Values, Frames, and Persuasion in Presidential Nomination Campaigns

Barker, David C.

doi:10.1007/s11109-005-8145-4

Cited by 61 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the Feinberg and Willer (2013) study, reframing environmental problems in terms of the sanctity foundation elicited a disgust response, causing conservatives to hold more pro-environmental attitudes. Likewise, research from political science and communications shows that value frames resonate most with those who endorse the relevant value (Barker, 2005;Shen & Edwards, 2005). Following that logic, we expect that pro-stem cell rhetoric will be most effective at persuading those who endorse the care foundation (H2).…”

Section: Our Case and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…But the notion that there is no individual-level variation in how a moral foundation affects policy opinions is incompatible with models of attitude formation in political science. According to that research, people use information from the political environment to translate their predispositions into support for specific policy attitudes and some individuals are better equipped to do this than others (Zaller, 1992; also see Barker, 2005, or Nisbett & Goidel, 2007.…”

Section: The Existing Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Moral Concerns and Policy Attitudes: Investigating the Influence of Elite Rhetoric

Clifford¹,

Jerit

Rainey

et al. 2015

Political Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing body of research documents the crucial role played by moral concerns in the formation of attitudes and a wide range of political behaviors. Yet extant models of moral judgment portray a direct linkage between moral intuitions and policy attitudes, leaving little room for the influence of political context. In this article, we argue that political rhetoric plays an important role in facilitating the connection between moral intuitions and political attitudes. Using a unique combination of media content analysis of the stem cell debate and individual-level measures of the public's moral foundations, we examine the role of rhetoric in linking a person's moral foundations to his or her attitudes. Our results show that individuals who are the most likely to have been exposed to political rhetoric have the strongest connection between their moral foundations and their attitudes on the issue. We also find that rhetoric was persuasive on this moralized issue and present suggestive evidence that it was most persuasive among those who endorsed the relevant moral foundation.

show abstract

Section: Our Case and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: The Existing Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Moral Concerns and Policy Attitudes: Investigating the Influence of Elite Rhetoric

Clifford¹,

Jerit

Rainey

et al. 2015

Political Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This repetition dynamic is the mechanism behind the previously discussed loudness hypothesis. The amount of repetition that an individual needs to comprehend the message should be inversely related to his or her level of knowledge (Barker, 2005).…”

Section: A Theory Of Opinion Formation In Competitive Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Theory of Framing and Opinion Formation in Competitive Elite Environments

Chong

Druckman

2007

Journal of Communication

678

599

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public opinion often depends on how elites choose to frame issues. For example, citizens' opinions about a Ku Klux Klan rally may depend on whether elites frame the event as a free-speech issue or a public safety issue. Past research has focused largely on documenting the size of framing effects in uncontested settings. By contrast, there has been little research on framing in competitive environments in which individuals receive multiple frames representing alternative positions on an issue. We take an initial step toward understanding how frames work in competitive environments by integrating research on attitude structure and persuasion. Our theory of framing identifies the key individual and contextual parameters that determine which of many competing frames will have an effect on public opinion.

show abstract

“…For example, frames are more readily accepted when they come from sources that are perceived to be credible and trustworthy (Druckman, ). Additionally, acceptance of frames may be conditioned by strong predispositions, which increase resistance to information that contradicts existing beliefs (Barker, ; Druckman, ; Goode and Ben Yahuda, ); those frames that reflect preexisting attitudes are generally more effective. Thus, political actors and the media may emphasize particular aspects of a problem that resonate with wider public concerns, tapping into preexisting fears to garner political support.…”

Section: Dominant Sex Trafficking Victimization Framesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenging the Dominant Frame: The Moderating Impact of Exposure and Knowledge on Perceptions of Sex Trafficking Victimization*

Bouché

Farrell

Wittmer-Wolfe

2018

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Human trafficking problems have largely been framed by political elites and the media as a sexual crime involving innocent victims who are largely women and children. It is unclear how this framing impacts the public's attitudes about the issue. Here, we ask what types of sex trafficking victim frames produce the strongest response among the American public and how does increased exposure and accurate knowledge about the issue moderate the impact of the victim frames? Methods To answer these questions, we utilize data from a unique nationally representative survey experiment fielded to 2,000 Americans in which we designed a 2 × 2 × 2 experiment manipulating the gender, age, and nationality of sex trafficking victims. Results We find the age of the victim has the greatest impact on affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses to human trafficking, but that these victim frames are conditional on the amount of exposure a subject has had to the issue of human trafficking and the level of correct knowledge he or she possesses about human trafficking. Conclusion Victim framing in public discourse on sex trafficking does make a difference, and the reasons these frames elicit different responses are complex and moderated by respondents’ exposure to information and knowledge about the issue.

show abstract

Values, Frames, and Persuasion in Presidential Nomination Campaigns

Cited by 61 publications

References 39 publications

Moral Concerns and Policy Attitudes: Investigating the Influence of Elite Rhetoric

Moral Concerns and Policy Attitudes: Investigating the Influence of Elite Rhetoric

A Theory of Framing and Opinion Formation in Competitive Elite Environments

Challenging the Dominant Frame: The Moderating Impact of Exposure and Knowledge on Perceptions of Sex Trafficking Victimization*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About