Contrary to common conservative complaints about left-leaning college professors trying to influence student political opinion, a new study suggests that professors in general have little impact on their students’ political views.

The study, to be published later this year in the journal “PS: Political Science and Politics,” surveyed the attitudes of approximately 6,800 students at 38 universities. It found that, while schools with more liberal faculty are apt to attract more liberal students, there was little evidence that faculty political views impacted those of students in the classroom.

Fittingly, the study was conducted by a bipartisan pair of researchers, Gordon Hewitt of Hamilton College, a Democrat, and Mack Mariani of Xavier University, a Republican. The two found that while students demonstrated a slight shift to the left over the course of four years, this mirrored the same trend in the general 18-24-year-old cohort in the U.S. — suggesting that liberal professors had little to no impact on student political views.

“The indoctrination argument is fundamentally an argument about change, the main point being that liberal professors indoctrinate students to become more liberal over the course of their college careers,” the authors write. “Regardless of any biases (intentional or unintentional) that professors bring to their teaching, the findings presented here should help alleviate the concern that students, on a widespread basis, are being forced to adopt the political positions of their liberal professors.”

Elite universities in particular have drawn the ire of conservative commentators for their left-leaning tendencies. At Stanford, where the controversy surrounding the appointment of former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to a distinguished visiting fellowship at the Hoover Institution last fall sparked a debate over campus and faculty politics, professors have contributed overwhelmingly to Democratic campaigns and causes.

In interviews with The Daily, professors expressed differing viewpoints regarding the appropriateness of politics in the classroom.

A self-described “irrepressible quipper,” History and Political Science Prof. Jack Rakove wears his political biases on his sleeve. Famous for his digressions during lectures, Rakove said he receives complaints about his occasional political commentary “once in a while.”

“Professors don’t sacrifice First Amendment rights when they get in the classroom,” he said. “We’re not supposed to be objective reporters . . . we’re allowed to profess our views.”

Hoover Senior Fellow and Political Science Prof. Larry Diamond, however, said he prefers not to present his political views in the classroom. Out of the country at a conference, Diamond wrote in an email to The Daily that while his lectures often touch on issues with political implications, “the classroom (or anything related to a class) is not the place to pontificate on political issues broadly, or to campaign for a partisan political cause (not to mention a candidate).”

“In fact, it’s really a violation of the University’s purpose and mission to use the classroom for blatantly partisan political purposes,” he continued. “I don’t mind talking about it with students privately. I just think we should not be using the classroom to campaign for a partisan or ideological cause. Rather, we should be encouraging students to think, and to question all assumptions.”

According to opensecrets.org, a Web site operated by the Center for Responsive Politics, three-quarters of campaign donations from the education industry in the 2008 election cycle have gone to Democrats. As of Mar. 3, Stanford affiliates had contributed nearly $325,000 to federal candidates and parties, with 86 percent going to Democrats and 14 percent to Republicans.