Exploring the existence of drug policy ‘ideologies’ in Australia

References

• Andersen R. Reporting public opinion polls: The media and the 1997 Canadian election. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 2000; 12: 285–298
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caulkins JP. Zero-tolerance policies: Do they inhibit or stimulate illicit drug consumption?. Management Science 1993; 39: 458–476
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Converse P. The nature of belief systems in mass publics. Ideology and discontent, DE Apter. The Free Press of Glencoe, London 1964; 206–261
   Google Scholar
• Druckman JN, Jacobs LR. Lumpers and splitters: The public opinion information that politicians collect and use. Public Opinion Quarterly 2006; 70: 453–476
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erickson PG. Harm reduction: What it is and is not. Drug and Alcohol Review 1995; 14: 283–285
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erikson RS, McIver JP, Wright Jr GC. State political culture and public opinion. The American Political Science Review 1987; 81: 797–813
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. Drug use: An overview of general population surveys in Europe. EMCDDA, Lisbon 2009
   Google Scholar
• Feldman S. Values, ideology, and the structure of political attitudes. Oxford handbook of political psychology, DO Sears, L Huddy, R Jervis. Oxford University Press, New York, NY 2003; 477–508
   Google Scholar
• Gerring J. Ideology: A definitional analysis. Political Research Quarterly 1997; 50: 957–994
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goot M. Politicians, public policy and poll following: Conceptual difficulties and empirical realities. Australian Journal of Political Science 2005; 40: 189–205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grichting WL. The meaning of ‘I don't know’ in opinion surveys: Indifference versus ignorance. Australian Psychologist 1994; 29: 71–75
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heith DJ. Staffing the White House public opinion apparatus 1969–1988. The Public Opinion Quarterly 1998; 62: 165–189
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes C, Ritter A. A summary of diversion programs for drug and drug-related offenders in Australia. National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, Sydney 2008
   Google Scholar
• Hunt N. A review of the evidence-base for harm reduction approaches to drug use. Forward Thinking on Drugs: A Release Initiative, London 2003
   Google Scholar
• Ialomiteanu AR, Giesbrecht N, Adlaf EM, Irving H, Paglia-Boak A, Rehm J. An exploratory approach to analyzing alcohol control policy opinions held by Ontario adults. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2010; 7: 827–841
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jost JT. The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist 2006; 61: 651–670
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jost JT, Nosek BA, Gosling SD. Ideology: Its resurgence in social, personality, and political psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2008; 3: 126–136
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleiman M, & Hawdon, J.E. (Eds.) (2011). Encyclopedia of drug policy. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications
   Google Scholar
• Kroh M. Measuring left-right political orientation: The choice of response format. Public Opinion Quarterly 2007; 71: 204–220
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latimer WW, Harwood EM, Newcomb MD, Wagenaar AC. Measuring public opinion on alcohol policy: A factor analytic study of a US probability sample. Addictive Behaviors 2003; 28: 301–313
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenton S, Single E. The definition of harm reduction. Drug and Alcohol Review 1998; 17: 213–220
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacCoun RJ. Toward a psychology of harm reduction. American Psychologist 1998; 53: 1199–1208
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makkai T, McAllister I. Public opinion towards drug policies in Australia, 1985–95. Commonwealth Department of Health and Family Services, Canberra 1998
   Google Scholar
• Matthew-Simmons F, Love S, Ritter A. A review of Australian public opinion surveys on illicit drugs. National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, Sydney 2008
   Google Scholar
• Mendes P. Fighting the drugs war: The role of prohibitionist groups in Australian illicit drugs policy. Dissent 2008; 26: 56–58
   Google Scholar
• Mullins WA. On the concept of ideology in political science. The American Political Science Review 1972; 66: 498–510
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthen LK, Muthen BO. Mplus user's guide5th. Muthen & Muthen, Los Angeles 2007
   Google Scholar
• Nylund KL, Asparouhov T, Muthén BO. Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 2007; 14: 535–569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne T, Rose N. Do the social sciences create phenomena? The example of public opinion research. The British Journal of Sociology 1999; 50: 367–396
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riley D, Sawka E, Conley P, Hewitt D, Mitic W, Poulin C, Topp J, et al. Harm reduction: Concepts and practice. A policy discussion paper. Substance Use & Misuse 1999; 34: 9–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ritter A, Cameron J. A systematic review of harm reduction. Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre, Fitzroy 2005
   Google Scholar
• Inc. SPSS. PASW Statistics 18. SPSS, an IBM Company, Armonk, NY 2009
   Google Scholar
• Stimson J. Tides of consent: How public opinion shapes American politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2004
   Google Scholar
• Tammi T, Hurme T. How the harm reduction movement contrasts itself against punitive prohibition. International Journal of Drug Policy 2007; 18: 84–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tenpas KD, McCann JA. Testing the permanence of the permanent campaign – An analysis of presidential polling expenditures, 1977–2002. Public Opinion Quarterly 2007; 71: 349–366
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson C, Room R, Livingston M. Mapping Australian public opinion on alcohol policies in the new millennium. Drug and Alcohol Review 2009; 28: 263–274
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar