Citation

Framing Public Discussion of Gay Civil Unions

Abstract | Word Stems | Keywords | Association | Citation | Get this Document | Similar Titles




STOP!

You can now view the document associated with this citation by clicking on the "View Document as HTML" link below.

View Document as HTML:
Click here to view the document

Abstract:

Although the framing of public opinion has often been conceptualized as a collective and social process, experimental studies of framing have typically examined only individual, psychological responses to alternative message-frames. In this research, we employ for the first time group conversations as the unit of analysis (following Gamson, 1992) in an experimental study of framing effects. Two hundred and forty-one American citizens in 54 groups (18 homogeneously conservative groups, 17 homogeneously liberal, and 19 heterogeneous groups) discussed whether or not gay and lesbian partnerships should be legally recognized. Groups were randomly assigned to one of two framing conditions (a “homosexual marriage / special rights” frame or a “civil union / equal rights” frame). Results indicated framing effects that were, in all cases, contingent on the ideological leanings of the group. The “marriage” frame tended to polarize group discussions along ideological lines. Both liberal and conservative groups appeared to find their opponents’ frame more provocative, responding to them with a larger number of statements and expressing greater ambivalence than when reacting to more hospitable frames.

Most Common Document Word Stems:

group (225), frame (225), discuss (147), public (73), union (59), marriag (57), right (56), gay (54), survey (54), civil (51), particip (51), one (48), statement (46), polit (44), homosexu (43), issu (43), conserv (39), argument (37), liber (37), studi (36), opinion (35),

Author's Keywords:

public opinion, framing, political conversation
Convention
Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

Association:
Name: International Communication Association
URL:
http://www.icahdq.org


Citation:
URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p111805_index.html
Direct Link:
HTML Code:

MLA Citation:

Price, Vincent., Nir, Lilach. and Cappella, Joseph. "Framing Public Discussion of Gay Civil Unions" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Marriott Hotel, San Diego, CA, May 27, 2003 <Not Available>. 2009-05-26 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p111805_index.html>

APA Citation:

Price, V. , Nir, L. and Cappella, J. , 2003-05-27 "Framing Public Discussion of Gay Civil Unions" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Marriott Hotel, San Diego, CA Online <.PDF>. 2009-05-26 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p111805_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Although the framing of public opinion has often been conceptualized as a collective and social process, experimental studies of framing have typically examined only individual, psychological responses to alternative message-frames. In this research, we employ for the first time group conversations as the unit of analysis (following Gamson, 1992) in an experimental study of framing effects. Two hundred and forty-one American citizens in 54 groups (18 homogeneously conservative groups, 17 homogeneously liberal, and 19 heterogeneous groups) discussed whether or not gay and lesbian partnerships should be legally recognized. Groups were randomly assigned to one of two framing conditions (a “homosexual marriage / special rights” frame or a “civil union / equal rights” frame). Results indicated framing effects that were, in all cases, contingent on the ideological leanings of the group. The “marriage” frame tended to polarize group discussions along ideological lines. Both liberal and conservative groups appeared to find their opponents’ frame more provocative, responding to them with a larger number of statements and expressing greater ambivalence than when reacting to more hospitable frames.

Get this Document:

Find this citation or document at one or all of these locations below. The links below may have the citation or the entire document for free or you may purchase access to the document. Clicking on these links will change the site you're on and empty your shopping cart.

Associated Document Available Access Fee All Academic Inc.

Document Type: .PDF
Page count: 38
Word count: 11791
Text sample:
Framing Public Discussion 1 Framing Public Discussion of Gay Civil Unions Abstract Although the framing of public opinion has often been conceptualized as a collective and social process experimental studies of framing have typically examined only individual psychological responses to alternative message-frames. In this research we employ for the first time group conversations as the unit of analysis (following Gamson 1992) in an experimental study of framing effects. Two hundred and forty-one American citizens in 54 groups (18 homogeneously
# Second half: Equal rights/ 2.67 2.00 .30 .25 1.19 .76 2.44 special rights # Notes. Table entries are F values (2 54). = p < .1; * = p < .05; ** = p < .01; *** = p < .001 Framing Public Discussion 38 Figure 1. Group Means of Pro Argumentation By Frame and Group Assignment Conservative Heterogeneous Liberal 5 4 3 2 1 0 Civil unions for gay couples Marriage for homosexuals


Similar Titles:
Do Canadians Want Same-Sex Marriage? The Role of Parties, Interest Groups and Public Opinion in the Enactment of the Civil Marriage Act

Marriage Frames: The Gate-Keepers of Public Opinion on Gay and Lesbian Political Rights?


 
All Academic, Inc. is your premier source for research and conference management. Visit our website, www.allacademic.com, to see how we can help you today.