Effects of Media Attributions on Responsibility Judgments and Policy Opinions

Jeong, Se‐Hoon; Yum, Jung-Yoon; Hwang, Yong Woo

doi:10.1080/15205436.2017.1362002

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some of the studies included in this review shed some light on possibilities. For example, if people believe that certain aspects of the environment cause obesity, then they may ascribe responsibility to change these aspects of the environment to certain groups such as governments or business (Jeong et al, 2018 ; Niederdeppe et al, 2011 ). A further route through which causal beliefs may affect attitudes is the affective component of attitudes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communicating evidence about the environment’s role in obesity and support for government policies to tackle obesity: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Reynolds

Vasiljevic

Pilling

et al. 2020

Health Psychology Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public support for many policies that tackle obesity by changing environments is low. This may reflect commonly held causal beliefs about obesity, namely that it is due to failures of self-control rather than environmental influences. Several studies have sought to increase public support by changing these and similar causal beliefs, with mixed results. The current review is the first systematic synthesis of these studies. Searches of PsycInfo, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Open Grey yielded 20 eligible studies (N = 8977) from 11,776 abstracts. Eligible studies were controlled experiments with an intervention group that communicated information about the environment's role in obesity, and a measure of support for environment-based obesity policies. The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO. Metaanalyses showed no evidence that communicating information about the environment's influence on obesity changed policy support or the belief that the environment influences obesity. A likely explanation for this null effect is the ineffectiveness of interventions that were designed to change the belief that the environment influences obesity. The possibility remains, however, that the association observed between beliefs about the causes of obesity and attitudes towards obesity policies is correlational and not causal.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communicating evidence about the environment’s role in obesity and support for government policies to tackle obesity: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Reynolds

Vasiljevic

Pilling

et al. 2020

Health Psychology Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 The inferences we make about SUD can be similar to the inferences an individual could make about homelessness. Numerous studies using attribution theory have confirmed and significantly extended Heider's original theory to various policy fields, including obesity (Cozzarelli et al 2002;Haider-Markel and Joslyn 2018), gay rights (Haider-Markel and Joslyn 2008), gun violence (Joslyn and Haider-Markel 2017), poverty (Zucker and Weiner 1993) and smartphone addiction (Jeong et al 2018).…”

Section: Factors Influencing Attitudes Toward Opioid Policiesmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Numerous studies using attribution theory have confirmed and significantly extended Heider's original theory to various policy fields, including obesity (Cozzarelli et al 2002;Haider-Markel 2 These specific factors are only used as examples of situational factors that could influence SUD and were not explicitly tested in our analysis. and Joslyn 2018), gay rights (Haider-Markel and Joslyn 2008), gun violence (Joslyn and Haider-Markel 2017), poverty (Zucker and Weiner 1993) and smartphone addiction (Jeong et al 2018).…”

Section: Factors Influencing Attitudes Toward Opioid Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Just say no? Public attitudes about supportive and punitive policies to combat the opioid epidemic

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using an original demographically representative survey, we estimate the determinants of public support for a set of supportive and punitive policies to combat the opioid epidemic among a sample of 2,131 Americans. Our findings indicate that individuals who attribute blame for the epidemic to the personal choices of individuals, conservatives and those high in racial resentment are consistently more likely to support punitive policies to combat the opioid epidemic and less likely to favour policies to support individuals with substance use disorders. Individuals who have a personal connection to someone struggling with opioid use disorder favour policies to support such individuals but have nuanced attitudes towards punitive policies. Importantly, we find overwhelming support for all supportive policies except supervised injection sites, while roughly 50% of our sample supported the set of punitive policy choices. Our research represents a significant step forward toward understanding public opinion about the opioid epidemic and policies to combat it.

show abstract

“…Much less research has connected adults’ attributions of childhood issues and support for policies benefiting children. Existing research includes childhood obesity (Barry et al., 2013; Dumitrescu et al., 2016; Jeong et al., 2018), children's vaccinations (Carpiano & Fitz, 2017), preschool programming (Forde & Heckler, 2017), juvenile justice (Trzcinski & Allen, 2012), and children's cellphone use (Jeong et al., 2018). This research also shows that believing in structural determinants for children's issues (e.g., the food industry) is associated with reduced blame of children or parents and increased support for policies that promote child well‐being or that regulate the responsible industries (Young et al., 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of public explanations of why children struggle and support for policy solutions using a national sample

Klevens

Treves‐Kagan

Metzler

et al. 2021

Anal Soc Iss & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Despite evidence showing the importance of structural determinants for child well‐being and the existence of policies that can promote child well‐being, many communities are not adopting these policies. Limited awareness of structural determinants may explain this gap. This study establishes the public's recognition of structural determinants and their associations with support for policies that promote child well‐being. Methods Secondary analyses of survey data collected in 2019 from a random sample of 2496 adults in the United States. This survey asked why some children “struggle” (e.g., do poorly in school, use drugs, or get involved in crime). Respondents could select individual (e.g., lack of effort) and structural (e.g., low wages) explanations. Respondents were also asked about their support for policies that are supportive of children and families. Results Stronger beliefs of structural explanations were associated with greater support for policies that strengthen family economics, family‐friendly work, and afford access to high‐quality early childcare and education. Beliefs in individual explanations were inversely associated with support for these policies. Conclusions These findings suggest increasing recognition of the structural determinants that hinder child development may help increase support for policies that are effective in improving children's outcomes.

show abstract

Effects of Media Attributions on Responsibility Judgments and Policy Opinions

Cited by 9 publications

References 55 publications

Communicating evidence about the environment’s role in obesity and support for government policies to tackle obesity: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Communicating evidence about the environment’s role in obesity and support for government policies to tackle obesity: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Just say no? Public attitudes about supportive and punitive policies to combat the opioid epidemic

Association of public explanations of why children struggle and support for policy solutions using a national sample

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About