<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org">
<title>Public Opinion Quarterly - current issue</title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org</link>
<description>Public Opinion Quarterly - RSS feed of current issue</description>
<prism:eIssn>1537-5331</prism:eIssn>
<prism:coverDisplayDate>Fall 2009</prism:coverDisplayDate>
<prism:publicationName>Public Opinion Quarterly</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0033-362X</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/i?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/ii?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/iii?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/439?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/462?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/484?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/497?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/521?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/537?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/551?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/566?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/578?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/590?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/592?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/595?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/599?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/602?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/603?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/606?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/607?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/608?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/609?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/610?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/629?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/i?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Subscriptions]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/i?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:26 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp061</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Subscriptions]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>i</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>i</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Subscriptions</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/ii?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Editorial Board]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/ii?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:26 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp062</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Editorial Board]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>ii</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>ii</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Editorial Board</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/iii?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Contents]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/iii?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp063</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Contents]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>iv</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>iii</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>TOC</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/439?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Effects of Internet Commerce on Social Trust]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/439?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>As of the early 21st century, one of the most popular uses of the internet is for online shopping. In this study I examine how online purchasing affects levels of generalized social trust, a quality widely believed to be central to the health and well-being of contemporary societies. Drawing on two original studies, including an experiment embedded in a representative national survey, and a hybrid laboratory/field experiment, I find consistent evidence that positive e-commerce experiences promote generalized social trust. I discuss the implications of these findings for the role of business in helping to maintain attitudes supportive of democracy.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mutz, D. C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp042</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Effects of Internet Commerce on Social Trust]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>461</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>439</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/462?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Measurement of Political Discussion Networks: A Comparison of Two "Name Generator" Procedures]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/462?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Social scientists use two different methods for collecting information on the people with whom individuals discuss politics. Some surveys ask respondents to provide information about the people with whom they discuss "important matters," while other studies ask for information specifically on the individual's political discussants. Drawing on three of the most recently collected sources of data on this subject, we compare social network data that have been collected in these two different ways. The majority of our results show that the network data provided by survey respondents are very similar regardless of which network generator procedure is used. These results suggest that we do not consciously select specific individuals with whom to discuss politics. Instead, the individuals with whom we choose to discuss politics are the same people with whom we discuss other important matters in our lives. This finding has significant methodological and substantive implications for studies of social influence.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Klofstad, C. A., McClurg, S. D., Rolfe, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp032</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Measurement of Political Discussion Networks: A Comparison of Two "Name Generator" Procedures]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>483</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>462</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/484?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Unintended Consequences: The Cost of Purging Business Numbers in RDD Surveys]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/484?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Survey researchers commonly use RDD (random digit dialing) samples that are purged of listed business telephone numbers to increase interviewer productivity by removing numbers that are assumed to be ineligible for household surveys. This study investigates this practice and finds an unintended consequence: an increase in household noncoverage. The data come from national RDD surveys using samples that were not purged of listed business numbers. Phone numbers were flagged as listed businesses or not and respondents were asked about how their phone lines are used. Five percent of respondents were interviewed on lines classified as business numbers that normally would have been purged from the sample. But were these valid household interviews or should they have been excluded? The data show that these are, in fact, primarily households. Ninety-four percent of these numbers rang at residences. Moreover, these phone numbers are used as household rather than business-only lines. Ninety-three percent said any adult in the household can answer the phone line in question. A more important finding is that business-line purging increases noncoverage. Sixty-five percent of those contacted on numbers that normally would have been purged from the sample said they had no other phone lines in the household&mdash;a noncoverage rate of 3.6 percentage points had these numbers been excluded from the sample. The study concludes with an examination of the characteristics of those interviewed on presumed business numbers, and considers the cost/benefit implications of including these numbers in the sample.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Merkle, D. M., Langer, G., Cohen, J., Piekarski, L. B., Benford, R., Lambert, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp035</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Unintended Consequences: The Cost of Purging Business Numbers in RDD Surveys]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>496</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>484</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/497?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Medicaid Underreporting in the CPS: Results from a Record Check Study]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/497?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The use of survey data can be significantly hampered by the occurrence of measurement error, particularly that engendered by respondent misreporting. Previous studies have shown that public program participation tends to be substantially misreported and underestimated. Comparison with administrative records shows such a situation with the reporting of Medicaid enrollment in the U.S. Census Bureau's Current Population Survey (CPS); for 36.2 percent of enrollees, their coverage was not reported in the survey. While false positive reporting also occurs, it is, on a percentage basis, much less frequent. To understand and correct for the false negative reporting, and to develop improvements to surveys to mitigate the occurrence of misreporting, it is useful to understand the factors that relate to it. This research sought to establish the relationship between false negative Medicaid reporting and various factors associated with the coverage (such as recency and intensity), the enrollee (such as demographics and the use of services), and differences in coverage status between the respondent and the person for whom he or she was reporting. Results show that coverage patterns including shared coverage, recency, and intensity of coverage all strongly relate to false negative Medicaid reporting in the CPS. The findings provide important guidance for questionnaire design improvements as well as model-based adjustments to the survey data.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pascale, J., Roemer, M. I., Resnick, D. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp028</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Medicaid Underreporting in the CPS: Results from a Record Check Study]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>520</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>497</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/521?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Helping Citizens Decide in Referendums: The Moderating Effect of Political Sophistication on the Use of the Information and Choice Questionnaire as a Decision Aid]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/521?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Voters often lack sufficient knowledge to make educated decisions. We investigated how a decision aid-&ndash;the Information and Choice Questionnaire (ICQ)&mdash;helped them make more consistent decisions. The ICQ is designed for large-scale use and provides voters with information about a specific problem before asking them for their opinions. It provides citizens with information summarizing a full range of viable policy options and the probable consequences of each, as provided by experts. We investigated the ICQ in the context of the Dutch 2005 referendum on the European Constitutional Treaty. Respondents (<I>N</I> = 340) constituted a random sample of the Dutch population. We studied the effects of the ICQ on vote preferences and the consistency of voters&rsquo; preferences shortly before the referendum. We were especially interested in the moderating role of political sophistication on the uses and effects of the ICQ. Our study confirmed that many voters had little knowledge about the European Constitution and had inconsistent preferences. The ICQ made their vote preferences more consistent, especially for those participants with lower levels of political sophistication. This suggests that this decision aid can narrow the gap between the politically sophisticated and the politically less sophisticated.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Neijens, P., de Vreese, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp040</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Helping Citizens Decide in Referendums: The Moderating Effect of Political Sophistication on the Use of the Information and Choice Questionnaire as a Decision Aid]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>536</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>521</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/537?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Revisiting Incentive Effects: Evidence from a Random-Sample Mail Survey on Consumer Preferences for Fuel Ethanol]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/537?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>This study revisits the issue of monetary incentive effects utilizing data from a mail survey sent to a random sample of adults across the United States regarding preferences for fuel ethanol. The results reported here are consistent with those found in the literature regarding the effect of incentives on response rates: they improved them, with prepaid incentives performing relatively better. We also found that state of residence was significantly correlated with choosing whether to respond to a survey. Regarding the effect of incentives on sample composition, we found that incentives tended to bias the sample in favor of less educated respondents, and tended to attract respondents less familiar with the survey subject. Finally, results indicate that incentives had very little effect on item nonresponse. Instead, item nonresponse was driven by education level, gender, and familiarity with the survey subject. However, combining the findings on sample composition with those of item nonresponse, it appears that the use of incentives <I>indirectly</I> affects item nonresponse by recruiting relatively more respondents that are less educated and/or less familiar with the survey topic, who are then less likely to respond to all questions.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Petrolia, D. R., Bhattacharjee, S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp038</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Revisiting Incentive Effects: Evidence from a Random-Sample Mail Survey on Consumer Preferences for Fuel Ethanol]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>550</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>537</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Research Notes</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/551?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Process Preferences and Voting in Direct Democratic Elections]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/551?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Direct democracy is extraordinarily popular and has become a pervasive policymaking tool at the state and local level. Repeated surveys have demonstrated that Americans strongly approve of allowing people to vote on citizen-proposed laws, a method currently allowed in about half of all states and in many municipalities across the country. This paper examines both the extent of this support and its implications. Using a battery of questions about the institution as an independent variable, we model the extent to which institutional evaluations of direct democracy influence voting behavior in ballot measure elections. Using data from California in 2005 and 2006, as well as Washington in 2006, we find support for the notion that process evaluations influence choice in ballot initiative elections, regardless of policy content. Those who favor direct democracy are more likely to vote yes, while those who are apprehensive about voting on ballot measures are more likely to vote no.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dyck, J. J., Baldassare, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp027</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Process Preferences and Voting in Direct Democratic Elections]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>565</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>551</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Research Notes</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/566?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Public Attitudes Toward Construction of New Power Plants]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/566?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Increased demand for U.S. electricity generation will require the construction of hundreds of new power plants in the coming decades. We examine attitudinal data from the 2008 MIT Energy Survey to measure public support for and opposition to the local siting of power plants. Substantial majorities of Americans oppose the location of coal, natural gas, and nuclear power plants in their area, although a majority supports local siting of wind facilities. We find that attitudes about plant siting depend heavily on perceptions of the environmental harm and costs of specific facilities; the effects of these attributes are similar across different types of fuel sources, suggesting that there is a common underlying structure to an individual's attitude. That is, people view all power sources in the same framework and differentiate them on perceived endowments, the most important of which is environmental harm.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ansolabehere, S., Konisky, D. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp041</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Public Attitudes Toward Construction of New Power Plants]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>577</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>566</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Research Notes</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/578?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Trends--Public Support for Presidential Nomination Reform]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/578?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The presidential nomination calendar has become increasingly front loaded in recent years as more and more states try to squeeze into the earliest possible dates. This front loading has produced conflict between the national parties and the states and culminated in a nomination calendar with little rhyme or reason to its schedule. Thus, various reform proposals have been suggested. This paper reviews public opinion on two avenues. First, it reports on public evaluations of the current system, which is lukewarm, but public dissatisfaction tends to focus on elements other than the calendar. Second, public support for regional primaries, population-based groupings of primaries and a single-day national primary are examined in polls from 1968 to 2007.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Norrander, B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp036</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Trends--Public Support for Presidential Nomination Reform]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>589</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>578</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>The Polls</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/590?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[John D. Griffin and Brian Newman. Minority Report: Evaluating Political Equality in America]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/590?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Burden, B. C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp045</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[John D. Griffin and Brian Newman. Minority Report: Evaluating Political Equality in America]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>592</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>590</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Book Reviews</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/592?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Mick P. Couper. Designing Effective Web Surveys]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/592?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Christian, L. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp046</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Mick P. Couper. Designing Effective Web Surveys]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>595</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>592</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Book Reviews</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/595?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Maria Elizabeth Grabe and Erik Page Bucy. Image Bite Politics: News and the Visual Framing of Elections]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/595?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jerit, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:27 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp050</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Maria Elizabeth Grabe and Erik Page Bucy. Image Bite Politics: News and the Visual Framing of Elections]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>598</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>595</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Book Reviews</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/599?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Harry O'Neill, 1929-2008]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/599?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bowers, D., Roberts, G., Schulman, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:28 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp059</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Harry O'Neill, 1929-2008]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>601</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>599</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>In Memoriam</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/602?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/602?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:28 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp039</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>602</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>602</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Erratum</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/603?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Proceedings of the Sixty-Fourth Annual Conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/603?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Link, M. W.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:28 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp058</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Proceedings of the Sixty-Fourth Annual Conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>605</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>603</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>AAPOR Proceedings</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/606?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The American Association for Public Opinion Research Presents the AAPOR AWARD For Exceptionally Distinguished Achievement to Elizabeth A. Martin]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/606?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kulka, R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:28 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp054</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The American Association for Public Opinion Research Presents the AAPOR AWARD For Exceptionally Distinguished Achievement to Elizabeth A. Martin]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>606</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>606</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>AAPOR Proceedings</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/607?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The American Association for Public Opinion Research Presents the 2009 WARREN J. MITOFSKY INNOVATORS AWARD to STEPHEN J. BLUMBERG, JULIAN V. LUKE, AND MARCIE L. CYNAMON For Their Work in Providing the Field of Survey Research with Timely Data on Changing Telephony Patterns in the United States]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/607?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:28 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp056</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The American Association for Public Opinion Research Presents the 2009 WARREN J. MITOFSKY INNOVATORS AWARD to STEPHEN J. BLUMBERG, JULIAN V. LUKE, AND MARCIE L. CYNAMON For Their Work in Providing the Field of Survey Research with Timely Data on Changing Telephony Patterns in the United States]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>607</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>607</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>AAPOR Proceedings</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/608?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The American Association for Public Opinion Research Presents the 2009 WARREN J. MITOFSKY INNOVATORS AWARD to VASJA VEHOVAR AND KATJA LOZAR MANFREDA For Their Work Creating and Fostering the WebSM Portal]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/608?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:28 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp057</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The American Association for Public Opinion Research Presents the 2009 WARREN J. MITOFSKY INNOVATORS AWARD to VASJA VEHOVAR AND KATJA LOZAR MANFREDA For Their Work Creating and Fostering the WebSM Portal]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>608</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>608</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>AAPOR Proceedings</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/609?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The American Association for Public Opinion Research Presents the 2009 AAPOR BOOK AWARD to Shanto Iyengar and Donald R. Kinder For News That Matters: Television and American Opinion University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL (1987)]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/609?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:28 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp055</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The American Association for Public Opinion Research Presents the 2009 AAPOR BOOK AWARD to Shanto Iyengar and Donald R. Kinder For News That Matters: Television and American Opinion University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL (1987)]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>609</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>609</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>AAPOR Proceedings</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/610?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Presidential Address: Plus Ca Change, Plus C'est La Meme Chose? AAPOR's Standards Code and Procedures]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/610?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kulka, R. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:28 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp053</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Presidential Address: Plus Ca Change, Plus C'est La Meme Chose? AAPOR's Standards Code and Procedures]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>628</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>610</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>AAPOR Proceedings</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/629?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[American Association for Public Opinion Research Annual Membership Meeting]]></title>
<link>http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/73/3/629?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Boyle, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:55:28 PDT</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/poq/nfp060</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[American Association for Public Opinion Research Annual Membership Meeting]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Association for Public Opinion Research</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>73</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>638</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>629</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>AAPOR Proceedings</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>