Framing, value words, and citizens' explanations of their issue opinions

Political Communication

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 303-316

  Brewer, Paul R ^a  

^a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Framing; Gay rights; Media effects; Public opinion; Values

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036350488     PISSN: 10584609     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01957470290055510     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Alvarez, R. M., & Brehm, J. (1995). American ambivalence towards abortion policy: Development of a heteroskedastic probit model of competing values. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 1055-1082.
2. Brewer, P. R. (1999). Values, public debate, and policy opinions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
3. Brewer, P. R. (2001). Value words and lizard brains: Do citizens deliberate about appeals to their core values? Political Psychology, 22, 45-64.
4. Button, J. W., Rienzo, B. A., & Wald, K. D. (1997). Private lives, public conflicts: Battles over gay rights in American communities. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
5. Carmines, E. G., & Stimson, J. A. (1980). The two faces of issue voting. American Political Science Review, 74, 78-91.
6. Dobson, J., & Bauer, G. L. (1990). Children at risk: The battle for the hearts and minds of our kids. Dallas, TX: Word Publishing.
7. Druckman, J. M. (2001). On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? Journal of Politics, 63, 1041-1066.
8. Evans v. Romer, 882 P. 2d 1335 (Colo. 1994).
9. Feldman, S. (1988). Structure and consistency in public opinion: The role of core beliefs and values. American Journal of Political Science, 32, 416-440.
10. Feldman, S., & Zaller, J. (1992). The political culture of ambivalence: Ideological responses to the welfare state. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 268-307.
11. Gallagher, J., & Bull, C. (1996). Perfect enemies: The religious right, the gay movement, and the politics of the 1990's. New York: Crown Publishers.
12. Gamson, W. A. (1992). Talking politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Gamson, W. A., & Lasch, K. E. (1983). The political culture of social welfare policy. In S. E. Spiro & E. Yuchtman-Yaar (Eds.), Evaluating the welfare state: Social and political perspectives (pp. 397-415). New York: Academic Press.
14. Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1987). The changing culture of affirmative action. In R. D. Braungart (Ed.), Research in political sociology (Vol. 3, pp. 137-177). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
15. Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95, 1-37.
16. Hochschild, J. (1981). What's fair? American beliefs about distributive justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17. Hurwitz, J., & Peffley, M. (1987). How are foreign policy attitudes structured? A hierarchical model. American Political Science Review, 81, 1099-1120.
18. Kellstedt, P. M. (2000). Media framing and the dynamics of racial policy preferences. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 245-260.
19. Kinder, D. R., & Sanders, L. M. (1996). Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Koch, J. W. (1998). Political rhetoric and political persuasion: The changing structure of citizens' preferences on health insurance during policy debates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 209-229.
21. Kůhberger, A. (1998). The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 23-55.
22. McClosky, H., & Zaller, J. (1984). The American ethos: Public attitudes toward capitalism and democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. McGuire, W. (1969). The nature of attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (2nd ed., pp. 136-314). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
24. Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A., & Oxley, Z. M. (1997). Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91, 567-583.
25. Nelson, T. E., & Oxley, Z. M. (1999). Issue framing effects on belief importance and opinion. Journal of Politics, 61, 1040-1067.
26. Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M., & Clawson, R. A. (1997). Toward a psychology of framing effects. Political Behavior, 19, 221-246.
27. Rimmerman, C. A., Wald, K. D., & Wilcox, C. (2000). The politics of gay rights. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28. Robertson, P. (1993). The turning tide. Dallas, TX: Word Publishing.
29. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
30. Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996).
31. Rosenstone, S. J., Kinder, D. R., & Miller, W. E. (1997). American National Election Study, 1996: Pre- and post-election survey (Study 6896) [computer file]. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies, and Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.
32. Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on psychology's view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 515-530.
33. Sullivan, A. (1995). Virtually normal: An argument about homosexuality. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
34. Tetlock, P. E. (1986). A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 819-827.
35. Vaid, U. (1995). Virtual equality: The mainstreaming of gay and lesbian liberation. New York: Anchor Books, Doubleday.
36. Wald, K. D., Button, J. W., & Rienzo, B. A. (1996). The politics of gay rights in American communities: Explaining antidiscrimination ordinances and policies. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 1152-1178.
37. Zaller, J. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.