scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
JournalISSN: 0190-9320

Political Behavior 

Springer Science+Business Media
About: Political Behavior is an academic journal published by Springer Science+Business Media. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Voting & Politics. It has an ISSN identifier of 0190-9320. Over the lifetime, 1324 publications have been published receiving 59842 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors conducted four experiments in which subjects read mock news articles that included either a misleading claim from a politician, or misleading claim and a correction, and found that corrections frequently fail to reduce misperceptions among the targeted ideological group.
Abstract: An extensive literature addresses citizen ignorance, but very little research focuses on misperceptions. Can these false or unsubstantiated beliefs about politics be corrected? Previous studies have not tested the efficacy of corrections in a realistic format. We conducted four experiments in which subjects read mock news articles that included either a misleading claim from a politician, or a misleading claim and a correction. Results indicate that corrections frequently fail to reduce misperceptions among the targeted ideological group. We also document several instances of a “backfire effect” in which corrections actually increase misperceptions among the group in question.

1,876 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper examined the impact of long-term partisan loyalties on perceptions of specific political figures and events and concluded that partisan bias in political perceptions plays a crucial role in perpetuating and reinforcing sharp differences in opinion between Democrats and Republicans.
Abstract: I examine the impact of long-term partisan loyalties on perceptions of specific political figures and events. In contrast to the notion of partisanship as a simple “running tally” of political assessments, I show that party identification is a pervasive dynamic force shaping citizens' perceptions of, and reactions to, the political world. My analysis employs panel data to isolate the impact of partisan bias in the context of a Bayesian model of opinion change; I also present more straightforward evidence of contrasts in Democrats' and Republicans' perceptions of “objective” politically relevant events. I conclude that partisan bias in political perceptions plays a crucial role in perpetuating and reinforcing sharp differences in opinion between Democrats and Republicans. This conclusion handsomely validates the emphasis placed by the authors of The American Voter on “the role of enduring partisan commitments in shaping attitudes toward political objects.”

1,239 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors examine the different ways that scholars have employed the concepts of framing and framing effects, how framing effects may violate some basic criteria of citizen competence, and what we know about how and when framing effects work.
Abstract: Social scientists have documented framing effects in a wide range of contexts, including surveys, experiments, and actual political campaigns. Many view work on framing effects as evidence of citizen incompetence—that is, evidence that citizens base their preferences on arbitrary information and/or are subject to extensive elite manipulation. Yet, we continue to lack a consensus on what a framing effect is as well as an understanding of how and when framing effects occur. In this article, I examine (1) the different ways that scholars have employed the concepts of framing and framing effects, (2) how framing effects may violate some basic criteria of citizen competence, and (3) what we know about how and when framing effects work. I conclude that while the evidence to date suggests some isolated cases of incompetence, the more general message is that citizens use frames in a competent and well-reasoned manner.

1,170 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper investigated whether different media types (newspapers, political talk radio, cable news, and Internet) are more likely to inspire selective exposure and found evidence that people's political beliefs are related to their media exposure.
Abstract: Today, people have ample opportunity to engage in selective exposure, the selection of information matching their beliefs. Whether this is occurring, however, is a matter of debate. While some worry that people increasingly are seeking out likeminded views, others propose that newer media provide an increased opportunity for exposure to diverse views. In returning to the concept of selective exposure, this article argues that certain topics, such as politics, are more likely to inspire selective exposure and that research should investigate habitual media exposure patterns, as opposed to single exposure decisions. This study investigates whether different media types (newspapers, political talk radio, cable news, and Internet) are more likely to inspire selective exposure. Using data from the 2004 National Annenberg Election Survey, evidence supports the idea that people’s political beliefs are related to their media exposure—a pattern that persists across media types. Over-time analyses suggest that people’s political beliefs motivate their media use patterns and that cable news audiences became increasingly politically divided over the course of the 2004 election.

869 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article proposed a theory of framing effects, with a specific focus on the psychological mechanisms by which framing influences political attitudes and discussed important conceptual differences between framing and traditional theories of persuasion that focus on belief change.
Abstract: Framing is the process by which a communication source constructs and defines a social or political issue for its audience. While many observers of political communication and the mass media have discussed framing, few have explicitly described how framing affects public opinion. In this paper we offer a theory of framing effects, with a specific focus on the psychological mechanisms by which framing influences political attitudes. We discuss important conceptual differences between framing and traditional theories of persuasion that focus on belief change. We outline a set of hypotheses about the interaction between framing and audience sophistication, and test these in an experiment. The results support our argument that framing is not merely persuasion, as it is traditionally conceived. We close by reflecting on the various routes by which political communications can influence attitudes.

861 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Journal in previous years
YearPapers
202336
2022100
2021152
202098
201947
201842