Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 22

Chapter 5: Hearing the Other Side and Standing Firm Arceneaux and Johnson PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 110 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Chapter 5: Hearing the Other Side and Standing Firm Arceneaux and Johnson. Erinn Lauterbach Feb. 28, 2014. Main point: What role could partisan news play in hardening the attitudes of viewers against opposing arguments? Example: Birthers in 2008

Download Presentation

Chapter 5: Hearing the Other Side and Standing Firm Arceneaux and Johnson

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

Chapter 5: Hearing the Other Side and Standing FirmArceneaux and Johnson

ErinnLauterbach

Feb. 28, 2014


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

  • Main point: What role could partisan news play in hardening the attitudes of viewers against opposing arguments?

    • Example: Birthers in 2008

  • These shows both bolster pre-existing attitudes and help hone viewer defenses to arguments from the other side.

  • Partisan show hosts (O’Reilly & Olbermann)

    • Promote their own views

    • Tear down others with whom they disagree

  • These kinds of communications can wall off like-minded viewers from hearing the other side.


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

  • One theory of political communication is that if people are exposed to opposing arguments (both proattitudinal and counterattitudinal) they will have more moderate views and reasonable opinions.

    • Authors use a hypothetical counterfactual

  • Questions: will hearing the other side moderate views (increase openness) or will exposure to countervailing views harden partisans against those arguments?


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

  • Again the A & J are borrowing from the psychology literature

    • Exposure to proattitudinal information increases peoples political efficacy and bolsters their initial opinions

      • Primes group identity

    • If counterattitudinal information signals an out-group threat it would motivate people to defend their groups position

      • This desire for in-group cohesion can mediate even reasonable counter arguments

      • Examples? Climate change?


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

  • Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) (Petty and Cacioppo)

    • Helps the authors incorporate how the audience might differ in their receptivity to pro and counterattitudinal arguments.

    • “some individuals have a strong need to intellectually process, or elaborate, arguments while others are less inclined to do so”

      • Need for cognition

  • Individuals high in need for cognition are better at and enjoy dissecting arguments as well as generating their own counter arguments.


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

  • People who have weak attitudes and high need for cognition tend to moderate their opinions when exposed to both side.

  • People with strong attitudes and high need for cognition tend to counterargue when exposed to counterattitudes.

    • Rehearse counterarguments

    • Distrust the source

    • Resist persuasion


Experiments

Experiments

  • Selective Exposure Experiments (SEEs) 09 & 11

    • Randomly assigned to 3 groups:

      • Proattitudinal show

      • Counterattitudinal show

      • Entertainment show (later to became channel changing group)

    • Focus on tax policy (Warren Buffet)

    • Asked to watch the news selection and rate the counterattitudinal persuasiveness on a 9 point scale

    • ELM measure was given in a pre-test


Results

Results

  • If a respondent claims the counterattitudinal argument was not persuasive (weak) then there is evidence that watching partisan news hardens people’s opinions making them less open to opposing viewpoints.

    • This is what they found. When compared to the control group, those in the counterattitudinal group rated the given argument as weak.


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

ELM?

  • Low need for cognition participants:

    • In both pro and counterattitudinal groups did not evaluate arguments differently from the control group.

  • High need for cognition participants:

    • The partisan arguments caused participants to be more resistant to opposing arguments.


Entertainment folks

Entertainment Folks?

  • News seekers have a desire to maintain their opinions and should be capable of resisting counterattitudinal arguments.

  • Entertainment seekers however may benefit from exposure to both pro and counterattitudinal news.

    • Have less defense against counter arguments.

  • ELM?

    • May lack the desire to connect arguments made in the news to any pre-existing opinions.


Experiment

Experiment

  • Fall 2011 Participant Preference Experiment (PPE)

    • Shorter version of the fall 2011 SEE

  • Before being randomly assigned to a group, participants were asked what they preferred to watch.

  • ELM was given in the post-test


Results1

Results

  • Partisan news shows have a larger affect on entertainment seekers

    • Specifically, proattitudinal group entertainment seekers substantially increase their resistance to counter arguments.

  • ELM:

    • Both low and high need for cognition entertainment seekers are more likely to resist opposing arguments after watching proattitudinal news.

    • It does little to harden attitudes further though


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

  • Takeaway:

    • Partisan news has the potential to have massive effects, but these are likely unrealized because the most susceptible tune out opinionated cable news programs.


Chapter 6 the salience and framing of issues

Chapter 6: The Salience and Framing of Issues


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

  • Agenda Setting:

    • By reporting on some issues at the expense of others, news media influences what issues the mass public sees as most important

    • Salience

  • Primes:

    • News media can construct shared perceptions about a collective experience and thus influence peoples political judgments

    • Helps people decide what information to rely on when constructing attitudes

  • Frames:

    • How a problem is defined can affect what people think about an issue

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jfb9f7yFYgw


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

  • Question: Does the rise of partisan media alter agenda setting?

  • Possible theories:

    • Partisan media may focus on different things.

    • Stroud (2001) looked at the 2004 Presidential election. He found that the agenda on each side was similar, but the way they framed the issues was different.

  • Implications: audiences of one news outlet will have a different conversation from that of the audience of other news outlets.

  • Viewer watching a counterattitudinal show may accept the agenda, but not the partisan definition given with the issue.

    • A & J find that both pro- and counterattitudinal shows can shape perceptions of issue salience.


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

  • O’Reilly devoted much of his time to talking about the budget and economy

  • Olbermann did not discuss the economy at all

    • Olbermann viewers were 14% less likely than O’Reilly to mention the economy as the most important problem.

    • Olbermann successfully shifted the focus of his viewers away from the economy.


Experiment1

Experiment

  • Winter 2011 SEE

    • Focus on the ACA/Obamacare

    • Posttest includes and overall evaluation of the president

    • The liberal and conservative shows presented the ACA in completely different ways


Findings

Findings

  • Control Group

    • There was basically no relationship between health care and their performance evaluation of the president

  • Counterattitudinal Group

    • Participants were more likely to bring health-care specific and evaluations of Obama in line with each other

  • Partisan (especially counterattitudinal) news appear to prime the issues relevant to their evaluations of the president. However, counterattitudinal shows magnify partisanship in issue-specific presidential evaluations.


Chapter 5 hearing the other side and standing firm arceneaux and johnson

  • Agenda Setting:

    • Most likely to happen among entertainment seeking groups assigned to proattitudinal shows.

    • News seekers in the counterattitudinal group appear to resist agenda setting (they were 10 percentage points less likely to mention the environment as a problem)

  • Issue Framing

    • Partisan media not only wants to set the agenda but also to affect how viewers define the issue.

  • Priming

    • Because counterattitudinal shows attack people’s core predispositions and partisan identities, a defensive priming effect may be more robus than simple agenda-setting effects are.


Experiment2

Experiment

  • Fall 2011 PPE

    • Participants were presented with six problem definitions of federal tax policy and asked to rank how important each was.

      • Definitions taken from the news shows, 3 liberal & 3 conservative

    • Participants physically drag each definition to the spot where they thought it belonged.


Findings1

Findings:

  • News Seekers

    • Were highly likely to choose attitude-consistent problem definitions without the aid of partisan news

    • Definitions were unaffected by pro or counterattitudinal shows.

  • Entertainment Seekers

    • Proattitudinal shows appeared to facilitate an attitude-consistent problem definition (only slighly)

    • Counterattitudinal shows lowered the probability that they chose an attitude-consistent definition as their first choice.

      • These shows may successfully alter problem defintions


  • Login