| Abstract: | Using integrative complexity theory and its associated codingscheme, this article explores the structure of arguments onabortion articulated by single- and multi-issue "prochoice"and "pro-life" groups between July 1989 (following the SupremeCourt Webster v. Reproductive Health Services opinion) and May1991. A simple random sample of 13 paragraphsized statementsrepresentative of each organization's position was rated bytwo trained coders on a 7-point scale measuring conceptual differentiationand integration. The debate, as a whole, was conducted at alow level of integrative complexity. Contrary to the "rigidityof the Right" hypothesis, both prochoice and pro-life argumentswere characterized by similarly low levels of integrative complexity.Supporting an ideologue hypothesis, the arguments of multi-as opposed to single-issue organizations were more integrativelycomplex. |
