Toll Booths on the Information Superhighway? Policy Metaphors in the Case of Net Neutrality

Political Communication

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 278-298

  Hartman, Todd K ^a  

^a APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

experiment; metaphor; net neutrality; persuasion; policy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864703591     PISSN: 10584609     EISSN: 10917675     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2012.694983     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Allbritton, D. W. 1995. When metaphors function as schemas: Some cognitive effects of conceptual metaphors. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10: 33-46.
2. Baron, R. M. and 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.
3. Belt, T. L. 2003. Metaphor & political persuasion, Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Southern California.
4. Berinsky, A. J. and Kinder, D. R. 2006. Making sense of issues through media frames: Understanding the Kosovo crisis. Journal of Politics, 68: 640-656.
5. Blanchette, I. and Dunbar, K. 2001. Analogy use in naturalistic settings: The influence of audience, emotion, and goals. Memory & Cognition, 29: 730-735.
6. Bosman, J. 1987. Persuasive effects of political metaphors. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 2: 97-113.
7. Bosman, J. and Hagendoorn, L. 1991. Effects of literal and metaphorical persuasive messages. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 6: 271-292.
8. Bowers, J. W. and Osborn, M. M. 1966. Attitudinal effects of selected types of concluding metaphors in persuasive speeches. Speech Monographs, 33: 147-155.
9. Brewer, P. R. 2002. Framing, value words, and citizens' explanations of their issue opinions. Political Communication, 19: 303-316.
10. Carmines, E. G. and Stimson, J. A. 1980. The two faces of issue voting. American Political Science Review, 74: 78-91.
11. Cassese, E. C., Huddy, L., Hartman, T. K., Mason, L. and Weber, C. R. Socially-Mediated Internet Surveys (SMIS): Obtaining motivated participants and rare samples for political research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association. April.
12. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A. and Eagly, A. H. 1989. "Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion context". In Unintended thought, Edited by: Uleman, J. S. and Bargh, J. A. 212-252. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
13. Chong, D. and Druckman, J. N. 2007a. Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10: 103-126.
14. Chong, D. and Druckman, J. N. 2007b. A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57: 99-118.
15. Delli Carpini, M. X. and Keeter, S. 1996. What Americans know about politics and why it matters, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
16. Dunbar, K. 2001. "The analogical paradox: Why analogy is so easy in naturalistic settings, yet so difficult in the psychological laboratory". In The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science, Edited by: Gentner, D., Holyoak, K. J. and Kokinov, B. N. 313-334. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
17. Eagly, A. H. and Chaiken, S. 1993. The psychology of attitudes, Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
18. Fainsilber, L. and Ortony, A. 1987. Metaphorical uses of language in the expression of emotions. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 2: 239-250.
19. Fiske, S. T. and Taylor, S. E. 1991. Social cognition, 2nd, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
20. Gamson, W. A. and Modigliani, A. 1987. "The changing culture of affirmative action". In Research in political sociology, Edited by: Braumgart, R. 137-177. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
21. Gentner, D. 1982. "Are scientific analogies metaphors?". In Metaphor: Problems and perspectives, Edited by: Miall, D. S. 106-132. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.
22. Gentner, D. 1983. Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7: 155-170.
23. Gentner, D. and Markman, A. B. 1997. Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52: 45-56.
24. Gibbs, R. W. J. 1994. The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
25. Gibbs, R. W. J. 1996. Why many concepts are metaphorical. Cognition, 61: 309-319.
26. Gibbs, R. W. J. 2002. Identifying and appreciating poetic metaphor. Journal of Literary Semantics, 31: 101-112.
27. Jaccard, J. and Turrisi, R. 2003. Interaction effects in multiple regression, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28. Johnson, J. T. and Taylor, S. E. 1981. The effect of metaphor on political attitudes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 2: 305-316.
29. Kam, C. D. 2005. Who toes the party line? Cues, values, and individual differences. Political Behavior, 27: 163-182.
30. Kinder, D. R. and Sanders, L. M. 1996. Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
31. Lakoff, G. 1996. Moral politics: What conservatives know that liberals don't, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
32. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors we live by, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
33. Lau, R. R. and Redlawsk, D. P. 2001. Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 45: 951-971.
34. Lau, R. R. and Schlesinger, M. 2005. Policy frames, metaphorical reasoning, and support for public policies. Political Psychology, 26: 77-114.
35. Lavine, H., Burgess, D., Snyder, M., Transue, J., Sullivan, J. L., Haney, B. and Wagner, S. H. 1999. Threat, authoritarianism, and voting: An investigation of personality and persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25: 337-347.
36. Lavine, H. and Snyder, M. 1996. Cognitive processing and the functional matching effect in persuasion: The mediating role of subjective perceptions of message quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32: 580-604.
37. Lupia, A. 1994. Shortcuts versus encyclopedias: Information and voting behavior in California insurance reform elections. American Political Science Review, 88: 63-76.
38. Marcus, G. E. 2000. Emotions in politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 3: 221-250.
39. Marcus, G. E., Neuman, W. R. and MacKuen, M. 2000. Affective intelligence and political judgment, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
40. McGuire, W. J. 1968. "Personality and attitude change: An information-processing theory". In Psychological foundations of attitudes, Edited by: Greenwald, A. G., Brock, T. C. and Ostrom, T. M. 171-196. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
41. McGuire, W. J. 1985. "Attitudes and attitude change". In The handbook of social psychology, 3rd, Edited by: Gardner, L. and Aronson, E. Vol. 2, 233-346. New York, NY: Random House.
42. Miller, G. A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63: 81-97.
43. Mio, J. S. and Lovrich, N. P. 1998. Men of zeal: Memory for metaphors in the Iran-contra hearings. Metaphor and Symbol, 13: 49-68.
44. Mio, J. S., Thompson, S. C. and Givens, G. H. 1993. The commons dilemma as metaphor: Memory, influence, and implications for environmental conservation. Metaphor and Symbol, 8: 23-42.
45. Mondak, 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.
46. Moyers, B. (2011). The net at risk: Net neutrality. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/moyersonamerica/net/neutrality.html (http://www.pbs.org/moyers/moyersonamerica/net/neutrality.html)
47. Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A. and Oxley, Z. M. 1997. Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91: 567-583.
48. Orwell, G. 1947. Politics and the English language: An essay, New York, NY: Herbert W. Simpson.
49. Ottati, V., Rhoads, S. and Graesser, A. C. 1999. The effect of metaphor on processing style in a persuasion task: A motivational resonance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77: 688-697.
50. Peha, J. M., Lehr, W. H. and Wilkie, S. 2007. The state of the debate on network neutrality. International Journal of Communication, 1: 709-716.
51. Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T. 1981. Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches, Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown.
52. Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T. 1986. Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change, New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
53. Petty, R. E. and Wegener, D. T. 1999. "The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies". In Dual process theories in social psychology, Edited by: Chaiken, S. and Trope, Y. 41-72. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
54. Pinker, S. 1997. How the mind works, New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
55. Pinker, S. 2007. The stuff of thought: Language as a window into human nature, New York, NY: Penguin Group.
56. Popkin, S. L. 1991. The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
57. Rahn, W. M. 1993. The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37: 472-496.
58. Read, S. J., Cesa, I. L., Jones, D. K. and Collins, N. L. 1990. When is the federal budget like a baby? Metaphor in political rhetoric. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 5: 125-149.
59. Robins, S. and Mayer, R. E. 2000. The metaphor framing effect: Metaphorical reasoning about text-based dilemmas. Discourse Processes, 30: 57-86.
60. Schlesinger, M. and Lau, R. R. 2000. The meaning and measure of policy metaphors. American Political Science Review, 94: 611-626.
61. Schon, D. A. 1979. "Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy". In Metaphor and thought, Edited by: Ortony, A. 254-283. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
62. Simon, H. A. 1974. How big is a chunk?. Science, 183: 482-488.
63. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E. and MacGregor, D. G. 2007. The affect heuristic. European Journal of Operational Research, 177: 1333-1352.
64. Sniderman, P. M. 1993. "The new look in public opinion research". In Political science: The state of the discipline, II, Edited by: Finifter, A. W. 219-245. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.
65. Sniderman, P. M., Brody, R. A. and Tetlock, P. E. 1991. Reasoning and choice: Explorations in political psychology, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
66. Sopory, P. and Dillard, J. P. 2002. The persuasive effects of metaphor: A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 28: 382-419.
67. Thagard, P. and Shelley, C. 2001. "Emotional analogies and analogical inference". In The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science, Edited by: Gentner, D., Holyoak, K. J. and Kokinov, B. N. 335-362. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
68. Weston, D. 2007. The political brain: The role of emotion in deciding the fate of the nation, New York, NY: Public Affairs.