Negatively framed political attitudes ("I don't like Obama") are stronger than positively framed attitudes ("I like Romney"), and this effect is strengthened when people think more deeply about the issues involved.
That is the finding of a paper published in the latest issue of the British Journal of Social Psychologyby George Bizer, a psychology professor at Union College in Schenectady, N.Y.
Bizer and his co-authors Iris Žeželj (University of Belgrade) and Jamie Luguri (Yale University) presented participants with information about two fictional (though ostensibly real) candidates – one conservative, one liberal – for a position on a government board.
After reading about the two candidates, some participants were asked if they 'supported' or 'opposed' the liberal candidate and some were asked if they 'supported' or 'opposed' the conservative. When the candidates were vying for a local government board, participants who were led to frame their opinions negatively – regardless of their underlying preference – expressed more certainty about their attitudes than did participants who were led frame their opinions positively. When the candidates were vying for a distant government board, the effect did not emerge.
Follow-up experiments replicated these findings: Experiment 2 showed that opposers were more certain than supporters, but only when the participants were able to think carefully about the candidates, while Experiment 3 showed that the effect generalized to perceived importance.
Dr Bizer says: "Our prior research showed that framing an opinion in terms of opposition yields stronger attitudes than does framing it in terms of support.
The most interesting point from our latest research is that this effect is actually stronger when people process the messages more deeply – when they are motivated and have been able to think about the issue. But when people are not motivated and able, the effect goes away. So, perhaps counter-intuitively, the people who care the most about the issues or candidates seem more likely to be affected by the bias."
Union College: http://www.union.edu
This press release was posted to serve as a topic for discussion. Please comment below. We try our best to only post press releases that are associated with peer reviewed scientific literature. Critical discussions of the research are appreciated. If you need help finding a link to the original article, please contact us on twitter or via e-mail.
Instead of brooding over a failed relationship, psychologist advises a couple of aspirin and distancing oneself from the event
Brazilian researchers release thousands of mosquitoes infected with a bacteria that suppresses dengue fever into the environment in Rio de Janeiro.
Major food companies have cut trillions of calories, and studies show Americans are consuming fewer calories because of it. But some advocates think companies should do more to improve our diets.
The National Institutes of Health is providing $10 million to explore sex difference in disease, part of a move to boost female numbers in clinical trials
The World Health Organization warns of more than 20,000 cases by early November if help doesn't arrive quickly in West Africa. The CDC projects 1.4 million cases by late January.
When you're paid to hit people, it's not always easy to stop at the end of the work day—a fact the NFL has to reckon with, and fast
Is Democracy a key to better levels of health in a country? That's long been the belief, but we hear about some research that shows that isn't always the case.
You can learn a lot about people if you mess with their minds. Here are four infamous experiments in which psychologists gave in to unethical temptations
The number of people without enough to eat has fallen rapidly over the past 25 years, but sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Asia are still struggling
New research raises serious questions about how artificial sweeteners might affect our bodies, but let's keep our cool and just do more research