Skip Navigation


Public Opinion Quarterly Advance Access originally published online on August 11, 2007
Public Opinion Quarterly 2007 71(3):479-481; doi:10.1093/poq/nfm021
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
71/3/479    most recent
nfm021v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Klein, D. B.
Right arrow Articles by Stern, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Letter to the Editor: A reply to Zipp and Fenwick

Daniel B. Klein and Charlotta Stern

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

March 2007

In the Fall 2006 issue of Public Opinion Quarterly, John F. Zipp and Rudy Fenwick published "Is the Academy a Liberal Hegemony?," an article openly framed as a reaction to "right-wing activists and scholars" (304). The scholarship they cite is principally ours (Klein and Stern 2005aGo; Klein and Western 2005Go). They arrive at findings about ideological ratios said to be "far lower than the ratios found by Klein ..." (309).

Unfortunately, ZF misrepresent us. We wrote and submitted a full reply, but the Editor Peter Miller asked us to keep to . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?