Framing the EU as Common Project vs. Common Heritage: Effects on Attitudes Towards the EU Deepening and Widening

Abstract

The present study investigated the effects of framing the European Union (EU) as a common project vs. a common heritage on participants' attitude towards EU integration (Experiment 1) and EU enlargement (Experiment 2). An additional aim was exploring whether the different frames affected the strength of identification with the EU, and if the framing effect on attitudes was mediated by participants' identification with the EU and/or by their message evaluation (Experiment 3). Results showed that a common project-based frame was more effective than a common heritage-based frame in promoting positive attitude toward EU integration and enlargement, as well as participants' identification with the EU, which mediated the framing effect on both attitudes; the mediation of participants' message evaluation was not significant. The procedure of the last experiment was replicated on a British sample (Experiment 4), showing a similar pattern of results.

Human and Global Identities: Different Prototypical Meanings of All‐Inclusive Identities

“…By contrast, citizenship-oriented labels generally evoke attitudinal and intellectual aspects that people share as members of a common global political community of citizens, superseding political (i.e., mainly national) divisions. This interpretation mirrors existing distinctions between ethnic and civic nationalisms (Kohn, 1944), civic and cultural identities (Bruter, 2003), essence-based and agency-based groups (Brewer, Hong, & Li, 2004), or heritage-based and project-based identities (La Barbera, 2015). It also implies that, as is the case with those other distinctions, the difference between humanness-and citizenship-oriented labels is likely to impact both on the contexts in which they are invoked and their subsequent effect on intergroup behavior and attitudes.…”

Five dimensions of European identity: A contribution to the Italian adaptation and validation of the In-Group Identification Scale

“…In addition, in second study we had a keen interest to several variables relevant to the EU context. In recent years, several studies have addressed the relationships between people’s identification as Europeans and psycho-social factors such as cooperation and pro-European attitudes ( La Barbera, 2015 ; La Barbera, Cariota Ferrara, & Boza, 2014 ). Nonetheless, the identification as Europeans has almost been measured by uni-dimensional scales (for an exception, see La Barbera & Cariota Ferrara, 2012 ).…”

“…As dependent variables potentially affected by participants’ identification with EU, we focused on two dependent variables which have been the target of an emergent research ( Boomgaarden, Schuck, Elenbaas, & de Vreese, 2011 ; La Barbera, 2015 ; Schuck & de Vreese, 2006 ): the attitudes towards EU integration and EU enlargement. EU integration (“deepening”) and enlargement (“widening”) have been considered as two different variables ( Karp & Bowler, 2006 ), taking into account that in countries such as the UK, EU enlargement is supported, whereas EU integration is not ( Lubbers & Scheepers, 2010 ).…”

“…However, either the attitude towards EU deepening and the attitude towards EU widening have been found to be positively correlated with identification with EU ( Boomgaarden et al, 2011 ; de Vreese & Boomgaarden, 2006 ; Fuchs & Schlenker, 2006 ; La Barbera, 2015 ). Nonetheless, as we already stated, there is a lack of research about the different dimensions of European identity and, in our best knowledge, any research has addressed the issue of which dimension of identification with EU would affect those attitudes.…”

“…In two studies, indeed, participants were asked about their identification as Europeans. There is a huge interest among social scientist about European identity ( Castano, 2004 ; Herrmann & Brewer, 2004 ; Hooghe & Marks, 2004 ; Lubbers, 2008 ; Thomassen & Back, 2008 ; Vetik, Nimmerfelft, & Taru, 2006 ), which has been shown to have a significant effect on relevant outcomes, such as group-based trust, willingness to cooperate, attitudes towards EU deepening and widening ( La Barbera, 2015 ; La Barbera, Cariota Ferrara, & Boza, 2014 ; Zielonka, 2005 ). Moreover, there is a growing interest about the dimensionality of European identity, and few theoretical conceptualization has been proposed ( Bruter, 2003 ; La Barbera & Cariota Ferrara, 2012 ), yet the topic needs a deeper investigation ( La Barbera et al, 2014 ).…”