Who said what? The effects of source cues in issue frames

Political Behavior

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 537-558

  Hartman, Todd K ^a   Weber, Christopher R ^b  

^a APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Attitude change; Competitive framing; Framing; Persuasion; Source cues

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956348779     PISSN: 01909320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11109-009-9088-y     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
2. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.
3. Bond, R., & Smith, P. B. (1996). Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch's line judgment task. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 111-137. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.111.
4. Brambor, T., Clark, W. R., & Golder, M. (2006). Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14, 63-82.
5. Brewer, P. R. (2001). Value words and lizard brains: Do citizens deliberate about appeals to their core values? Political Psychology, 22, 45-64. doi:10.1111/0162-895X.00225.
6. Brewer, P. R. (2003). The shifting foundations of public opinion about Gay Rights. The Journal of Politics, 65, 1208-1220. doi:10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00133.
7. Brewer, P. R., & Gross, K. (2005). Values, framing, and citizens' thoughts about policy issues: Effects on content and quantity. Political Psychology, 26, 929-948. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00451.x.
8. Chong, D. (1993). How people think, reason, and feel about rights and liberties. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 867-899. doi:10.2307/2111577.
9. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007a). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103-126. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054.
10. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007b). Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. The American Political Science Review, 101, 637-655. doi:10.1017/S0003055407070554.
11. Cialdini, R. (1984). Influence: Science and practice. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
12. Cohen, G. L. (2003). Party over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 808-822. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.808.
13. Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1981). The origins and meaning of liberal/conservative self-identifications. American Journal of Political Science, 25, 617-645. doi:10.2307/2110756.
14. Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1984). Group identification, values, and the nature of political beliefs. American Politics Research, 12, 151-175.
15. Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent. New York: Free Press.
16. Druckman, J. N. (2001a). On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? The Journal of Politics, 63, 1041-1066. doi:10.1111/0022-3816.00100.
17. Druckman, J. N. (2001b). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23, 225-256. doi:10.1023/A:1015006907312.
18. Druckman, J. N. (2004). Political preference formation: Competition, deliberation, and the (ir)relevance of framing effects. The American Political Science Review, 98, 671-686. doi:10.1017/S000 3055404041413.
19. Druckman, J. N., & Nelson, K. R. (2003). Framing and deliberation: How citizens' conversations limit elite influence. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 729-745. doi:10.1111/1540-5907.00051.
20. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
21. Feldman, S., & Weber, C. R. (2008, July). Understanding social conservatism: Values, threats, and framing issue preferences. Paper Presented at the annual meeting of the International Society of Political Psychology.
22. French, J. R. R., Jr. (1956). A formal theory of social power. Psychological Review, 63, 181-194. doi: 10.1037/h0046123.
23. French, J. R. R., Jr., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150-167). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
24. Gamson, W. A. (1992). Talking politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
25. Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1987). The changing culture of affirmative action. Research in Political Sociology, 3, 137-177.
26. Gerber, A., & Green, D. P. (1998). Rational learning and partisan attitudes. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 794-818.
27. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2004). Does identity or economic rationality drive public opinion on European integration. PS: Political Science and Politics, 37, 415-420.
28. Huddy, L. (2001). From social to political identity: A critical examination of social identity theory. Political Psychology, 22, 127-156. doi:10.1111/0162-895X.00230.
29. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible?: How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). New that matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
31. Jaccard, J. (2001). Interaction effects in logistic regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
32. Jaccard, J., & Turrisi, R. (2003). Interaction effects in multiple regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
33. Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three processes of attitude change. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 51-60. doi:10.1177/002200275800200106.
34. Kelman, H. C. (1961). Processes of opinion change. Public Opinion Quarterly, 25, 57-78. doi:10.1086/ 266996.
35. Kinder, D. R., & Sanders, L. M. (1996). Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36. Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1944). The people's choice; how the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New York: Duell.
37. McClosky, H., & Zaller, J. (1984). The American ethos: Public attitudes toward capitalism and democracy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
38. McGuire, W. J. (1969). The nature of attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 136-314). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
39. Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view. New York: Harper & Row.
40. Mondak, J. J. (1993). Source cues and policy approval: The cognitive dynamics of public support for the Reagan agenda. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 186-212.
41. Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A., & Oxley, Z. M. (1997). Media framing effects of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. The American Political Science Review, 91, 567-583. doi:10.2307/ 2952075.
42. Nelson, T. E., & Garst, J. (2005). Value-based political messages and persuasion: Relationships among speaker, recipient, and evoked values. Political Psychology, 26, 489-515. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221. 2005.00428.x.
43. Nelson, T. E., & Kinder, D. R. (1996). Issue frames and group-centrism in American public opinion. The Journal of Politics, 58, 1055-1078. doi:10.2307/2960149.
44. Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1981). Questions and answers in attitude surveys: Experiments on question form, wording, and context. New York: Academic Press.
45. Shamir, M., & Arian, A. (1999). Collective identity and electoral competition in Israel. The American Political Science Review, 93, 265-277. doi:10.2307/2585395.
46. Slothuus, R. (2008). More than weighting cognitive importance: A dual process model of issue framing effects. Political Psychology, 29, 1-28.
47. Sniderman, P. M., & Theriault, S. M. (2004). The structure of political argument and the logic of issue framing. In W. Saris & P. Sniderman (Eds.), Studies in public opinion: Attitudes, nonattitudes, measurement error, and change. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
48. Tate, K. (2003). Black faces in the mirror: African Americans and their representatives in the US Congress. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
49. Tomz, M., & Sniderman, P. M. (n.d.). Brand names and the organization of mass belief systems. Unpublished manuscript.
50. Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
51. Zaller, J. R., & Feldman, S. (1992). A simple theory of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 579-616. doi:10.2307/2111583.
52. Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer effect: Understanding how good people turn evil. New York: Random House.