No abstract

Hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) has recently become a very intensely debated process for extracting oil and gas. Supporters argue that fracking provides positive economic benefits and energy security and offers a decreased reliance on coal‐based electricity generation. Detractors claim that the fracking process may harm the environment as well as place a strain on local communities that experience new fracking operations. This study utilizes a recently conducted survey distributed to a sample of policy elites and the general public in Arkansas and Oregon to examine the role of cultural value predispositions and trust in shaping the perceptions of risks and benefits associated with fracking. Findings indicate that cultural values influence both trust and benefit‐risk perceptions of fracking for both policy elites and the general public. More specifically, we found that trust in information from various sources is derived from the intrinsic values held by an individual, which in turn impacts perceptions of related benefits and risks. We also found that while the overall pattern of relationships is similar, trust plays a larger role in the formulation of attitudes for policy elites than for the general public. We discuss the implications of the mediating role of trust in understanding value‐driven benefit‐risk perceptions, as well as the disparate role of trust between policy elites and the general public in the context of the policy‐making process for both theory and practice.

Objective We seek to understand how political ideology and LGBT contact experiences exert influence on an individual's level of LGBT policy support. Methods We apply multivariate regression and posterior simulation‐based conditional process analysis using data collected from a recent national survey of 1,500 American adults. Results We find that LGBT contact moderates the effects of individuals’ political ideology on the formation of their LGBT policy preference in distinctive ways. Furthermore, such analytical results hold nuanced differences depending on the specific topic of LGBT policy in consideration. Conclusion These findings are significant in terms of previous understandings of the contact theory of attitude change. Regarding the formation of policy positions, it is not simply contact, ideology, or the combination of the two that is influential. Instead, there appears to be a distinction in attitudinal valence toward what a specific policy represents, and thus the support for LGBT equality in that domain.

No abstract

No abstract