Attitude Framing

This study tested the "valence framing effect": an assumption that negatively conceptualized attitudes (as opposing the non-preferred alternative) are more resistant to later persuasion attempts. In the experiment we created choice between two political candidates and experimental subjects were led to conceptualize their political preferences in one of two possible ways: either as supporting the preferred candidate or as opposing the non-preferred candidate. The data indicate that negative preferences show less overall change when exposed to counterarguments. This finding can be incorporated in two theoretical frameworks: dual process theories of attitude change (Elaboration likelihood model) and descriptive decision making theories (Prospect theory). Results are discussed for their implications for the efficacy of political communication.

This study tested the "valence framing effect": an assumption that negatively conceptualized attitudes (as opposing the non-preferred alternative) are more resistant to later persuasion attempts. In the experiment we created choice between two political candidates and experimental subjects were led to conceptualize their political preferences in one of two possible ways: either as supporting the preferred candidate or as opposing the non-preferred candidate. The data indicate that negative preferences show less overall change when exposed to counterarguments. This finding can be incorporated in two theoretical frameworks: dual process theories of attitude change (Elaboration likelihood model) and descriptive decision making theories (Prospect theory). Results are discussed for their implications for the efficacy of political communication.

This study tested the "valence framing effect": an assumption that negatively conceptualized attitudes (as opposing the non-preferred alternative) are more resistant to later persuasion attempts. In the experiment we created choice between two political candidates and experimental subjects were led to conceptualize their political preferences in one of two possible ways: either as supporting the preferred candidate or as opposing the non-preferred candidate. The data indicate that negative preferences show less overall change when exposed to counterarguments. This finding can be incorporated in two theoretical frameworks: dual process theories of attitude change (Elaboration likelihood model) and descriptive decision making theories (Prospect theory). Results are discussed for their implications for the efficacy of political communication.

This study tested the "valence framing effect": an assumption that nega-tively conceptualized attitudes (as opposing the non-preferred alternative) are more resistant to later persuasion attempts. In the experiment we created choice between two political candidates and experimental subjects were led to conceptualize their political preferences in one of two possible ways: either as supporting the preferred candidate or as opposing the non-preferred candi-date. The data indicate that negative preferences show less overall change when exposed to counterarguments. This finding can be incorporated in two theoretical frameworks: dual process theories of attitude change (Elaboration likelihood model) and descriptive decision making theories (Prospect theory). Results are discussed for their implications for the efficacy of political commu-nication.

This study tested the "valence framing effect": an assumption that negatively conceptualized attitudes (as opposing the non-preferred alternative) are more resistant to later persuasion attempts. In the experiment we created choice between two political candidates and experimental subjects were led to conceptualize their political preferences in one of two possible ways: either as supporting the preferred candidate or as opposing the non-preferred candidate. The data indicate that negative preferences show less overall change when exposed to counterarguments. This finding can be incorporated in two theoretical frameworks: dual process theories of attitude change (Elaboration likelihood model) and descriptive decision making theories (Prospect theory). Results are discussed for their implications for the efficacy of political communication. .

This study tested the "valence framing effect": an assumption that negatively conceptualized attitudes (as opposing the non-preferred alternative) are more resistant to later persuasion attempts. In the experiment we created choice between two political candidates and experimental subjects were led to conceptualize their political preferences in one of two possible ways: either as supporting the preferred candidate or as opposing the non-preferred candidate. The data indicate that negative preferences show less overall change when exposed to counterarguments. This finding can be incorporated in two theoretical frameworks: dual process theories of attitude change (Elaboration likelihood model) and descriptive decision making theories (Prospect theory). Results are discussed for their implications for the efficacy of political communication.