The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies
Abstract
What is the effect of democratic competition on the power of elites to frame public opinion? We address this issue first by defining the range of competitive contexts that might surround any debate over a policy issue. We then offer a theory that predicts how audiences, messages, and competitive environments interact to influence the magnitude of framing effects. These hypotheses are tested using experimental data gathered on the opinions of adults and college students toward two policy issues—the management of urban growth and the right of an extremist group to conduct a rally. Our results indicate that framing effects depend more heavily on the qualities of frames than on their frequency of dissemination and that competition alters but does not eliminate the influence of framing. We conclude by discussing the implications of these results for the study of public opinion and democratic political debate.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm
Entman, R. M. (1993) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x · Cited by 16,203
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Zaller, J. R. (1992) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511818691 · Cited by 7,785
A Theory of Framing and Opinion Formation in Competitive Elite Environments
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00331.x · Cited by 1,159
Self-citation
Cited by
When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions
Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2 · Cited by 3,173
How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation
DRUCKMAN, J. N., PETERSON, E., & SLOTHUUS, R. (2013) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055412000500 · Cited by 1,569
Self-citationMedia and Political Polarization
Prior, M. (2013) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135242 · Cited by 1,125
The Influence of Partisan Motivated Reasoning on Public Opinion
Bolsen, T., Druckman, J. N., & Cook, F. L. (2014) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-013-9238-0 · Cited by 891
Self-citationPolitical Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Public Opinion Formation
Leeper, T. J., & Slothuus, R. (2014) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12164 · Cited by 722
Monroe, B. L., Colaresi, M. P., & Quinn, K. M. (2008) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpn018 · Cited by 542
Are Survey Experiments Externally Valid?
BARABAS, J., & JERIT, J. (2010) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055410000092 · Cited by 481
Students as Experimental Participants: A Defense of the “Narrow Data Base”
Druckman, J. N., & Kam, C. D. (2011) · Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511921452.004 · Cited by 454
Self-citationGentzkow, M., Shapiro, J. M., & Taddy, M. (2019) · Econometrica · doi:10.3982/ecta16566 · Cited by 419
Do I Think BLS Data are BS? The Consequences of Conspiracy Theories
Einstein, K. L., & Glick, D. M. (2015) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-014-9287-z · Cited by 277
The role of evidence in politics: Motivated reasoning and persuasion among politicians.
Baekgaard, M., Christensen, J., Dahlmann, C. M., Mathiasen, A., & Petersen, N. B. G. (2019) · British Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1017/s0007123417000084 · Cited by 209
Analyzing Polarization in Social Media: Method and Application to Tweets on 21 Mass Shootings
Demszky, D., Garg, N., Voigt, R., Zou, J., Shapiro, J., Gentzkow, M., & Jurafsky, D. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1304 · Cited by 164
“, forthcoming), and the propagation of partisan frames can influence public opinion (Chong and Druckman, 2007) and party identification (Fiorina and Abrams, 2008).”
BackgroundGentzkow, M., Shapiro, J., & Taddy, M. (2016) · doi:10.3386/w22423 · Cited by 159
Misunderstanding the harms of online misinformation
Budak, C., Nyhan, B., Rothschild, D. M., Thorson, E., & Watts, D. J. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07417-w · Cited by 156
Nisbet, E. C., Hart, P. S., Myers, T., & Ellithorpe, M. (2013) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/jcom.12040 · Cited by 137
International law, military effectiveness, and public support for drone strikes
Kreps, S. E., & Wallace, G. P. R. (2016) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343316657405 · Cited by 128
A Framework for the Study of Persuasion
Druckman, J. N. (2022) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-110428 · Cited by 126
Self-citationElite Polarization and Public Opinion: How Polarization Is Communicated and Its Effects
Robison, J., & Mullinix, K. J. (2016) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2015.1055526 · Cited by 124
BONILLA, T., & TILLERY, A. B. (2020) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055420000544 · Cited by 113
The Social Dimension of Political Values
Connors, E. C. (2020) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-019-09530-3 · Cited by 113
When Common Identities Decrease Trust: An Experimental Study of Partisan Women
Klar, S. (2018) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12366 · Cited by 86
Framing innocence: an experimental test of the effects of wrongful convictions on public opinion
Norris, R. J., & Mullinix, K. J. (2020) · Journal of Experimental Criminology · doi:10.1007/s11292-019-09360-7 · Cited by 81
Arceneaux, K., & Truex, R. (2023) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s1537592722000901 · Cited by 97
“On the one hand, the presence of robust political competition and a free press often works to limit the ability of politicians to manipulate public opinion (Chong and Druckman, 2007; Zaller, 1992).”
Quantifying the potential persuasive returns to political microtargeting
Tappin, B. M., Wittenberg, C., Hewitt, L. B., Berinsky, A. J., & Rand, D. G. (2023) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2216261120 · Cited by 83
Walker, B. J. A., Kurz, T., & Russel, D. (2018) · Environment and Behavior · doi:10.1177/0013916517713299 · Cited by 77
Making Change: Norm-Based Strategies for Institutional Change to Address Intractable Problems
Raymond, L., Weldon, S. L., Kelly, D., Arriaga, X. B., & Clark, A. M. (2014) · Political Research Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1065912913510786 · Cited by 75
Scotto, T. J., Reifler, J., Hudson, D., & vanHeerde-Hudson, J. (2017) · Journal of Experimental Political Science · doi:10.1017/xps.2017.6 · Cited by 52
Opinion dynamics with backfire effect and biased assimilation
Chen, X., Tsaparas, P., Lijffijt, J., & De Bie, T. (2021) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0256922 · Cited by 39
A Negativity Bias in Reframing Shapes Political Preferences Even in Partisan Contexts
Boydstun, A. E., Ledgerwood, A., & Sparks, J. (2019) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550617733520 · Cited by 31
Yuan, W. (2026) · Computational Social Sciences · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-01373-6_8
Metadata
- Authors
- CHONG, D., & DRUCKMAN, J. N.
- Venue
- American Political Science Review
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2007-11
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 637-655
- ISSN
- 0003-0554 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5943
- OpenAlex
- W2142573394
- Cited by
- 1,120
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 142.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
