It has become commonplace to use the ability-motivation-opportunity triad (Luskin,1990) as a theoretical background for studies on political knowledge. Closely considering mechanisms of knowledge acquisition, and how ability fits into the process, we argue that a direct effect of cognitive ability on the acquisition of political knowledge makes little theoretical sense. Cognitive ability rests within the individual, while political information is external to them suggesting that ability without external stimuli cannot produce political knowledge. For this reason we view cognitive ability as a catalyzer for knowledge accrued through motivation and opportunity. Additionally we propose that education cannot be used as a proxy for ability as educational socialization directly influences people’s knowledge level, yet ability only indirectly ties education to knowledge. A revised model incorporates our criticism of the triad by separating educational attainment from cognitive ability and changing the status of the latter to moderating variable on all other effects. We introduce a direct measurement of cognitive ability, allowing us to fit the revised triadic model to the 2012 wave of the Dutch Vote Compass panel, specify meaningful interaction effects and shed light on the mechanism underlying the associations between the elements of the triad and the acquisition of political knowledge. We attempt a partial replication of Robert Luskin’s initial model and compare it to the revised model we proposed. Finally, we find that cognitive ability moderates the effect of motivation and opportunity on political knowledge; all effects are stronger for the high-ability subsample than for the low-ability one.
