Survey Variable: Ranked Indicators of Difference in Politics

As with indicators of status more generally, respondents to the Privilege and Participation survey were asked not only to select but also to rank the indicators that they think distinguish people involved in politics from them. The results of their rankings can be seen in Figure 1 (above, using weighted data), which shows that there is no stand-out indicator that is ranked highly by most people.[1] Education (panel G) is the most popular option, and is ranked first by approaching a fifth of people (18.1%) whilst being in the top three for two fifths of people (40.5%). This is followed by the people known by those involved in politics (panel H), which is ranked first by one in seven (13.7%) and placed in the top three by a third (33.3%), and then by ideas (panel C), which is ranked first by one in nine (11.6%) and in the top three by a quarter (24.7%).

Income (panel F) and occupation (panel J) approach ideas in terms of how many people rank them in the top three (23.4% and 20.5% respectively) but none of the other indicators are ranked in the top three by more than a fifth of respondents. In order of popularity, they are: pastimes and interests (ranked in the top three by 14.4%, panel D); speech (panel B, 12.3%); location of residence (12.2%, panel I); appearance and dress (4.0%, panel A); possessions (3.0%, panel E). Like indicators of status more generally, the most popular indicator of the difference of those involved in politics is education. Thereafter, however, the similarities in rankings end, and people prioritise indicators of social capital (who they know) and cultural capital (their ideas) when distinguishing those who are involved in politics, rather than the more common indicators of occupation and income (which are prioritised as general indicators of status).

It is worth remembering that the question asked respondents about ‘people who get involved in politics,’ which is likely to have invoked different responses than asking about ‘politicians’ would have. Nonetheless, and notwithstanding the fifth of people who say that those involved in politics are no different from them, the politically active are seen as a distinct group by most, particularly in terms of their education, acquaintances, and ideas. Though it remains to be seen whether the indicators are related in people’s minds (which we can see by observing whether they tend to select all three of them), these factors emphasise the cultural and social distinction of those who are involved in politics.

Variable names	pr_spa_b, pr_sps_b, pr_spi_b, pr_spc_b, pr_spp_b, pr_spj_b, pr_spe_b, pr_spw_b, pr_spl_b, pr_spm_b, pr_spo_b, priv_isprankles_appear, priv_isprankles_speech, priv_isprankles_ideas, priv_isprankles_intact, priv_isprankles_possess, priv_isprankles_occup, priv_isprankles_educ, priv_isprankles_whoknow, priv_isprankles_wherelive, priv_isprankles_income, priv_isprankles_other, priv_isprankmor_appear, priv_isprankmor_speech, priv_isprankmor_ideas, priv_isprankmor_intact, priv_isprankmor_possess, priv_isprankmor_occup, priv_isprankmor_educ, priv_isprankmor_whoknow, priv_isprankmor_wherelive, priv_isprankmor_income, priv_isprankmor_other
Number of cases	1,405
Number of categories	2-3
Categories to code as missing	None
Cases to code as missing	None
Recoded variable names	pr_rpa_cir, pr_rps_cir, pr_rpi_cir, pr_rpc_cir, pr_rpp_cir, pr_rpj_cir, pr_rpe_cir, pr_rpw_cir, pr_rpl_cir, pr_rpm_cir, pr_rpo_cir
Number of cases	1,405
Number of categories	5
New and old categories	The binary and original ranking variables (respondents saw differently worded ranking questions depending on how many reasons they selected) were combined to create the new ranking variables. If a respondent did not select an indicator of difference, they were coded as 0 (‘Not selected’) on the new variable. If they selected an indicator but did not place it in their top three then they were coded as 1 (‘Selected’). Those who ranked an indicator were coded as 2 (‘Ranked third’), 3 (‘Ranked second’), or 4 (‘Ranked first’), meaning that higher values on the new variable equate to higher rankings of that indicator of difference.

---

[1] See also Table A1.