Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

0 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

How issue frames shape beliefs about the importance of climate change policy across ideological and partisan groups.

ABSTRACT: We use an experiment to examine whether the way in which climate change is framed affects individuals' beliefs about its importance as a policy issue. We employ frames that emphasize national security, human rights, and environmental importance about the consequences of climate change. We find no evidence that issue frames have an overall effect on opinions about the importance of climate change policy. We do find some evidence that the effect of issue frames varies across ideological and partisan groups. Most notably, issue frames can lead Republicans and those on the political right to view climate change policy as less important. We conclude by discussing our findings relative to extant literature and considering the implications of our findings for those who seek to address the issue of climate change.

SUBMITTER: Singh SP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5519075 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Publications

How issue frames shape beliefs about the importance of climate change policy across ideological and partisan groups.

Singh Shane P SP Swanson Meili M

PloS one 20170720 7

We use an experiment to examine whether the way in which climate change is framed affects individuals' beliefs about its importance as a policy issue. We employ frames that emphasize national security, human rights, and environmental importance about the consequences of climate change. We find no evidence that issue frames have an overall effect on opinions about the importance of climate change policy. We do find some evidence that the effect of issue frames varies across ideological and partis ...[more]

PMID: 28727842

Similar Datasets

Identifying issue frames in text.

Project description:Framing, the effect of context on cognitive processes, is a prominent topic of research in psychology and public opinion research. Research on framing has traditionally relied on controlled experiments and manually annotated document collections. In this paper we present a method that allows for quantifying the relative strengths of competing linguistic frames based on corpus analysis. This method requires little human intervention and can therefore be efficiently applied to large bodies of text. We demonstrate its effectiveness by tracking changes in the framing of terror over time and comparing the framing of abortion by Democrats and Republicans in the U.S.

| S-EPMC3712954 | biostudies-literature

Beyond partisan filters: Can underreported news reduce issue polarization?

Project description:While many news outlets aim for impartiality, 67% of Americans perceive their news sources as partisan, often presenting only one side of the story. This paper tests whether exposing individuals to news stories their political adversaries focus on can mitigate political polarization. In an experiment involving a real-world political newsletter-sent to participants who had opted to receive news that uncovers media biases-exposure to a specific story about refugee policy led respondents to reassess their positions. This reevaluation changed their stances on the issue and reduced the ideological distinctions they made between Democrats and Republicans. These findings underscore the need for future studies to untangle the specific circumstances where cross-partisan exposure can alter political attitudes.

| S-EPMC10871475 | biostudies-literature

Exposure and Aversion to Human Transmissible Diseases Predict Conservative Ideological and Partisan Preferences.

Project description:The objective prevalence of and subjective vulnerability to infectious diseases are associated with greater ingroup preference, conformity, and traditionalism. However, evidence directly testing the link between infectious diseases and political ideology and partisanship is lacking. Across four studies, including a large sample representative of the U.S. population (N > 12,000), we demonstrate that higher environmental levels of human transmissible diseases and avoidance of germs from human carriers predict conservative ideological and partisan preferences. During the COVID-19 pandemic (N = 848), we replicated this germ aversion finding and determined that these conservative preferences were primarily driven by avoidance of germs from outgroups (foreigners) rather than ingroups (locals). Moreover, socially conservative individuals expressed lower concerns of being susceptible to contracting infectious diseases during the pandemic and worried less about COVID-19. These effects were robust to individual-level and state-level controls. We discuss these findings in light of theory on parasite stress and the behavioral immune system and with regard to the political implications of the COVID-19 pandemic.

| S-EPMC8251465 | biostudies-literature

Corporate funding and ideological polarization about climate change.

Project description:Drawing on large-scale computational data and methods, this research demonstrates how polarization efforts are influenced by a patterned network of political and financial actors. These dynamics, which have been notoriously difficult to quantify, are illustrated here with a computational analysis of climate change politics in the United States. The comprehensive data include all individual and organizational actors in the climate change countermovement (164 organizations), as well as all written and verbal texts produced by this network between 1993-2013 (40,785 texts, more than 39 million words). Two main findings emerge. First, that organizations with corporate funding were more likely to have written and disseminated texts meant to polarize the climate change issue. Second, and more importantly, that corporate funding influences the actual thematic content of these polarization efforts, and the discursive prevalence of that thematic content over time. These findings provide new, and comprehensive, confirmation of dynamics long thought to be at the root of climate change politics and discourse. Beyond the specifics of climate change, this paper has important implications for understanding ideological polarization more generally, and the increasing role of private funding in determining why certain polarizing themes are created and amplified. Lastly, the paper suggests that future studies build on the novel approach taken here that integrates large-scale textual analysis with social networks.

| S-EPMC4711825 | biostudies-other

The comparative importance for optimal climate policy of discounting, inequalities and catastrophes.

Project description:Integrated assessment models (IAMs) of climate and the economy provide estimates of the social cost of carbon and inform climate policy. With the Nested Inequalities Climate Economy model (NICE) (Dennig et al. PNAS 112:15,827-15,832, 2015), which is based on Nordhaus's Regional Integrated Model of Climate and the Economy (RICE), but also includes inequalities within regions, we investigate the comparative importance of several factors-namely, time preference, inequality aversion, intraregional inequalities in the distribution of both damage and mitigation cost and the damage function. We do so by computing optimal carbon price trajectories that arise from the wide variety of combinations that are possible given the prevailing range of disagreement over each factor. This provides answers to a number of questions, including Thomas Schelling's conjecture that properly accounting for inequalities could lead the inequality aversion parameter to have an effect opposite to what is suggested by the Ramsey equation.

| S-EPMC6956944 | biostudies-literature

Ideological biases in social sharing of online information about climate change.

Project description:Exposure to media content is an important component of opinion formation around climate change. Online social media such as Twitter, the focus of this study, provide an avenue to study public engagement and digital media dissemination related to climate change. Sharing a link to an online article is an indicator of media engagement. Aggregated link-sharing forms a network structure which maps collective media engagement by the user population. Here we construct bipartite networks linking Twitter users to the web pages they shared, using a dataset of approximately 5.3 million English-language tweets by almost 2 million users during an eventful seven-week period centred on the announcement of the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change. Community detection indicates that the observed information-sharing network can be partitioned into two weakly connected components, representing subsets of articles shared by a group of users. We characterise these partitions through analysis of web domains and text content from shared articles, finding them to be broadly described as a left-wing/environmentalist group and a right-wing/climate sceptic group. Correlation analysis shows a striking positive association between left/right political ideology and environmentalist/sceptic climate ideology respectively. Looking at information-sharing over time, there is considerable turnover in the engaged user population and the articles that are shared, but the web domain sources and polarised network structure are relatively persistent. This study provides evidence that online sharing of news media content related to climate change is both polarised and politicised, with implications for opinion dynamics and public debate around this important societal challenge.

| S-EPMC8064565 | biostudies-literature

Social learning and partisan bias in the interpretation of climate trends.

Project description:Vital scientific communications are frequently misinterpreted by the lay public as a result of motivated reasoning, where people misconstrue data to fit their political and psychological biases. In the case of climate change, some people have been found to systematically misinterpret climate data in ways that conflict with the intended message of climate scientists. While prior studies have attempted to reduce motivated reasoning through bipartisan communication networks, these networks have also been found to exacerbate bias. Popular theories hold that bipartisan networks amplify bias by exposing people to opposing beliefs. These theories are in tension with collective intelligence research, which shows that exchanging beliefs in social networks can facilitate social learning, thereby improving individual and group judgments. However, prior experiments in collective intelligence have relied almost exclusively on neutral questions that do not engage motivated reasoning. Using Amazon's Mechanical Turk, we conducted an online experiment to test how bipartisan social networks can influence subjects' interpretation of climate communications from NASA. Here, we show that exposure to opposing beliefs in structured bipartisan social networks substantially improved the accuracy of judgments among both conservatives and liberals, eliminating belief polarization. However, we also find that social learning can be reduced, and belief polarization maintained, as a result of partisan priming. We find that increasing the salience of partisanship during communication, both through exposure to the logos of political parties and through exposure to the political identities of network peers, can significantly reduce social learning.

| S-EPMC6166837 | biostudies-literature

Are face masks a partisan issue during the COVID-19 pandemic? Differentiating political ideology and political party affiliation.

Project description:Popular press articles have asserted that those with certain political orientations are less likely to wear face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic. We propose that this relation is due to differential information shared by political parties rather than values associated with face mask wearing. We further propose that, when assessed together, political party affiliation (e.g., Republican, Democrat) but not political ideology (e.g., conservative, liberal) predicts face mask wearing, and this effect is mediated by perceptions of efficacy doubts but not perceptions that face masks infringe upon the wearer's independence. We performed a three-wave, time-separated survey study with 226 participants. Each proposal was supported. When assessed together, political party affiliation but not political ideology significantly predicted face mask wearing, and a significant indirect effect was observed via perceptions of efficacy doubts but not independence. Our results support that face mask wearing is a unique preventative action, which should be understood using political theory.

| S-EPMC8652787 | biostudies-literature

Political parties and climate policy: A new approach to measuring parties' climate policy preferences.

Project description:This study presents an innovative approach to hand-coding parties' policy preferences in the relatively new, cross-sectoral field of climate change mitigation policy. It applies this approach to party manifestos in six countries, comparing the preferences of parties in Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy and the United Kingdom over the past two decades. It probes the data for evidence of validity through content validation and convergent/discriminant validation and engages with the debate on position-taking in environmental policy by developing a positional measure that incorporates 'pro' and 'anti' climate policy preferences. The analysis provides evidence for the validity of the new measures, shows that they are distinct from comparable measures of environmental policy preferences and argues that they are more comprehensive than existing climate policy measures. The new measures strengthen the basis for answering questions that are central to climate politics and to party politics. The approach developed here has important implications for the study of new, complex or cross-cutting policy issues and issues that include both valence and positional aspects.

| S-EPMC6201165 | biostudies-literature

Deficit Attention Disorder: Partisanship, Issue Importance and Concern About Government Overspending.

Project description:Political action and electoral behavior often stem from a conviction that an issue is important. Yet despite a growing literature on partisan bias, it remains unclear whether partisan attachment also affects the perceived importance of various issues. We propose a theory of partisan-motivated issue attention (PMIA), wherein citizens satisfy partisan instincts by shifting the perceived importance of an issue. We apply our theory to an issue involving a fundamental tool of the federal government-the power to deficit-spend-and test the hypothesis that partisans' concern about government overspending significantly changes depending on which party presides over deficit-spending. Leveraging pre-registered experimental and observational studies, we find strong support for this hypothesis among both Republicans and Democrats. Lastly, using text analytical methods, we also find evidence of PMIA in televised partisan media. Our study thus demonstrates that putative concern about deficit-spending contains a sizable partisan component and, more broadly, uncovers an additional means by which partisan bias guides citizens' attitude formation on policy-relevant issues in the United States.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11109-022-09783-5.

| S-EPMC8889874 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data