Comm162 Week 6 notes
Comm162 Week 6 notes Comm162
Popular in Campaigns, Voting, Media
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Communication Studies
This 2 page Class Notes was uploaded by Erica Evans on Monday February 15, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to Comm162 at Stanford University taught by Shanto Iyengar in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 8 views. For similar materials see Campaigns, Voting, Media in Communication Studies at Stanford University.
Reviews for Comm162 Week 6 notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 02/15/16
Comm162 Class 10 2/8/2016 Framing: • “Presentation effect” – the presentation, and not the content affects the message. Different ‘genres’ of news coverage as frames. • If you are really trying to change their opinions… is this really framing? Or is it persuasion? • “Semantic cues” – saying “poor people” instead of “people on welfare.” People are much more sympathetic towards the poor. • “Episodic” vs. “thematic” – • Episode means: here is the latest episode of poverty, a close up interview with someone. This is more likely to hold the public’s attention. This is the dominant form of broadcast news. Leads to focus on the behavior of individuals. • Thematic: showing the trends and statistics. More removed. Blame is placed not on the individual, but society or the government. • Druckman: “equivalency versus emphasis framing” • A policy to combat a disease: Either plan A: “200 people will be saved” vs. Plan B: “1/3 chance everyone will live and 2/3 chance that no one will be saved” … it is the same outcome, but everyone would choose the second choice. • Or just change the words from “live” to “will not die” – People will chose the wording that emphasized “living.” • Framing as a “script” – following the narrative of an issue. • News is always about violent crime and never white-‐collar crime. • Reporting about crime usually unfolds like a script and is very episodic. They give you information about a suspect. Race and gender is injected into the story because they show you a picture. • Study where people saw a white suspect, black suspect or no suspect. Even when people saw no suspect, 40% said they saw a black suspect…. The same thing applies to Muslim/middle eastern people and terrorism. • Emphasis framing: If there is a student protest, Frame A: Did these students have the right to protest? Frame B: What about law and order. Everyone is more supportive of the protest when they hear Frame A. Persuasion: • Propaganda: this sparked interest in mass media in the 1940’s. How was Hitler able to come to power? • Two factor model: P (persuasion) = p (acceptance| exposure) • If you’re given a message, what is the likeliness that you will accept it? • Curvilinear function for any indicator of political engagement (information, education, etc.) – persuasion highest in the middle. Lowest at the two extremes. • It is the moderates that can be persuaded most. The people who don’t care at all, not educated at all will not change, the people who are super political junkies, super educated etc. will not change, but the people in the middle are more easily persuaded. • Strong partisans and politically attentive remain un-‐persuaded à polarization phenomenon. • Message loudness (intensity) and strength of existing opinion as conditioners à also affects persuasion. • Credibility is super important. We rely on experts to tell us what is important. Expertise and perception of partisan intent help us decide who is credible. Counter-‐attitudinal presentations are the most credible. If someone from the other side endorsed a candidate that would be huge! • Possibility to return to “minimal consequences” Is America Polarized? • Not much evidence of ideological polarization. • People identify with groups • Identity automatically produces in group / out group preferences • Affective polarization: how do Reps and Dems feel about each other? à Lots of contempt. • Compare political elites with ordinary citizens à elites are completely polarized, but ordinary citizens are still mostly moderate. • The American South was a bastion of conservative democrats in the 1960’s. But there was a lot of ideological conflict within the party. Overtime the South got realigned and became Republican. Party cleavage and ideological cleavage has become synchronized. • Maximalists vs. minimalists à • Conscious awareness, implicit attitudes • Take the Harvard implicit attitudes test • People might have more negative views towards another party than they do about another race or religion… but is this just because people control their answers for political correctness? • No! Evidence shows that even subconsciously, this divide is stronger for parties than anything else. • Dictator Game and Trust Game tests for partisan bias. Behavioral evidence!
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'