Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11109-012-9213-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Extant research in political science has demonstrated that citizens’ opinions on policies are influenced by their attachment to the party sponsoring them. At the same time, little evidence exists illuminating the psychological processes through which such party cues are filtered. From the psychological literature on source cues, we derive two possible hypotheses: (1) party cues activate heuristic processing aimed at minimizing the processing effort during opinion formation, and (2) party cues activate group motivational processes that compel citizens to support the position of their party. As part of the latter processes, the presence of party cues would make individuals engage in effortful motivated reasoning to produce arguments for the correctness of their party’s position. Following psychological research, we use response latency to measure processing effort and, in support of the motivated reasoning hypothesis, demonstrate that across student and nationally representative samples, the presence of party cues increases processing effort.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 24 kb)11109_2012_9213_MOESM1_ESM.docx
Bassili, J. N. (1993). Response latency versus certainty as indexes of the strength of voting intentions in a Cati survey. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 54–61. CrossRef
Bassili, J. N. (1995). On the psychological reality of party identification: Evidence from the accessibility of voting intentions and of partisan feelings. Political Behavior, 17, 339–358. CrossRef
Bullock, J. G. (2011). Elite influence on public opinion in an informed electorate. American Political Science Review, 105, 496–515. CrossRef
Burdein, I., Lodge, M., & Taber, C. (2006). Experiments on the automaticity of political beliefs and attitudes. Political Psychology, 7, 359–371. CrossRef
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. (1960). The American voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cohen, G. L. (2003). Party over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 808–822. CrossRef
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Belmont: Wardsworth Group/Thomson Learning.
Fazio, R. H. (1990). A practical guide to the use of response latency in social psychological research. In C. Hendrick & M. S. Clark (Eds.), Research methods in personality and social psychology (pp. 74–97). Sage, Thousand Oaks: Review of Personality and Social Psychology.
Goren, P. (2005). Party identification and core political values. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 881–896. CrossRef
Green, D., Palmquist, B., & Schickler, E. (2002). Partisan hearts and minds. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Greene, S. (1999). Understanding party identification: A social identity approach. Political Psychology, 20, 393–403. CrossRef
Greitemeyer, T., Fischer, P., Frey, D., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2009). Biased assimilation: The role of source position. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 22–39. CrossRef
Habyarimana, J., Humphreys, M., Posner, D. N., & Weinstein, J. M. (2007). Why does ethnic diversity undermine public goods provision? American Political Science Review, 101, 709–725. CrossRef
Hobolt, S. B. (2007). Taking cues on Europe? Voter competence and party endorsements in referendums on European integration. European Journal of Political Research, 46, 151–182. CrossRef
Huckfeldt, R., Levine, J., Morgan, W., & Sprague, J. (1999). Accessibility and the political utility of partisan and ideological orientations. American Journal of Political Science, 43, 888–911. CrossRef
Huckfeldt, R., Mondak, J. J., Craw, M., & Mendez, J. M. (2005). Making sense of candidates: Partisanship, ideology, and issues as guides to judgment. Cognitive Brain Research, 23, 11–23. CrossRef
Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (2000). Political consequences of inconsistency: The accessibility and stability of abortion attitudes. Political Psychology, 21, 57–79 (Special issue: Response latency measurement in telephone surveys).
Jennings, K. M., & Niemi, R. G. (1974). The political character of adolescence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Jennings, K. M., & Niemi, R. G. (1981). Generations and politics: A panel study of young adults and their parents. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kam, C. D. (2005). Who toes the party line? Cues, values, and individual differences. Political Behavior, 27, 163–182. CrossRef
Koch, J. W. (2001). When parties and candidates collide: Citizen perception of house candidates’ positions on abortion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, 1–21. CrossRef
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivating reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480–498. CrossRef
Kurzban, R., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2001). Can race be erased? Coalitional computation and social categorization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98, 15387–15392. CrossRef
Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 951–971. CrossRef
Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2006). How voters decide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Layman, G. C., & Carsey, T. M. (1998). Why do party activists convert? An analysis of individual-level change on the abortion issue. Political Research Quarterly, 51, 723–749.
Lebo, M. J., & Cassino, D. (2007). The aggregated consequences of motivated reasoning and the dynamics of partisan presidential approval. Political Psychology, 28, 719–746. CrossRef
Malhotra, N., & Kuo, A. G. (2009). Emotions as moderators of information cue use. American Politics Research, 37, 301–326. CrossRef
Malhotra, N., & Margalit, Y. (2010). Short-term communication effects or longstanding dispositions? The public’s response to the financial crisis of 2008. Journal of Politics, 72, 852–867. CrossRef
Matz, D. C., & Wood, W. (2005). Cognitive dissonance in groups: The consequences of disagreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 22–37. CrossRef
McDermott, R. (2007). Cognitive neuroscience and politics: Next steps. In R. Neumann, G. Marcus, A. Crigler, & M. MacKuen (Eds.), The affect effect (pp. 375–397). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mondak, J. J. (1993). Source cues and policy approval: The cognitive dynamics of public support for the Reagan agenda. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 186–212. CrossRef
Mulligan, K., Grant, T. J., Mockabee, S. T., & Monson, J. Q. (2003). Response latency methodology for survey research: Measurement and modelling strategies. Political Analysis, 11, 289–301. CrossRef
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. (1990). The adaptive decision maker: Effort and accuracy in choice. In R. M. Hogarth (Ed.), Insights in decision making (pp. 129–153). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Petersen, M. B. (2012). Social welfare as small-scale help: Evolutionary psychology and the deservingness heuristic. American Journal of Political Science, 56, 1–16. CrossRef
Petersen, M. B., Slothuus, R., Stubager, R., & Togeby, L. (2010). Political parties and value consistency in public opinion formation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74, 530–550. CrossRef
Petersen, M. B., Slothuus, R., Stubager, R., & Togeby, L. (2011). Deservingness versus values in public opinion on welfare: The automaticity of the deservingness heuristic. European Journal of Political Research, 50, 24–52. CrossRef
Petersen, M. B., Sznycer, D., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2012). Who deserves help? Evolutionary psychology, social emotions and public opinion about welfare. Political Psychology, 33, 395–418. CrossRef
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown.
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 134–148. CrossRef
Pietraszewski, D., Curry, O., Petersen, M. B., Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. (2012). Politics erases race but not sex: Evidence that signals of political party support engage coalitional psychology. Working paper.
Rahn, W. M. (1993). The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 472–496. CrossRef
Redlawsk, D. P. (2002). Hot cognition or cool consideration? Testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision-making. Journal of Politics, 64, 1021–1044.
Rosema, M. (2006). Partisanship, candidate evaluations, and prospective voting. Electoral Studies, 25, 467–488. CrossRef
Schaffner, B. F., & Streb, M. J. (2002). The partisan heuristic in low information elections. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66, 559–581. CrossRef
Slothuus, R., & de Vreese, C. H. (2010). Political parties, motivated reasoning, and issue framing effects. The Journal of Politics, 72, 630–645. CrossRef
Squire, P., & Smith, E. R. A. N. (1988). The effect of partisan information on voters in nonpartisan elections. The Journal of Politics, 50, 169–179.
Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 755–769. CrossRef
van Harreveld, F., van der Pligt, J., de Vries, N. K., Wenneker, C., & Verhue, D. (2004). Ambivalence and information integration in attitudinal judgment. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 431–447. CrossRef
Westen, D., Blagov, P. S., Harenski, K., Kilts, C., & Hamann, S. (2006). Neural bases of motivated reasoning: An FMRI study of emotional constraints on partisan political judgment in the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 1947–1958. CrossRef
Yamagishi, T., & Mifune, N. (2008). Does shared group membership promote altruism? Fear, greed, and reputation. Rationality and Society, 20, 5–30. CrossRef
Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
- Motivated Reasoning and Political Parties: Evidence for Increased Processing in the Face of Party Cues
Michael Bang Petersen
- Springer US
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta