Suchergebnisse

When political actors debate the merits of a public policy, they often focus on the consequences of a bill or legislative proposal, with supporters and opponents making stark but contradictory predictions about the future. Building upon the framing literature, I examine how rhetoric about a policy's consequences influences public opinion. I show that predictive appeals work largely by altering people's beliefs about the impact of a policy. Following in the tradition of recent framing research, this article also examines how opinions are influenced when people are exposed to opposing predictions. The analysis focuses on two strategies that are common in real‐world debates—the direct rebuttal (in which an initial appeal is challenged by a statement making the opposite prediction) and the alternate frame (which counters an initial appeal by shifting the focus to some other consequence). There are important differences in the effectiveness of these two strategies—a finding that has implications for the study of competitive framing and the policymaking process more generally.

Conventional wisdom and scholarly research indicate that to win a policy debate political actors should frame the issue strategically-that is, selectively highlight considerations that mobilize public opinion behind their policy position. Engaging the opponent in a dialogue (i.e., focusing on the same considerations) is portrayed as a suboptimal strategy because political actors forfeit the ability to structure the debate. Using over 40 public opinion polls and a detailed content analysis of news stories, I examine the use of framing and engagement strategies during the 1993-94 debate over health care reform. The analysis shows that engagement was more effective at increasing support for reform than framing. This study is the first to document the role of engagement in a policy debate, and it extends work showing that this strategy is more common in election campaigns than scholars once suspected. Adapted from the source document.

This study examines the extent & consequences of press independence in the realm of problem definition. Beginning with an experiment, the analysis shows that many of the words & phrases used in the 1998 to 1999 Social Security reform debate were misleading in the sense that they caused citizens to draw incorrect inferences about the financial problems facing Social Security. Next, the study compares the prevalence of these same expressions in the mass media & in transcripts of political speeches & press releases. Contrary to theories of indexing, reporters & journalists exhibited considerable independence in how they described Social Security's financial problems. Ironically, however, this meant that media accounts had more misleading rhetoric than the actual statements of government officials. Tables, Figures, References. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright 2006 by the President and the Fellows of Harvard College.]

This study examines the extent and consequences of press independence in the realm of problem definition. Beginning with an experiment, the analysis shows that many of the words and phrases used in the 1998 to 1999 Social Security reform debate were misleading in the sense that they caused citizens to draw incorrect inferences about the financial problems facing Social Security. Next, the study compares the prevalence of these same expressions in the mass media and in transcripts of political speeches and press releases. Contrary to theories of indexing, reporters and journalists exhibited considerable independence in how they described Social Security's financial problems. Ironically, however, this meant that media accounts had more misleading rhetoric than the actual statements of government officials.

Despite the tradition of studying campaign effects, we know little about the rhetorical strategies of candidates. This study speculates about the types of appeals that incumbents and challengers find most effective and that are, as a result, most likely to dominate an election campaign. Candidates have an incentive to use arguments that evoke emotions such as fear, anxiety, and anger. Emotional appeals allow candidates to emphasize consensual values, which makes it easier to mobilize their party's base while simultaneously attracting the support of the uncommitted. The use of emotional appeals is also consistent with the media's preference for drama and excitement in news reporting. Thus, emotional appeals will be more enduring than other types of appeals, and hence more likely to dominate the rhetorical landscape. A content analysis of newspaper coverage of the 1988 Canadian federal election campaign provides suggestive evidence in favor of this view.

Abstract
Social scientists employ survey methods to explore the contours of human behavior. Today there are more opportunities to collect survey data than at any time in recent history. Yet sample quality varies dramatically due in part to the availability of nonprobability samples (NPSs) from commercial survey organizations. While these kinds of surveys have advantages in terms of cost and accessibility, the proprietary nature of the data can be problematic. In this synthesis, we describe situations in which researchers typically employ NPSs and consider whether these data are fit for purpose. Next, we discuss use cases that are not widespread but may be appropriate for these data. We conclude that potential utility of NPSs will remain out of reach unless scholars confront the tension between the operation of online survey organizations and the goals of transparent research.