Issue Frames and Group-Centrism in American Public Opinion

Nelson, Thomas E.; Kinder, Donald R.

doi:10.2307/2960149

Cited by 638 publications

(389 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

380

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Over 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).…”

Section: Who Said What? the Effects Of Source Cues In Issue Framesmentioning

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

Section: Who Said What? the Effects Of Source Cues In Issue Framesmentioning

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

show abstract

“…On the other hand, if negative media images about Latinos and welfare are less prevalent and having more Latinos in a state makes whites feel more positive toward them, then it is reasonable that effects will depend on the ethnic context. 31 There exists an extensive literature on the influence the media or political elites have on attitudes about race (Gilliam and Iyengar 2000;Valentino, Hutchings, and White 2002), racial inequality (Iyengar 1991), poverty (Gilens 1996a;Iyengar 1990Iyengar , 1991, as well as attitudes toward welfare and other programs for the poor (Mendelberg 2001;Nelson and Kinder 1996). Given that whites are more likely to see blacks depicted unfavorably in the national media, it is curious that the coefficient on the Latino work ethic variable is larger than the coefficient on the black work ethic variable in disproportionately white states.…”

Section: The Influence Of Context On Support For Welfarementioning

confidence: 99%

The Changing Color of Welfare? How Whites’ Attitudes toward Latinos Influence Support for Welfare

Fox

2004

American Journal of Sociology

216

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article uses the National Election Study to consider how stereotypes about Latinos influence white support for welfare. It shows that whites' stereotypes about Latino work ethic grow more positive as the size of the Latino population increases, suggesting positive effects of contact. Moreover, the effect of whites' stereotypes about Latino-but not black-work ethic on support for welfare is contingent on ethnic context. In areas with few Latinos, the lazier whites think Latinos are, the less whites want to spend on welfare. However, in areas that are disproportionately Latino the more hardworking whites think Latinos are (controlling for whites' stereotypes about blacks), the less whites want to spend on welfare as well. This last result, this article argues, is the product of a social comparison between black and Latino work ethic.

show abstract

“…Framing effect centers on the effect of media content on public opinion (Gamson & Lasch 1983;Gamson & Modigliani, 1989;Iyengar 1991;Nelson & Kinder 1996). Through stressing specific values, facts, and other considerations of an issue, framing provides the public with "greater apparent relevance to the issue than they might appear to have under an alternative frame" (Nelson, Clawson, & Oxley, 1997, p. 567).…”

Section: Framing Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%