Projections of Power: Framing News, Public Opinion, and U.S. Foreign Policy

The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion: Preface

textEstablishing predictive validity of measures is a major concern in marketing research. This paper investigates the conditions favoring the use of single items versus multi-item scales in terms of predictive validity. A series of complementary studies reveals that the predictive validity of single items varies considerably across different (concrete) constructs and stimuli objects. In an attempt to explain the observed instability, a comprehensive simulation study is conducted aimed at identifying the influence of different factors on the predictive validity of single versus multi-item measures. These include the average inter-item correlations in the predictor and criterion constructs, the number of items measuring these constructs, as well as the correlation patterns of multiple and single items between the predictor and criterion constructs. The simulation results show that, under most conditions typically encountered in practical applications, multi-item scales clearly outperform single items in terms of predictive validity. Only under very specific conditions do single items perform equally well as multi-item scales. Therefore, the use of single-item measures in empirical research should be approached with caution, and the use of such measures should be limited to special circumstances.

Guidelines for choosing between multi-item and single-item scales for construct measurement: A predictive validity perspective

“There is a sequence to social science research: a dramatic event happens – say, September 11 – then a wave studies follows [...]. But then there is a predicament: we cannot tell how things have changed because we do not know how they were: and not knowing what has changed and what has not, we are not able to determine why what has happened, happened” (p. xi), argue Sniderman and Hagendoorn in their thorough study on multiculturalism, conflicts over identity and values in the Netherlands pre 9–11. Indeed in many studies 9/11 is seen as a landmark event, regarding the relations between Muslims and non-Muslims, but very often prior frictions and internal conflicts are not taken into account. Showing how prejudice had the strongest impact on support for equality (p.128) towards Muslims and making clear this sentiment was already ubiquitous before 9/11 across the political spectrum, Sniderman and Hagendoorn fill an important gap. One of the most valuable aspects of their meticulous study is the part about fear of Dutch non-Muslims related to intolerance of minorities. This we often hear, but the authors go deeper by arguing that we should find out who feels threatened and by what? Two perceived threats matter: to economic self-interest and to cultural identity. The latter more likely induces intolerant reactions than the former. One of the striking results is that even those who do not agree that Dutch culture is threatened react as strongly to problems of cultural integration as those who are in agreement (p. 99). According to Sniderman and Hagendoorn the best predictor of prejudice towards minorities is the importance people attach to the value of conformity (p. 114). They make clear how people tend to yield to Cont Islam (2008) 2:151–154 DOI 10.1007/s11562-008-0039-x

When ways of life collide: Multiculturalism and its discontents in the Netherlands

The dominant approach to the study of international political economy assumes that the policy preferences of individuals and groups reflect economic self-interest. Recent research has called this assumption into question by suggesting that voters do not have economically self-interested preferences about trade policy. We investigate one potential explanation for this puzzling finding: economic ignorance. We show that most voters do not understand the economic consequences of protectionism. We then use experiments to study how voters would respond if they had more information about how trade barriers affect the distribution of income. We find that distributional cues generate two opposing effects: they make people more likely to express self-serving policy preferences, but they also make people more sensitive to the interests of others. In our study both reactions were evident, but selfish responses outweighed altruistic ones. Thus, if people knew more about the distributional effects of trade, the correlation between personal interests and policy preferences would tighten. By showing how the explanatory power of economic self-interest depends on beliefs about causality, this research provides a foundation for more realistic, behaviorally informed theories of international political economy.

Why Don't Trade Preferences Reflect Economic Self-Interest?

In this paper, we provide one of the first systematic analyses of gender's effect on trade attitudes. We draw on a unique representative national survey of American workers that allows us to evaluate a variety of potential explanations for gender differences in attitudes toward free trade and open markets more generally. We find that existing explanations for the gender gap, most notably differences between men and women in economic knowledge and differing material self-interests, do not explain the gap. Rather, the gender difference in trade preferences and attitudes about open markets is due to less favorable attitudes toward competition among women, less willingness to relocate for jobs among women, and more isolationist non-economic foreign policy attitudes among women.

Men, Women, Trade, and Free Markets

I explore how the tone of media coverage affects opinions of foreign countries by studying a particular case: the People’s Republic of China. I exploit the fact that recent presidential campaigns have focused a great deal of attention on China. Indeed, before the 2012 presidential election, media coverage of China was particularly high and largely negative due to campaign rhetoric about how China was stealing American jobs and ruining the U.S. economy. Using a nationally representative, preand postelection panel, I explore how these changes in media valence affect opinions of China. I use an original content analysis of mentions of China on U.S. political television to examine whether changes in the way the country is depicted in the media lead individuals to change their opinions of it. Results indicate that media valence does affect opinion; the increase in negatively-valenced coverage of China in advance of the U.S. presidential election increased the degree to which individuals perceived China to be a threat. I also find that an increase in positively-valenced coverage of China increases perceived threat from China. I also use an original survey experiment to offer causal evidence that negativelyvalenced media about foreign countries negatively affects opinions toward those countries—and their citizens. Here, I focus on political advertisements, examining whether exposure to presidential ads, aired as part of the 2012 campaign, cause individuals to have more unfavorable opinions of both China and Chinese people. I also test whether these ads cause people to discriminate against Chinese citizens and Asians, more generally. Results indicate that negatively-valenced media about a country causes people to perceive it as more threatening and to view it—and the people dwelling in it—less favorably. I also find that it causes people to discriminate against Chinese and Asians on an individual level (rather than broadly as a group), evaluating Chinese and Asian college applicants less positively. These studies highlight the power that media can have on American opinion of foreign countries and show how negatively-valenced media used during the course of ordinary campaigning can affect discrimination and Sino-U.S. relations. Degree Type Dissertation This dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2017 Degree Name Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Graduate Group Communication First Advisor Diana C. Mutz

/pdf/china-in-the-media-effects-on-american-opinion-3vw0hefi0h.pdf

China in the Media: Effects on American Opinion

Do theories developed to explain widespread anti-Americanism in some regions generalize to countries where pro-Americanism is the norm? Anti-Americanism has intensified in most places, yet sentiments remain relatively positive in sub-Saharan Africa. We compare survey responses from Africa with those from other regions in the developing world to determine why Africans are more pro-American than others. The evidence indicates that personal contacts with individuals in the United States, support for international engagement, and admiration of the American model generate goodwill in Africa. Notably, these individual-level drivers of approval in Africa are similar to those in other regions. We conclude that Africans are relatively favorable toward the United States because more Africans than non-Africans have attitudes, traits, and experiences that encourage pro-American sentiments. Most scholars of attitudes about America seek to explain disapproval, rather than approval, of the United States. The telling label ‘anti-Americanism’ is typically used to denote the outcome of interest within this field of study (Friedman, 2012). The search for sources of dissatisfaction has led academics to focus on populations and regions where negative sentiments are especially acute. For example, disproportionate attention has been paid to Muslims, to countries in the Middle East and Europe and, to a lesser extent, Latin America. Such formulations of the object of study, and the resultant selection of cases, may lead to incomplete explanations. Extant theories may be of limited use for ascertaining why many individuals approve of the U.S. much of the time. We expand on the existing literature by investigating attitudes about the U.S., after first reference in a region with a substantial reserve of proAmericanism. As we will demonstrate, survey evidence suggests that proAmericanism is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in any other region. Africa is also the most neglected region within the study of attitudes about the U.S. This

Pro- and Anti-Americanism in Sub-Saharan Africa

The growth of partisan media allows individuals to self-select and expose themselves to only like-minded programs, which may lead these individuals to hold distorted perceptions of politics and incorrect expectations about election outcomes. Partisan programs increasingly offer only opinionated commentary and news that favors one side, rather than providing objective information and analysis. In the 2012 election, for example, channels at either end of the ideological spectrum not only differed substantially in terms of positive and negative coverage of the candidates, but in terms of the polls they covered and resulting electoral predictions. While some in the GOP criticized the distorted coverage of polls by conservative pundits for strategic reasons, the divergent coverage of polls between partisan media on the left and right might also have important negative implications for the democratic system.In this paper, we draw upon the two-wave (pre- and post-election), nationally representative 2012 ANES Time Series Study (N = 5,916) to test the effects of exposure to 39 partisan news and entertainment programs on voter expectations. We find that those with more right-leaning media diets expected Romney to win with a greater vote margin, while those with more left-leaning media diets expected Obama to win with a greater vote margin, than did those with primarily neutral or balanced media diets. We then demonstrate that individuals whose expectations for the election were unmet experienced a decrease in trust in the legitimacy of the electoral process. Additionally, those with unmet expectations experienced a decrease in trust in the media following the election. In both cases, we find strong evidence indicating partisan media influences trust through its effects on expectations. Our findings show that partisan media holds the power to reduce institutional support, in part by distorting citizens’ expectations for future events.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID2301154_code2096926.pdf?abstractid=2301154&mirid=4

Laura R. Silver

Papers

Men, Women, Trade, and Free Markets

China in the Media: Effects on American Opinion

Pro- and Anti-Americanism in Sub-Saharan Africa

Calling it Wrong: Partisan Media Effects on Electoral Expectations and Institutional Trust

Sovereignty and its Discontents: The United Nations and its Impact on Legitimacy