Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies

Chong, Dennis; Druckman, James N.

doi:10.1017/s0003055407070554

Cited by 776 publications

(629 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

587

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Rather, some positive views will be pushed to undecided or negative and some undecided views also pushed to negative. This sort of ''backlash'' effect is consistent with research showing negative effects on opinion of weak-inapplicable frames competing with strong-applicable ones (Chong and Druckman 2007b), of distrust towards a political leader (Levi and Stoker 2000, 489-90) and of general levels of trust for citizens' negative evaluations of foreign countries (Brewer et al 2004).…”

Section: Conditional Effects Of Public Diplomacysupporting

confidence: 82%

Spinning the Globe? U.S. Public Diplomacy and Foreign Public Opinion

Goldsmith¹,

Horiuchi

2009

The Journal of Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global public opinion has emerged as a prominent issue in international relations. But have U.S. public diplomacy efforts during the post-9/11 period successfully improved foreign publics' appraisals of U.S. foreign policy? We examine this question by estimating the effects of U.S. high-level visits to foreign countries on public opinion in those countries. We base our theoretical arguments on the political communication literature, but extend them to consider transnational dynamics in international relations. Specifically, we argue that U.S. leaders' credibility in the eyes of foreign publics is critical in shaping attitudes toward U.S. foreign policy. Empirically, we show that the effects of such visits were initially significantly large and positive, but weakened once the war in Iraq began and international media started reporting negative aspects of the ''war on terror.'' Most interestingly, we find some evidence that high-level visits eventually exhibited a backlash effect.

show abstract

Section: Conditional Effects Of Public Diplomacysupporting

confidence: 82%

Spinning the Globe? U.S. Public Diplomacy and Foreign Public Opinion

Goldsmith¹,

Horiuchi

2009

The Journal of Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As for the right hand side of the model, we created a control variable called instrumentalism that measures respondents' beliefs about the instrumental value of foreign aid: whether aid strengthens US/GB political influence and helps to prevent international terrorism. 3 Table 4 contains marginal effects from two separate probit estimations for each country.…”

Section: Multivariate Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

We Spend How Much? Misperceptions, Innumeracy, and Support for the Foreign Aid in the United States and Great Britain

Scotto¹,

Reifler²,

Hudson³

et al. 2017

J Exp Polit Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Majorities of citizens in high-income countries often oppose foreign aid spending. One popular explanation is that the public overestimates the percentage and amount of taxpayer funds that goes towards overseas aid. Can the framing of aid overcome this innumeracy? We report the results of an experiment examining differences in support for aid spending as a function of the information American and British respondents receive about foreign aid spending. In both nations, providing respondents with information about foreign aid spending as a percentage of the national budget significantly reduces support for cuts. The findings suggest that support for aid can be increased, but significant opposition to aid spending remains.2

show abstract

“…However, second-generation framing research has increasingly focused on instances of when framing does (or does not) occur (Brewer, 2003(Brewer, , 2005Chong and Druckman, 2007b;Druckman, 2001aDruckman, , 2001bDruckman, , 2004Druckman and Nelson, 2003;Sniderman and Theriault, 2004). For example, scholars find that framing effects are attenuated when individuals are immersed in heterogeneous, cross-cutting social networks (Druckman and Nelson, 2003) or when the media outlet carrying a message is viewed as untrustworthy (e.g., The National Enquirer; Druckman, 2001a).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, scholars find that framing effects are attenuated when individuals are immersed in heterogeneous, cross-cutting social networks (Druckman and Nelson, 2003) or when the media outlet carrying a message is viewed as untrustworthy (e.g., The National Enquirer; Druckman, 2001a). Recent work has also demonstrated that multifaceted information environments reduce framing effects in what has been called dual or competitive framing (Brewer, 2003(Brewer, , 2005Chong and Druckman, 2007b;Druckman, 2001aDruckman, , 2004Druckman and Nelson, 2003;Sniderman and Theriault, 2004; see also Zaller, 1992). Evidence has also suggested that individual-level political and psychological factors influence framing, such as motivation (Druckman and Nelson, 2003) and ability (Brewer, 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Who Said What? The Effects of Source Cues in Issue Frames

Hartman

Weber

2009

Polit Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on previous research concerning the role that source cues play in political information processing, we examine whether an ideological identity match between the source of a framed message and the respondent moderates framing effects. We test our hypotheses in two experiments concerning attitudes toward a proposed rally by the Ku Klux Klan. In Experiment 1 (N = 274), we test our hypothesis in a simple issue framing experiment. We find that framing effects occur for strong identifiers only when there is a match between the ideology of the speaker and respondent. In Experiment 2 (N = 259), we examine whether matched frames resonate equally well when individuals are simultaneously exposed to competing frames. The results from this experiment provide mixed support for our hypotheses. The results from our studies suggest that identity matching is an important factor to consider in future framing research. WHO SAID WHAT? 3 Who Said What? The Effects of Source Cues in Issue FramesOver the past two decades, public opinion scholars have accumulated strong evidence of framing effects for a wide range of social and political issues (Gamson, 1992; Gamson and Mogdigliani, 1987;Iyengar, 1991;Iyengar and Kinder, 1987;Kinder and Sanders, 1996;Nelson and Kinder, 1996;Nelson, Clawson, and Oxley, 1997;Schuman and Presser, 1981). Consistent evidence has demonstrated that subtle differences in the presentation of information can influence how people form and change their political attitudes (for an excellent summary, see Druckman, 2004, as well as Chong and Druckman, 2007a). This research has led some scholars to revisit models of information processing and conclude that citizens do not possess concrete attitudes, per se; rather, they construct opinions based upon whatever information is accessible at the time (Zaller and Feldman, 1992). This "top-of-the-head" approach suggests that characteristics of the sender, receiver, and message interact to produce attitude formation and change (Zaller, 1992). In this paper, we extend this line of inquiry by considering the role of social influence in political communication.Specifically, we explore whether ideological identities of the message source and recipient affect susceptibility to issue frames. Theory and HypothesesScholars have traditionally defined framing as the process by which potentially relevant considerations are made available, which, in turn, influence how an individual thinks about an issue (Nelson et al., 1997). A framing effect occurs when the considerations highlighted in a frame move people to endorse or oppose a specific policy (Gamson, 1992). A frame is said to be effective when it shifts an opinion distribution in a particular direction. For example, individuals exposed to a freedom of speech frame are more likely to allow a disliked group to demonstrate in public, while those that received a public safety and order frame are quick to restrict the groups' first-amendment

show abstract

Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies

Cited by 776 publications

References 41 publications

Spinning the Globe? U.S. Public Diplomacy and Foreign Public Opinion

Spinning the Globe? U.S. Public Diplomacy and Foreign Public Opinion

We Spend How Much? Misperceptions, Innumeracy, and Support for the Foreign Aid in the United States and Great Britain

Who Said What? The Effects of Source Cues in Issue Frames

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About