Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
How Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRience Department of Political Science Northwestern UniversityScott Hall 601 University Place Evanston, IL 60208 Phone: 847-491-7450 Fax: 847-491-8985E-mail: druckmanfflnorthwestern.eduErik Peterson Graduate Student Department of Political Science Stanford University Encina Hall West 616 Serra St Pal Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRo Alto, CA, 94305E-mail: erik.peteisotifflstanford.eduRune Slothuus Associate Professor Department of Political Science Aarhus University Bartholins ADruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
lle 7 8000 Aarhus c, Denmark Phone: (+45) 87 16 56 91 Fax: (+45) 86 13 98 39 E-mail: slotlnnisfflps.au.dk41128*We thank Laurel Harbridge, Gabe Lenz. MHow Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSR research assistance. We also thank the Northwestern Office of Undergraduate Studies and the Danish Social Science Research Council (grant 275-07-0179) for financial support.1How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion FormationAbstract:Competition is a defining element of democracy. One Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRof the most noteworthy events over the last quartercentury in U.S. politics is the change in the nature of elite party competition: the parties have bDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
ecome increasingly polarized. Scholars and pundits actively debate how these elite patterns influence polarization among the public (e.g., have citizeHow Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRred the way citizens arrive at their policy opinions in the first place, and if so, in what ways? We address these questions with a theory and two survey experiments (on the issues of drilling and immigration). We find stark evidence that polarized environments fundamentally change how citizens make Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSR decisions. Specifically, polarization intensifies the impact of party endorsements over substantive information and, perhaps ironically, stimulates gDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
reater confidence in those - less substantively grounded - opinions. We discuss the implications for public opinion formation and the nature of democrHow Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRical system bl which competing leaders and organizations define the alternatives of public policy in such u way thul the public cun participate in the decision-mukiny process" (italic s in original). While his work vastly influenced the trajec tory OÍ multiple areas ol political sc ienc e, his com h Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRiding conception OÍ democracy has received relatively scant attention. In this paper, we take up an aspect OÍ his definition hy addressing the cpiesliDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
on: how does (he tenor ol political competition a defining element of democrac y affec I the nature of citizen decision-making?We foe IIS on one of thHow Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRsts from the major parties have become more ideologically distinct from one another and more internally homogeneous (e.g., McCarty, Poole, and Rosenthal 2006). Therefore, following previous work, we define elite polarization as high levels of ideological distance between parties and high levels of h Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRomogeneity within parties. Lively debate revolves around the causes and consequences of elite polarization, with notable attention to whether citizensDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
have also polarized. While there is far from a consensus on the status of citizen polarization (e.g.. Fiorina and Abrams 2008: 582. Hetherington 2009How Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRind, with two experiments on immigration and energy, that elite polarization dramatically changes the ways citizens form opinions. This occurs because polarization stimulates partisan motivated reasoning, which, in turn, generates decision-making that relics more on partisan endorsements and less on Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSR substantive arguments. We discuss the consequences of this shift in decisionmaking criteria for understanding the nature of public opinion. We also cDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
onsider the implications of these findings for normative debates about "quality opinions” and more general discussions about polarization and democratHow Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRlows (e.g., Sniderman and Theriault 2004, Petersen, Slodiuus, andTogeby 2010, Boudreau n.d.).1Our goal is to assess the impact of elite polarization on citizen decision-making. To do so, we einploy a counterfactual. We compare the decisions citizens reach in the presence of competing arguments made Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRin a polarized environment against those made in less polarized environments (see Mansbridge 1983: 25). Our central question is: do opinions formed unDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
der conditions of elite polarization differ from those formed sans polarization? We specifically compare the role of perhaps the two most widely used How Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSR frames and partisan cues. We discuss each in rum.FramingWe operationalize “arguments” as directional issue or emphasis frames. Few topics have been studied as extensively in the field of political communication (e.g., Chong and Druckman 2011, n.d.). Frames refer to alternative conceptualizations of Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSR an issue or event. A framing effect occurs when “in the course of describing an issue or event, a speaker’s emphasis on a subset of potentially relevDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
ant considerations causes Individuals to focus on these considerations when constructing their opinions” (Dmckman and Nelson 2003: 730). An oft-cited How Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRally on free speech considerations and support the right to rally. In contrast, if the speaker uses a public safety frame, the audience will base their opinions on public safety considerations and oppose the rally (Nelson, Clawson, and Oxley 1997).A number of studies over the past quarter-century sh Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRow that framing effects can substantially shape opinions. This work isolates a variety of factors that moderate the impact of a given frame. One of thDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
e most important factors Is a frame’s “strength.” As with the psychological attitude literature on argument strength (e.g., O'Keefe 2002: 147, 156), fHow Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRargument strength by providing respondents with alternative frames'arguments and then asking them to rate the "effectiveness" or applicability of each (e.g., O’Keefe 2002, Chong and Dnickman 2007, 2010,2Druckman 2010, Aaroe 2011, Druckman and Leeper n.d.b.).- Concerning a hate group rally, for insta Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRnce, these frames or arguments could involve considerations of free speech, public safety, public litter, traffic problems, the community’s reputationDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
, or racism. A frame is deemed relatively stronger than another if it receives a significantly higher rating of effectiveness or applicability (for deHow Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRample, individuals likely perceive the public safety frame to be a stronger argument against a hate group’s rally than an alternative “con" frame that argues the rally should not be held because it will result In litter in the streets.If two opposing frames are of equal strength, their effects on an Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSR opinion tend to cancel out (Dnickman 2004, Snlderman and Theriault 2004, Chong and Druckman 2007, Jerit 2009). Perhaps more interesting is what happeDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
ns when frames are not evenly matched. A growing research literature shows that strong frames, when used In isolation, move opinions. More importantlyHow Elite Pdrtisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Foi Illation*James N. Druckman (Corresponding author) Payson s. Wild Professor of Political Sci Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRstrength on the issue of a publically funded casino and found that strong frames included the (positive) economic implications and (negative) social costs of building the casino. Pie-testing also demonstrated that weak frames included the (positive) entertainment value and (negative) moral implicati Druckman Peterson Slothuus APSRons surrounding the casino’s construction. When another group of respondents encountered a mix of these frames, only the strong frames affected opinioDruckman Peterson Slothuus APSR
n (e.g., a single exposure to the strong economic frame moved opinion by 41%) even in the face of multiple negative moral value frames (also see AaroeGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook