large corporations control the majority of media outlets. These corporations have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo and promoting policies that benefit their bottom line, and they use their control over the media to shape public opinion in their favor. Another important component of the propaganda model is the "advertising" filter, which refers to media outlets relying heavily on advertising revenue to survive. This leads to a bias in favor of content that is friendly to advertisers, and a reluctance to report on stories that might be seen as critical of their interests. The "flak" filter refers to how powerful individuals and groups can use their influence to shape the media narrative. This can include things like threats of legal action, pressure from advertisers, or even direct censorship. The "anti-communism" filter refers to how the media has been shaped by the Cold War, particularly in its focus on the threat of communism and its portrayal of the Soviet Union as an enemy of the United States.

News organizations frequently sponsor polls to track public attitudes on political issues and election campaigns. Research suggests that media coverage can affect opinion by directing attention toward particular issues. Studies by Benjamin Page and Robert Shapiro found that media coverage explained much of the movement in public opinion on numerous domestic and foreign policy issues. However, public attitudes generally changed only modestly. The media’s greatest influence lies in setting the public agenda—bringing issues into public awareness, stimulating discussion, and creating pressure for government action.

Despite their influence, the media’s power has important limits. Once opinions become firmly established, they tend to be shaped more by real-world events than by media messages. Issues such as economic hardship, inflation, or shared group grievances remain important regardless of media attention. Furthermore, media organizations themselves are influenced by political, economic, and social actors seeking favorable coverage.

In the book Personal Influence (1955), Elihu Katz and Paul Lazarsfeld present the results of research they conducted together. They concluded that different people have different levels of information on political issues and that voting behavior is greatly influenced by social contacts. The ability and willingness to accept the message sent by the media are influenced by many factors: personal education and ideological commitment, as well as the emotional strength, form, and language of the message itself. Even more than radio or the press, voting behavior is influenced by "opinion leaders", people who have a great influence on people close to them, because they, in their environment, are the ones who share the most information and opinions about politics.

    Measuring Public Opinion – Methods and Challenges

Academic opinion polls aim to measure public attitudes accurately through careful sampling methods, clearly worded questions, and detailed reporting of results. Most surveys use closed-ended questions, such as rating scales or agree/disagree formats, which allow responses to be quantified and statistically analyzed. The accuracy of a poll depends largely on three factors: who is interviewed, the context in which the interview occurs, and the specific wording of the questions.

Researchers have identified important limitations in survey data. John Zaller argued that many respondents provide opinions on topics they know little about, effectively creating responses on the spot. These “nonattitudes” can distort survey findings, particularly as political knowledge and engagement decline. Furthermore, public opinion is not simply a collection of equally informed views. People differ in their levels of knowledge, interest, and participation in public debate, and the opinions of influential individuals often carry more weight than those of ordinary citizens.

Predicting election outcomes presents additional challenges. Research by Irving Crespi showed that extensive efforts to reach difficult respondents improve polling accuracy because people who are hard to contact or unwilling to participate may differ significantly from those who respond readily. Pollsters must also estimate which respondents are genuinely committed to their choices and which are likely to vote. These difficulties become especially pronounced in low-turnout elections, contests involving unfamiliar candidates, or referendums on complex issues.

To improve accuracy, pollsters often apply filters that exclude likely nonvoters or respondents who have little interest in politics and have given minimal thought to the issues being surveyed. As a result, polling involves not only measuring opinions but also determining which opinions are informed, meaningful, and likely to influence political outcomes.

                              Changes in Public Opinion

Changes in public opinion generally occur gradually through both the spread of new ideas and the replacement of older generations by younger ones. Social processes such as differences in birth rates, migration, social mobility, and generational succession can alter public attitudes even when individuals maintain political views similar to those of their parents. Major life experiences during early adulthood—such as war, poverty, or participation in social movements—can have a lasting impact on a generation’s outlook.

Attitudes toward race provide a clear example of how public opinion evolves. Over time, surveys have shown a steady increase in racial tolerance across society. Although all groups moved in this direction, younger generations often led the change, sometimes with support from parents who were sympathetic but less willing to challenge existing norms. Rising levels of education and greater contact between different social groups also encouraged more tolerant attitudes. In addition, the passing of older, more conservative generations contributed to this shift. Notably, regions with the strongest segregationist traditions experienced especially rapid changes once national public opinion and media coverage, particularly through television, brought increased attention to racial issues.

       How Public Opinion Influences Politics and Policy

Public opinion polls play an important role in modern politics because political actors often respond strategically to their results. Polls influence candidate selection, campaign strategies, party platforms, and government policies. Candidates who appear likely to win attract greater financial support, endorsements, and media attention, while voters may strategically support a leading candidate rather than a preferred but less viable one. This can create momentum for frontrunners, particularly during primary elections. At the same time, candidates often try to manage expectations because performing worse than predicted can be perceived as a political setback, even after a victory.

Polls also help campaign managers identify the issues most important to voters and adjust messages accordingly. According to the spatial model of politics developed by Anthony Downs, parties seeking electoral success tend to move toward the political center to attract undecided voters. As ideological loyalties weaken, political leaders increasingly rely on polling data to maintain popularity, often adopting majority-supported positions on highly visible issues while conserving political capital for less salient matters.

Polling experts have become influential advisers to candidates, political parties, and presidents. Governments frequently conduct private polls to gauge public opinion, although the overall impact of extensive polling on democratic processes remains debated.

Political scientists distinguish between two approaches officials may take toward public opinion. A delegate follows the preferences of constituents, even when they conflict with personal beliefs, whereas a trustee gives greater weight to personal judgment and perceptions of the public good. In practice, many officials balance both orientations.

Public opinion also shapes policymaking and institutional decisions. Legislators often act cautiously on controversial issues, waiting to see how public sentiment develops. Historical examples include reactions to controversies involving Franklin D. Roosevelt and Richard Nixon. Major civil rights legislation gained support only after public opinion shifted through activism and media attention. Research further suggests that government policies frequently align with public preferences. Studies have found that policy changes are significantly more likely when public opinion favors them, while governments are less likely to alter policies when the public supports maintaining the status quo. These findings highlight the substantial, though not absolute, influence of public opinion on democratic governance.

                 The Formation of the Public Sphere

In the book, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (1962), Jürgen Habermas studies the change of the public sphere from the time of feudalism, through its various forms in civil society, and concludes with his presentation of the disintegration of the public sphere in the modern age. The public sphere refers to a free and open debate on social and political issues, which takes place in public. The beginning of the public sphere appears in the salons and taverns of large cities in Europe at the beginning of the modern age. The media, and especially the press, initially played a significant role in the emergence and development of the public sphere. However, over time, the state, the private sphere, and economic monopolies have merged, leading to the commercialization of the media and their abuse in order to achieve the interests of specific classes or groups. All this caused a rapid decline of the public sphere and led to its "refeudalization". The decline of the public sphere caused the loss of individual freedom because the state and institutions gained supremacy over individuals.

               History of the Measurement of Public Opinion

Before the twentieth century, there were few reliable methods for measuring public opinion. The most common approach was the straw poll, in which newspapers and magazines invited readers to submit responses, often to predict election outcomes. These polls were informal and unrepresentative because they reflected the views of readers, who tended to be wealthier and better educated than the general population. An example was the extensive straw poll conducted by the Chicago Record during the 1896 U.S. presidential election.

The limitations of straw polls became especially clear in 1936 when the magazine Literary Digest incorrectly predicted that Franklin D. Roosevelt would lose reelection. Although the prediction was based on more than two million responses, the sample was biased because it relied on automobile registration lists and telephone directories, excluding many poorer citizens who strongly supported Roosevelt. In addition, Republicans were more motivated to return ballots, creating further distortion. The failure demonstrated that large sample sizes alone do not guarantee accurate results.

During the same election, three pioneering pollsters—Archibald Crossley, Elmo Roper, and George Gallup—used more scientific methods and predicted Roosevelt’s victory much more accurately. Gallup became especially influential, introducing in-person interviews and quota sampling, which sought to make survey samples reflect the social and economic characteristics of the broader population. Although quota sampling improved accuracy, it still produced biases and was eventually replaced after 1948 by probability sampling, which uses random selection methods to give all individuals an equal chance of being included.

Public opinion research advanced further through the work of Paul Lazarsfeld, who founded the Bureau of Applied Social Research and improved methodologies such as surveys, focus groups, panel studies, and contextual analysis. He also developed latent structure analysis, an important statistical technique.

Institutional support for survey research expanded with the creation of the National Opinion Research Center in 1941 and the Survey Research Center in 1946. These organizations conducted influential nationwide surveys that shaped modern public opinion research. One of the most significant outcomes was The American Voter (1960), a landmark study by Angus Campbell, Philip Converse, Warren Miller, and Donald Stokes that greatly influenced the study of voting behavior and public opinion.

References:

Allport, Floyd Henry. “Toward a Science of Public Opinion”, in Public Opinion Quarterly (1937)

Bartels, Larry M. Presidential Primaries and the Dynamics of Public Choice (1988);

Blumer, Herbert. ‘‘Outline of Collective Behavior’’, in Robert R. Evans. (ed.). Readings in Collective Behavior (1972);

Blumer, H.“Collective Behavior”, in Lee, A. M. (ed.). New Outlines of the Principles of Sociology (1946);

Bogart, Leo. Polls and the Awareness of Public Opinion (1972);

Buchanan, James M., and Roger D. Congleton. Politics by Principle: Toward Nondiscriminatory (1998); Democracy

Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller and Donald E. Stokes. The American Voter (1960);

Chomsky, Noam. Manufacturing Consent (1988);

Cooley. Social Organization: A Study of the Larger Mind (1909);

Converse, P. E. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics”, in Apter, D. E. (ed.). Ideology and Discontent (1964);

Crespi, Irving. Pre-Election Polling: Sources of Accuracy and Error (1988);

De Boer, C. & Velthuijsen, A. S. “Participation in Conversations about the News”, in International Journal of Public Opinion Research (2001);

Downs, Anthony. An Economic Theory of Democracy (1957);

Erikson, Robert S., and Kent L. Tedin. American Public Opinion: Its Origins, Content and Impact. 7th ed. (2005); Erikson, Robert S., Gerald C. Wright, and John P. McIver. Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States (1993);

Ginsberg, Benjamin. The Captive Public: How Mass Opinion Promotes State Power (1986);

Gramsci. Prison Notebooks (Volumes 1, 2 & 3) (2011, in Italian 1947);

Habermas. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (1989, in German 1962);

Inkeles, Alex. Public Opinion in Soviet Russia: A Study in Mass Persuasion (1950);

Janowitz. Reader in Public Opinion and Communication (1966);

Lang, Gladys Engel, and Kurt Lang. The Battle for Public Opinion: The President, the Press, and the Polls During Watergate (1983);

Lazarsfeld. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign (1966);

     -     The People's Choice (1968);

Lippmann, Walter. Public Opinion (1922);

Mendelberg, T. “The Deliberative Citizen: Theory and Evidence”, in Delli Carpini, M. X., Huddy, L., & Shapiro, R. Y. (eds.). Political Decision Making, Deliberation, and Participation (2002);

Mannheim, Karl. Man and Society in an Age of Reconstruction (1940);

Marshall, Thomas. Public Opinion and the Supreme Court (1989);

Monroe, Alan D. ‘‘Public Opinion and Public Policy, 1980–1993’’, in Public Opinion Quarterly (1998);

Monroe, Alan D. “Consistency between Public Preferences and National Policy Decisions”, in American Politics Quarterly (1979);

Mueller, John E. War, Presidents, and Public Opinion (1973);

Nelson, Barbara. Making an Issue of Child Abuse: Agenda Setting for Social Problems (1984);

Neuman, W. Russell. The Paradox of Mass Politics: Knowledge and Opinion in the American Electorate (1986);

Noelle-Neumann, Elisabeth. The Spiral of Silence (1984);

Page, Benjamin I., and Robert Y. Shapiro. ‘‘The Effects of Public Opinion on Policy’’, in American Political Science Review (1983);

      -     The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’ Policy Preferences (1992);

Price, V. Public Opinion (1992);

Renshaw, Stanley A. (ed.). A Handbook of Political Socialization (1977);

Ross, Edward A. Social Control: A Survey of the Social Foundations of Order (1901);

Schandler, Herbert J. The Unmaking of a President: Lyndon B. Johnson and Vietnam (1977);

Schattschneider, E. E. The Semisovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America (1960);

Scheufele, D. A. & Moy, P. “Twenty-Five Years of the Spiral of Silence: A Conceptual Review and Empirical Outlook”, in International Journal of Public Opinion Research (2000);

Schuman, Howard, and Lawrence Bobo. Racial Attitudes: Trends and Interpretations (1985);

Schumpeter, Joseph A. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (1942);

Sigel, Roberta S. (ed.) Political Learning in Adulthood: A Sourcebook of Theory and Research (1989);

Tilly, Charles. From Mobilization to Revolution (1978);

Tocqueville. Democracy in America (2021, in French 1835, 1840);

Tönnies. Community and Society (2021, in German 1887);

     -     Ferdinand Tönnies On Public Opinion (1822);

Touraine. The Post-Industrial Society (1971, in French 1969)

Wetstein, Matthew E. Abortion Rates in the United States: The Influence of Opinion and Policy (1996);

Zaller, John. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion (1992).