Search

As a political issue, death and dying topics only sometimes reach the political agenda. However, some issues, such as physician-assisted suicide (PAS) have been highly salient. This article explores attitudes toward PAS by examining the malleability of opinion when respondents are exposed to issue frames and when specific messengers present those frames. We used 4 experimental conditions in a statewide survey and 1 control group, which allowed us to compare the impact of a framed message on opinion as well as that message presented by a specific messenger. Results suggest that support for PAS can be shaped by whether PAS is framed as individual choice or as a matter involving sanctity of life. In addition, we find that specific messengers did not influence opinion on PAS beyond the influence of the issue frame itself, controlling for respondent characteristics such as gender and race. Indeed, the findings indicate that messengers may in fact reduce the intended impact of issue frames of opinion toward PAS.

As a political issue, death and dying topics only sometimes reach the political agenda. However, some issues, such as physician-assisted suicide (PAS) have been highly salient. This article explores attitudes toward PAS by examining the malleability of opinion when respondents are exposed to issue frames and when specific messengers present those frames. We used 4 experimental conditions in a statewide survey and 1 control group, which allowed us to compare the impact of a framed message on opinion as well as that message presented by a specific messenger. Results suggest that support for PAS can be shaped by whether PAS is framed as individual choice or as a matter involving sanctity of life. In addition, we find that specific messengers did not influence opinion on PAS beyond the influence of the issue frame itself, controlling for respondent characteristics such as gender and race. Indeed, the findings indicate that messengers may in fact reduce the intended impact of issue frames of opinion toward PAS.

This article examines the extent to which a change in the information environment affected opinion of a recent gun safety ballot initiative in Washington. Through content analysis of newspaper stories and documentation of expenditures of competing interests, the authors are able to detect a discernable shift in the information environment during the final weeks of the campaign. Support for the initiative dropped appreciably concurrent with this shift. The authors are able to show that the altered information context (a) generated the greatest change among the most politically aware respondents and (b) sustained this effect within specific partisan classifications. Although previous research investigates analogous behavioral dynamics in a variety of political settings, this analysis differs in application to ballot initiative campaigns. The authors discuss the implications of their findings in terms of direct democracy campaigns and conclude that influence of competing interests are central to the nature and outcome of the election.

The relationship between individual and social opinion is examined by evaluating the influence of consensus information in improving evaluations for political candidates. The results of a survey of college students from Washington University in St. Louis are used for this study. Results show that individuals, in their decision-making processes, assign weight to social sources of information.