|
|
|
|
Moderated Framing: The Role of Ambivalence and Affect in Issue Framing |
|
| Abstract | Word Stems | Keywords | Association | Citation | Get this Document | Similar Titles |
|
STOP! You can now view the document associated with this citation by clicking on the "View Document as HTML" link below. |
|
Click here to view the document
|
Abstract:
|
Given the ubiquity of framing effects found in the social sciences, researchers have now begun examining the contextual and individual-level factors that influence when framing effects occur. Drawing on previous literature concerning the role that source cues play in political information processing, we examine whether an identity match (or mismatch) between the source of a framed message and respondent moderates framing effects. In Experiment 1 (n=199), we employ a 2 (Message Source: liberal/ conservative speaker) x 2 (Frame: free speech/ public order) x 2 (Participant Ideology: liberal/ conservative) experiment and expect that when the identity of the source matches that of the participant, framing effects should be heightened (relative to participants in a mismatch condition). We also examine whether constructs such as the Need for Cognition, the Need to Evaluate, or ideological ambivalence will influence this “matching effect.” In Experiment 2 (n=119), we examine whether source cues resonate with individuals exposed to competing frames. Ultimately, we find strong evidence for the moderating role of source cues on framing effects, and we suggest that identity matching is an important factor to consider in future framing research. |
Most Common Document Word Stems:
frame (217), sourc (136), ideolog (110), effect (99), public (97), conserv (94), polit (92), liber (90), speech (89), 1 (88), 2 (86), order (77), import (69), free (64), particip (62), match (61), valu (58), individu (54), posit (53), cue (51), x (51), |
|
 | Convention | | Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! |  | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. |  | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! |  | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! |  | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. |  | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! |  | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
Association:
Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
|
Citation:
|
MLA Citation:
| Weber, Chris. "Moderated Framing: The Role of Ambivalence and Affect in Issue Framing" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott, Loews Philadelphia, and the Pennsylvania Convention Center, Philadelphia, PA, Aug 31, 2006 <Not Available>. 2009-05-24 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p150830_index.html> |
APA Citation:
| Weber, C. , 2006-08-31 "Moderated Framing: The Role of Ambivalence and Affect in Issue Framing" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott, Loews Philadelphia, and the Pennsylvania Convention Center, Philadelphia, PA Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2009-05-24 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p150830_index.html |
Publication Type: Proceeding Abstract: Given the ubiquity of framing effects found in the social sciences, researchers have now begun examining the contextual and individual-level factors that influence when framing effects occur. Drawing on previous literature concerning the role that source cues play in political information processing, we examine whether an identity match (or mismatch) between the source of a framed message and respondent moderates framing effects. In Experiment 1 (n=199), we employ a 2 (Message Source: liberal/ conservative speaker) x 2 (Frame: free speech/ public order) x 2 (Participant Ideology: liberal/ conservative) experiment and expect that when the identity of the source matches that of the participant, framing effects should be heightened (relative to participants in a mismatch condition). We also examine whether constructs such as the Need for Cognition, the Need to Evaluate, or ideological ambivalence will influence this “matching effect.” In Experiment 2 (n=119), we examine whether source cues resonate with individuals exposed to competing frames. Ultimately, we find strong evidence for the moderating role of source cues on framing effects, and we suggest that identity matching is an important factor to consider in future framing research. |
Get this Document:
Find this citation or document at one or all of these locations below. The links below may have the citation or the entire document for free or you may purchase access to the document. Clicking on these links will change the site you're on and empty your shopping cart.
| Document Type: |
application/pdf |
| Page count: |
39 |
| Word count: |
12561 |
| Text sample: |
| Moderated Framing: Source Cues Individual Differences & Counterframing Todd K. Hartman †Stony Brook University (SUNY) Christopher R. Weber †Stony Brook University (SUNY) Given the ubiquity of framing effects found in the social sciences second-generation researchers have now begun examining the contextual and individual-level factors that influence when framing effects occur. Drawing on previous literature concerning the role that source cues play in political information processing we examine whether an identity match (or mismatch) between the source of |
| should have as much right to buy advertising space as a group that favors world peace. If the majority votes in a referendum to ban the public expression of certain opinions should the majority opinion be followed? 38 No because free speech is a more fundamental right than majority rule. Yes because no group has a greater right than the majority to decide which opinions can or cannot be expressed. *Note: All of these questions appeared after the main |
Similar Titles:
When My Favorite Candidate Opposes My Favorite Position on an Issue: The Effect of Incongruent Messages on Attitude Change Toward the Issue and Toward the Source
Public Attitudes About Political Participation on the Internet: Do People Perceive Political Activities Performed Online and Offline to be Equally Effective?
The salience of unusual issue preferences: the effect of relative policy positions on issue importance for parties in 23 countries
|
|