Partisan Stereotypes and Policy Attitudes

Journal of Communication

Volumn 62, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1102-1120

  Bergan, Daniel E ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; STEREO IMAGE;

EID: 84870918179     PISSN: 00219916     EISSN: 14602466     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01676.x     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Adams, G. D. (1997). Abortion: Evidence of issue evolution. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 718-737. doi: 10.2307/2111673>
2. Ansolabehere, S., & Iyengar, S. (1994). Riding the wave and claiming ownership over issues. Public Opinion Quarterly, 58, 335-357. doi: 10.1086/269431
3. Arcenaeux, K. (2007). Can partisan cues diminish democratic accountability? Political Behavior, 30(2), 139-160. doi: 10.1007/s11109-007-9044-7
4. Ashmore, R. D., & Del Boca, E. K. (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotypes and stereotyping. In D. L. Hamiton (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 1-35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Bartels, L. (2008). Unequal democracy: The political economy of the new gilded age. New York, NY: Sage.
6. Booth-Butterfield, S., & Welbourne, J. (2002). The elaboration likelihood model: Its impact on persuasion theory and research. In J. P. Dillard, & M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 155-173). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7. Brock, T. C. (1965). Communicator-recipient similarity and decision change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(6), 650-654. doi: 10.1037/h0022081
8. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stakes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
9. Carmines, E. G., & Stimson, J. A. (1980). The two faces of issue voting. The American Political Science Review, 74, 78-91. doi: 10.2307/1955648
10. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing in the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.752
11. Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3-39). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103-126. doi: 10.072805.103054
13. Cizmar, A. M., & Layman, G. C. (2009). How can we measure if something is easy? Evidence from two experiments on abortion attitudes. Working paper.
14. 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
15. Conover, P. J., & Feldman, S. (1981). The origins and meaning of liberal/conservative self-identifications. American Journal of Political Science, 25(4), 617-645. doi: 10.2307/2110756
16. Converse, P. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent. New York, NY: Free Press.
17. Converse, P. E., & Markus, G. B. (1979). Plus ca change: The new CPS election study panel. American Political Science Review, 73, 32-49. doi: 10.2307/1954729
18. Crawford, J. T., Jussim, L., Madon, S., Cain, T. R., & Stevens, S. T. (2011). The use of stereotypes and individuating information in political person perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 529-542. doi: 10.1177/0146167211399473
19. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1975). An attribution analysis of the effect of communicator characteristics on opinion change: the case of communicator attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 126-144. doi: 10.1037/h0076850
20. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. New York, NY: Harcort Brace & Company.
21. Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Chaiken, S. (1978). Causal inference about communicators and their effect on opinion change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 424-438. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.36.4.424
22. Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
23. Hayes, D. (2011). When gender and party collide: Stereotyping in candidate trait attribution. Politics & Gender, 7, 133-165. doi: 10.1017/S1743923X11000055
24. Hershey, M. R., & Beck, P. A. (2003). Party politics in America (10th ed.). New York: Longman.
25. Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (1993). Definition and assessment of accuracy in social stereotypes. Psychological Review, 100(1), 109-128. doi: 10.1017/S1743923X11000055
26. Kam, C. D. (2005). Who toes the party line? Cues, values, and individual differences. Political Behavior, 27(2), 163-182. doi: 10.1007/s11109-005-1764-y
27. Kelley, H. H. (1973). The process of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28, 107-128. doi: 10.1037/h0034225
28. Kelman, H. C. (1961). Processes of opinion change. Public Opinion Quarterly, 25, 57-78. doi: 10.1086/266996
29. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: The central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
30. Rahn, W. M. (1993). The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37(2), 472-496. doi: 10.2307/2111381
31. Sabato, L. J., & Larson, B. (2002). The party's just begun: Shaping political parties for America's future (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
32. Sears, D. O. (1965). Effects of the assassination of President Kennedy on political partisanship. In B. S. Greenberg, & E. B. Parker (Eds.), The Kennedy assassination and the American public: Social communication in crisis (pp. 305-326). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
33. Soss, J., & Schram, S. F. (2007). A public transformed? Welfare reform as policy feedback American Political Science Review, 101(1), 111-127. doi: 10.1017/S0003055407070049
34. Walster, E., Aronson, E., & Abrahams, D. (1966). On increasing the persuasiveness of a low prestige communicator. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 325-343. doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(66)90026-6
35. Wilson, E. J., & Sherrell, D. L. (1993). Source effects in communication and persuasion research: A meta-analysis of effect size. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21(2), 101-112. doi: 10.1007/BF02894421
36. Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.