Motivated Reasoning,Public Opinion,and Presidential Approval

Political Behavior - Presidential approval is a desirable commodity for US presidents, one that bolsters re-election chances and the prospects of legislative success. An important question, then,...     

Partisan Influence on Immigration: The Case of Norway

Do governments decide the size of immigration? This article analyses partisan impact on refugee immigration to Norway. The first part maps party positions on refugee immigration and demonstrates that the views of Norwegian parties are far from consensual. The second part tests whether the number of refugees admitted has been affected by changes of government by way of a panel analysis covering the period 1985–2005 and 143 sending countries. Controlling for other determinants of immigration both in receiving and sending countries, the analysis suggests that that the number of refugees admitted to Norway has been significantly lower during Conservative rule. Among parties with government experience, the Conservative Party also has adopted the most restrictive stand in its manifestoes. No significant differences between Labour Party and centre governments were found, even though the centre parties express more liberal preferences.     

The Influence of Foreign Voices on U.S. Public Opinion

Public opinion in the lead‐up to the 2003 Iraq War presents a puzzle. Despite the fact that domestic political elites publicly voiced little opposition to the invasion, large numbers of Americans remained opposed to military action throughout the pre‐war period, in contrast to the predictions of existing theory. We argue that some rank‐and‐file Democrats and independents expressed opposition because of the widely reported antiwar positions staked out by foreign, not domestic, elites. Merging a large‐scale content analysis of news coverage with public opinion surveys from August 2002 through March 2003, we show that Democrats and independents—especially those with high levels of political awareness—responded to dissenting arguments articulated in the mass media by foreign officials. Our results, which constitute the first empirical demonstration of foreign elite communication effects on U.S. public opinion, show that scholars must account for the role played by non‐U.S. officials in prominent foreign policy debates.     

Shot by the Messenger: Partisan Cues and Public Opinion Regarding National Security and War

Research has shown that messages of intra-party harmony tend to be ignored by the news media, while internal disputes, especially within the governing party, generally receive prominent coverage. We examine how messages of party conflict and cooperation affect public opinion regarding national security, as well as whether and how the reputations of media outlets matter. We develop a typology of partisan messages in the news, determining their likely effects based on the characteristics of the speaker, listener, news outlet, and message content. We hypothesize that criticism of a Republican president by his fellow partisan elites should be exceptionally damaging (especially on a conservative media outlet), while opposition party praise of the president should be the most helpful (especially on a liberal outlet). We test our hypotheses through an experiment and a national survey on attitudes regarding the Iraq War. The results show that credible communication (i.e., “costly” rhetoric harmful to a party) is more influential than “cheap talk” in moving public opinion. Ironically, news media outlets perceived as ideologically hostile can actually enhance the credibility of certain messages relative to “friendly” news sources.

Interpreting Performance Information: Motivated Reasoning or Unbiased Comprehension

A main rationale of performance information is to empower citizens to make informed decisions by presenting them with unambiguous information about the performance of institutions. However, even objective, clear, and unambiguous performance information is subject to biased interpretation depending on whether the information is consistent with the prior beliefs held by those who receive the information. Integrating the theory of motivated reasoning with the literature on performance information, the authors hypothesize that performance information that is inconsistent with prior beliefs is less likely to be interpreted correctly than belief‐consistent information. Using randomized survey experiments in which respondents were presented with quantitative performance data, the authors show that subjects systematically interpret performance information in ways that conform with their prior beliefs. The findings question the assumption that providing performance information automatically increases knowledge about government performance, let alone improves political decisions.     

A Unified Theory of Value-Based Reasoning and U.S. Public Opinion

Public opinion research shows that American citizens utilize domain-specific political values to guide opinion formation in the key issue areas that comprise the American political agenda. One set of political values operates on economic welfare opinions, a different set of values applies to cultural issue positions, a third set shapes foreign policy preferences, and so on in other policy domains. Drawing on Shalom Schwartz’s theory of basic human values, this paper argues that two socially focused values—self-transcendence and conservation—guide opinion formation across all major policy domains. By contrast, the personally focused values of self-enhancement and openness-to-change should play a more limited role in preference formation. These hypotheses are tested using data from a novel 2011 national survey and the 2012 General Social Survey. The statistical results affirm expectations. We show that self-transcendence and conservation values predict scores on symbolic ideology, economic conservatism, racial conservatism, cultural conservatism, civil liberties, and foreign policy opinions. Self-enhancement and openness-to-change values play a modest role in shaping preferences.     

Resistance to Position Change,Motivated Reasoning,and Polarization

Political Behavior - People seem more divided than ever before over social and political issues, entrenched in their existing beliefs and unwilling to change them. Empirical research on mechanisms...     

Conspiracy Endorsement as Motivated Reasoning: The Moderating Roles of Political Knowledge and Trust

Given the potential political and social significance of conspiracy beliefs, a substantial and growing body of work examines the individual‐level correlates of belief in conspiracy theories and general conspiratorial predispositions. However, although we know much about the psychological antecedents of conspiracy endorsement, we know less about the individual‐level political causes of these prevalent and consequential beliefs. Our work draws from the extant literature to posit that endorsement of conspiracy theories is a motivated process that serves both ideological and psychological needs. In doing so, we develop a theory that identifies a particular type of person—one who is both highly knowledgeable about politics and lacking in trust—who is most susceptible to ideologically motivated conspiracy endorsement. Further, we demonstrate that the moderators of belief in conspiracy theories are strikingly different for conservatives and liberals.     

论网络舆情对政府制定公共政策的影响

当前我国处于网络信息新时代,网络舆情是政府了解民意的重要渠道和方法,对于民意的征求也应适当地采取网络投票、提问等方式。网络传播方式已成为我国公众表达利益诉求、维护自身权益的重要公共平台。因此,网络舆情对政府制定决策有着重要的影响,同时伴随着很大的压力,并且网络舆情的积极作用与消极作用并存,所以网络舆情状态下政府如何制定好公共政策成为考验政府能力的一个挑战。     

公共管理与公众舆论

自18世纪开始兴起的公众舆论推动了近代西方民主思想的形成,而20世纪公共管理的勃兴正是这种民主思想体制化的必然结果。对于公众舆论的理性与非理性认识分野,受制于背后复杂的权力博弈。在近代公众舆论观向现代公众舆论观转型的过程中,公众权力论逐渐让位于管理控制论。由于国家-市场-市民社会的关系失衡,当代公众舆论面临着环境危机。在目前善治的要求下,公共管理从公共利益出发,必须以保护公众舆论的自由和多元为己任,确立自身被监督者、反馈者和配给者的多重角色,做到有所为和有所不为。     

How Getting the Facts Right Can Fuel Partisan‐Motivated Reasoning

Scholars often evaluate citizens' democratic competence by focusing on their ability to get relevant facts right. In this article, I show why this approach can yield misleading conclusions about citizen competence. I argue that although citizens with strong partisan loyalties might be forced to accept the same facts, they find alternative ways to rationalize reality. One such way, I show, is through the selective attribution of credit and blame. With four randomized experiments, conducted in diverse national settings and containing closed‐ as well as open‐ended questions, I find that as partisans correctly updated economic beliefs to reflect new facts, they conversely attributed responsibility in a highly selective fashion. Although partisans might acknowledge the same facts, they are apt in seizing on and producing attributional arguments that fit their preferred worldviews.     

监督舆论与舆论监督:网络公民权利与公共权力的进退与平衡

监督舆论与舆论监督是话语干涉的两种形式,存在主体性、结果性、立场性、技术性的权力差异。监督舆论形成公共权力的积极进制、消极进制、无效进制,引导舆论朝着积极正向的方向发展,但也易造成舆论的说教化与虚假化。舆论监督形成公共权力的强制化、主动化、圈层化、边缘化的退制,适应公意的变化,提倡公民权利约束公共权力,保证权力运行的合法化与公开化,存在舆论控制权力的风险,出现群体审判与群氓政治的现象。监督舆论与舆论监督应达到有限性平衡、动态性平衡、有效性平衡、竞争性平衡,保证公共权力与公民权利的相互制衡,达到善治的目的,进而实现公共权力与舆论机制的优化,促进社会现代化的和谐发展。     

Partisan Influence on the Local Tax Burden in the Netherlands

This paper analyses the role of partisan politics in determiningthe local tax burden. Property taxes are the most important revenuesource which municipalities in the Netherlands can decide uponthemselves. Using a new data set on Dutch local property taxes in1996, it is concluded that municipalities with a council dominatedby left wing parties have a higher tax burden. We also find thatlarger coalitions have lower levels of taxation. Finally, taxexporting increases tax rates.     

民意的形成与政治社会化

在政治生活中,几乎每一个领域和具体问题上都充斥着各种各样的态度和意见.这些态度和意见从哪里来,是民意研究领域的一个常见问题,而从政治社会化的视角寻找民意来源,则是民意研究的一个重要内容.其中,家庭、学校、时代与生命周期的影响,既代表着不同的民意来源,也反映了早期社会化阶段民意形成过程中情感变量与信息变量的不同影响.在民意的形成过程中,情感变量与信息变量在持续产生影响,其影响在生命周期的不同阶段也在持续发生变化.     

第四势力与舆论监督之比较

首先,本文通过比较西方学者和我国学者对其所下的定义来展开阐述并解释第四势力与舆论监督的概念。其次,探讨二者的相同之处,如:二者都体现媒体的基本职能,二者都不是绝对的自由,二者都体现公益性,二者都来源于公民权利。第三从法理的层面运用阐述二者的不同点:二者的主体性质不同、二者所包含的内容不同,法律对二者的要求不同,对二者的主要制约方式不同。最后,探求我国舆论监督的发展方向。     

The Limits of Partisan Loyalty

Political Behavior - While partisan cues tend to dominate political choice, prior work shows that competing information can rival the effects of partisanship if it relates to salient political...     

The Conditional Nature of Presidential Responsiveness to Public Opinion

How does public opinion affect presidential policymaking? We address this issue by testing a diverse set of hypotheses with data concerning a set of individual policies across time. In particular, the data revolve around presidential budgetary proposals on a set of major policy issues for which there are recurring surveys on citizens' preferences over spending. The analysis suggests that presidents are more responsive to mass opinion on issues that are familiar to citizens in their everyday lives. Also, for reelection‐seeking presidents, responsiveness is shown to depend upon two key political factors. First, presidents are more responsive to public opinion when the next election is imminent. Second, the effect of presidential popularity is nonmonotonic; presidents with average approval ratings are most likely to adopt policy positions congruent with public opinion, whereas presidents with approval ratings that are significantly above or below average have the greatest propensity to take unpopular positions.