The utility of staying on message: Competing partisan frames and public awareness of elite differences on political issues

Forum

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2007, Pages

  Wagner, Michael W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

Author keywords

Conflict extension; Framing; Menu dependence; Political parties; Public opinion

Indexed keywords

EID: 35948955570     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15408884     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2202/1540-8884.1197     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. Adams, Greg D. 1997. "Abortion: Evidence of an Issue Evolution." American Journal of Political Science. 41: 718-37.
2. "Americans Deserve Better Campaigns." Editorial, Chicago Sun-Times, November 4, 1996, pg. 31.
3. Baumgartner, Frank R. and Bryan D. Jones. 1994. "Agenda Dynamics and Policy Subsystems." The Journal of Politics, 53: 1044-1074.
4. Bobo, Lawrence and James R. Kluegel. 1993 "Opposition to Race-Targeting: Self-interest, Stratification Ideology, or Racial Attitudes?" American Sociological Review 58: 443-64.
5. Burke, Kenneth. 1945. A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
6. Carmines, Edward G. and James A. Stimson. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
7. Carmines, Edward G. and James Woods. 2002. "The Role of Party Activists in the Evolution of the Abortion Issue." Political Behavior, 24: 361-77.
8. Carsey, Thomas M., and Geoffrey C. Layman. 2006. "Changing Sides or Changing Minds? Party Identification and Policy Preferences in the American Electorate,"Amencan Journal of Political Science 50: 464-77.
9. Cohen, Bernard. 1963. The Press and Foreign Policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
10. Cook, Timothy E. 1998. Governing with the News: The News Media as a Political Institution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11. Downie Jr., Leonard and Robert G. Kaiser. 2002. The News About the News: American Journalism in Peril. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
12. Druckman, James N. 2004. "Political Preference Formation: Competition, Deliberation, and the (Ir)relevance of Framing Effects." American Political Science Review 98: 671-86.
13. Druckman, James N. 2001. "On the Limits of Framing Effects." The Journal of Politics 64: 1041-66.
14. Edelman, Murray J. 1988. Constructing the Political Spectacle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
15. Entman, Robert M. 1989. "How the Media Affect What People Think: An Information Processing Approach." Journal of Politics 51: 347-70
16. Gamson, W. & Modigliani, A. (1987). The Changing Culture or Affirmative Action. Research in Political Sociology, 3, pp. 137-77
17. Graber, Doris A. 2002. Mass Media and American Politics. Sixth Edition. Washington D.C.: CQ Press.
18. Hershey, Marjorie Randon. 1999. "If the Party's in Decline, Then What's Filling the News Columns?" in Nelson Polsby and Raymond Wolfinger, eds., On Parties. Berkeley: University of California.
19. Iyengar, Shanto. 1991. Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Iyengar, Shanto and Kinder, Donald R. 1987. News That Matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21. Jones, Bryan D. and Frank Baumgartner. 2005. The Politics of Attention. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
22. Kahneman, Daniel and Amos Tversky. 1982. "The Psychology of Preferences." Science 246: 135-42.
23. Kinder, Donald R. and Lynn M. Sanders. 1990. "Mimicking Political Debate with Survey Questions: The Case of White Opinion on Affirmative Action for Blacks." Social Cognition 8: 73-103.
24. Klapper, Joseph T. 1960. The Effects of Mass Communications. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
25. Layman, Geoffrey C. and Thomas M. Carsey. 2002. "Party Polarization and Conflict Extension in the American Electorate." American Journal of Political Science 46: 786-802.
26. McCombs, Maxwell E. and Donald L. Shaw. 1972. "The Agenda-Setting Function of the Mass Media." Public Opinion Quarterly, 36: 176-87.
27. McGuire, William. 1986. "The Myth of Massive Media Impact: Savagings and Salvagings." Public Communication and Behavior 1: 173-257.
28. Nelson, Thomas E. and Kinder, Donald R. 1996. "Issue Frames and Group-Centrism in American Public Opinion." Journal of Politics 58: 1055-78.
29. Nelson, Thomas E. & Zoe M. Oxley 1999. "Issue Framing Effects on Belief Importance and Opinion," The Journal of Politics 61: 1040-67.
30. Poole, Keith and Howard Rosenthal. 1997. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll-Call Voting. New York: Oxford University Press.
31. Riker, William. 1990. "Heresthetic and rhetoric in the spatial model." In James Enelow and Melvin Hinich, eds. Advances in the Spatial Theory of Voting. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Schattschneider, E.E. 1942. Party Government. New York: Rinehart.
33. Schattschneider, E.E. 1960. The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America. Hinsdale, IL: Dreyden.
34. Schudson, Michael. 2003. The Sociology of News. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
35. Shafer, Byron E. and William J.M. Claggett. 1995. The Two Majorities: The Issue Context of Modern American Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
36. Sniderman, Paul 2000. "Taking Sides: A Fixed Choice Theory of Political Reasoning." In Aurthur Lupia, Mathew D. McCubbins, and Samuel L. Popkin, eds. Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
37. Sniderman, Paul M. and John Bullock. 2004. "A Consistency Theory of Public Opinion and Political Choice: The Hypothesis of Menu Dependence" In Studies in Public Opinion, eds. Willem E. Saris and Paul M. Sniderman. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38. Sniderman, Paul M., and Sean M. Theriault. 2004. "The Structure of Political Argument and the Logic of Issue Framing." In Studies in Public Opinion, eds. Willem E. Saris and Paul M. Sniderman. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
39. Stimson, James A. 2004. Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. Weaver, David H. 1994. "Media Agenda Setting and Elections: Voter Involvement or Alienation?" Political Communication, 11: 347-56.
41. Weaver, David H. 1991. "Issue Salience and Public Opinion: Are There Consequences to Agenda-Setting?"" International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 3: 53-68.
42. Wright, Gerald C. and Brian F. Schaffner. 2002. "The Influence of Party: Evidence from the State Legislatures." American Political Science Review, 96: 367-79.
43. Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
44. Zaller, John R. 1996. "The Myth of Massive Media Impact Revived: New Support for a Discredited Idea. In Political Persuasion and Attitude Change, edited by Diana C. Mutz, Paul M. Sniderman, and Richard A. Brody. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.