Media Efect

7/31/2019 Media Efect

1/27

Mass Media and Public Opinion: An Experimental Study of Media Effects

Glen Smith

Department of Political Science

Washington State University

[email protected]

1Abstract

The medias ability to change public opinion has long been a concern in political scienceresearch. Recent research has found that news coverage can influence public opinion onpolitical issues and voting decisions. One shortfall of traditional media effects research isthat it tends to lump together editorials and opinion columns with straight news articles; apractice that prevents the researchers from analyzing the influence of each typeseparately. One exploration of media effects did separate the influence of news from theinfluence of opinion, and found the opinion columns and editorials had more influence onvoting decisions than news articles. I expand on this research by performing anexperiment testing the influence of opinion columns and editorials. The results indicatethat 1) opinion columns have a persuasive influence over readers, 2) this influence isgeneralizable to readers opinions on political issues, 3) the salience of the issue makeslittle difference in the persuasive power of editorials and opinion columns, and 4) opinioncolumns make readers more ideologically consistent in their issue opinions.

Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the International Society of PoliticalPsychology on July 5, 2007.

Introduction

1


2/27

The impact of the mass media on public opinion has long been an area of great

concern in political science and popular culture. Hitlers propaganda machine and its

assumed influence on the German people during World War II caused great concern

among government officials and academics. This concern was largely put to rest after

research into media effects found that the news media tend to reinforce existing opinions

rather than persuade people to change opinions (Hovland, 1953; Klapper, 1960).

Although past research has mostly examined the influences of straight news articles,

recent research has pointed to the power of opinion columns to influence voting decisions

(Dalton, Beck and Huckfeldt, 1998; Beck et al., 2002). Unfortunately, the pervasiveness

of this influence is unclear because the research has been limited to an examination of the

1992 presidential election. My research aims at testing the persuasive power of opinion

columns in a broader context. I attempt to expand our understanding of the persuasive

power of the opinion section of newspapers in the following ways. First, I test the power

of opinion columns in an experimental setting, adding a measure of internal validity to

past research which relied on surveys and content analyses. Second, I test whether

opinion columns influence public opinions on political issues and policy options. Past

research found opinion columns and editorials influence voting decisions, but no research

has investigated whether that persuasive power translates to public opinion concerning

political issues. Finally, I investigate whether the salience of the issues (the readers

levels of interest in the issues) influence the persuasive power of opinion columns or

news articles.

In the present research, I test the influence of opinion columns by exposing three

groups of participants to three different types of articles: balanced articles, biased articles,

and opinion columns. One group is exposed to two articles each one containing a two-

2


3/27

sided communication flow (positive and negative aspects) concerning reform plans. One

article discussed Bushs Social Security reform plan and the other discussed the 2005

bankruptcy reform legislation that was eventually passed by Congress. A second group

was exposed to the same articles minus almost all negative aspects of the reform plans,

isolating the absence of negative aspects as the only difference between the two groups.

Participants in the third group were exposed to the same (balanced) articles as the first

group, but were also exposed to opinion columns opposing each of the issues.

The experimental conditions I have set up pit manipulation against persuasion. If

a journalist gives only positive aspects of a plan to the public without mentioning the

negative aspects and this influences public opinion, it is certainly manipulation. On the

other hand, if peoples opinions change because they read an argument in an opinion

column that presented a reasoned argument, it is difficult to call this manipulation as it

more closely resembles persuasion. Although it is certainly possible for opinion columns

to manipulate readers, I show in the results section that this is not likely the case because

those reading opinion columns held opinions that were more ideologically consistent than

either of the other two groups.

In the end, my research adds important insights into the medias power to

persuade the public. My findings suggest that while the news media have little power to

manipulate public opinion, they are able to persuade people through the opinion section

of the newspaper. Opinion columns and editorials also allow people to better understand

how the issue fits with their values and predispositions. The results from my experiment

coupled with the findings of past survey research suggest that future research may find

more media effects by separating opinion columns and editorials from straight news

articles.

3


4/27

Media Effects Research

Are the news media able to persuade readers? If so, that would give them the

power to influence public opinion; a topic at the center of media effects research. Most

past research has found that the media are ineffective at changing public opinion

(Klapper, 1960). Rather than change opinion, the news media tend to reinforce peoples

current opinions (Klapper, 1960). Reinforcement occurs because of such psychological

factors as selective exposure and selective retention. People are more likely to remember

information that they agree with, and tend to avoid exposure to information that is

contrary to their current beliefs. People generally resist and avoid discordant information

because of the discomfort that usually follows. Because of these processes, the news

media are often ineffective at persuading people to change their opinions on political

issues. As we will see, however, this is not always the case as certain circumstances have

the potential to increase the news medias power to persuade the public.

One circumstance likely influencing media effects is the salience of the issue at

hand. The salience of a political issue represents the amount of interest one has in an

issue, as well as how often and how recently they have thought about the issue. Less

experience with a political issue allows for more media effects because people lack the

previous considerations necessary to reject information contrary to their opinions (Zaller,

1992). It is impossible to reject information contrary to ones previous opinion if there

are no previous opinions. A lack of previous considerations would reduce selective

retention and increase the influence of the information provided by the news media

concerning the issues.

Another factor influencing the medias power to influence opinions are

4


5/27

characteristics of the messages. The media are likely to influence public opinion when

they consistently present a one-sided communication flow to the public. Zaller (1992,

1996) used survey data to show how mass opinion during the Vietnam War was linked to

the amount of discord among political elites. Throughout most of the War, the public

was overwhelmingly favorable to staying the course. Zaller (1992, 1996) argues that the

consistent support among the public was due to a consensus among political elites on the

issue. The intermediate actor in this relationship is the news media. Elite consensus on

the issue resulted in the media presenting a one-sided communication flow to the public;

the public only heard the pro-war side of the debate. This occurred because the news

media relied on political elites as information sources, which caused the level of discord

in the media to be indexed to the level of discord among political elites.1 The

presentation of a one-sided communication flow in the news media caused those paying

attention to the media to have a consensus concerning the War. Thus, when the media

presents a one-sided communication flow concerning political issues, large media effects

on public opinion are possible.

One problem with Zallers (1992, 1996) study is that the media are taken as a

whole, and not separate parts. Elite opinion can be transferred through straight news

articles or opinion columns and editorials. Although it is very likely that news articles

presented a one-sided communication flow concerning the War, it is unclear whether that

was the cause of public consensus. If opinion columns and editorials follow elite

opinion, they are also likely to present a consensus view concerning the War. The use of

survey data makes it impossible to determine whether the medias influence on public

opinion is driven by opinion columns and editorials or straight news articles.2

1 For more on the concept of indexing in the media see Bennett (1996).2 Zaller was not looking at this question, but rather he examined whether elite consensus influenced publicopinion through the media. Whether the influence was caused by the opinion section or the straight news

5


6/27

The news media were also found to influence retrospective evaluations of the

economy. Hetherington (1996) found that increased exposure to the news media (prior to

the 1992 election) caused people to perceive the economy more negatively. In turn, those

economic perceptions influenced peoples voting decisions. Because most of the

economic news was negative, the incumbent president (George H. W. Bush) suffered at

the polls. This study, too, fails to determine whether economic evaluations were

influenced by learning about the economy from news articles, or from the elites in

opinion columns and editorials. Perhaps people took cues from the elites in the opinion

section on how the economy was doing. Brody (1991) suggests that evaluations of

presidential performance are influenced by elite opinion, one source of which are the

opinion sections of newspapers. In short, both Zaller (1992, 1996) and Hetherington

(1996) found important media effects on public opinion, but it is unclear whether these

effects were driven by the information contained in straight news articles or the opinions

and persuasive arguments contained in the opinion sections of the newspaper.

Recent research has also found media effects on evaluations of political

candidates. Research on Senate election coverage has indicated that the news media can

influence peoples voting decisions, although the influence is minor. Kahn and Kenney

(2002) performed a content analysis of the largest newspaper in each of the fifty states

and combined it with data from surveys asking people in each state about their media

consumption habits and voting decisions. The results indicate that the medias tone

toward Senate candidates influenced readers vote choice. More favorable coverage in

the local newspaper caused candidates vote totals to increase. Kahn and Kenney (2002)

argued that this resulted from the endorsement decisions of the ownership and editorial

articles was of little concern in his research. Therefore, this takes nothing away from his research, butmerely points to an avenue for future research.

6


7/27

staffs because endorsements influenced straight news coverage of Senate candidates.

Editors and owners caused more positive straight news coverage, and the slanted news

influenced readers voting decisions. Similar findings were reported in a case study of

the Minnesota Senate race during the 2000 election (Druckman and Parkin, 2005).

The content analysis in both Kahn and Kenney (2002) and Druckman and Parkin

(2005) failed to separate the influence of editorials and opinion columns from the

influence of straight news articles. Perhaps editorials and opinion columns had a larger

influence on voting decisions than straight news articles. The true cause of opinion

change in these studies, then, might be the content of the opinion section rather than

straight news articles. Opinion columns and editorials are likely slanted toward the

ideological direction of the publisher or editor (Page, 1996). If opinion content is

influenced by the partisan leanings of the newspaper ownersand this is likely the case

it would explain the influence of endorsement decisions. In other words, the partisan

leanings of newspaper editors and owners may cause biased news coverage, but they are

also likely to cause biased opinion content. Without separating the content of the opinion

section from the news articles, it is impossible to determine whether the influence found

in Senate election research was driven by the slant of the newspapers opinion sections or

the papers slanted news coverage of the candidates.

A similar study to Kahn and Kenney (2002) was done on the 1992 presidential

election, but unlike the Senate election research, the researchers in this study separated

the content of opinion columns and editorials from the content of straight news articles.

Dalton, Beck and Huckfeldt (1998) performed a content analysis of newspaper and

television coverage of the candidates in the 1992 presidential election. The results

indicated that the content of the election coverage was mostly objective, but editorials

7


8/27

and opinion columns were more partisan. They combined the content analysis with a

representative survey of select counties throughout the United States. Separating the

opinion content from the content of straight news articles allowed the researchers to

determine which factor was a stronger influence on peoples voting decisions. Survey

results indicated that vote choice was influenced by the content of the newspapers that

people read. Furthermore, the influence of the editorials and opinion columns was

stronger than the influence of straight news articles (which was minimal). The

researchers concluded that editorials and opinion columns influenced voting decisions by

providing partisan cues to the readers that simplified the choices in the election.

Although straight news articles were mostly objective, when bias did existed it had little

influence on readers voting decisions. Rather, it was the more partisan editorials and

opinion columns that influenced voting decisions. In short, Dalton, Beck and Huckfeldt

(1998) provide strong evidence that opinion columns influence public opinion more than

straight news articles.3

The findings of Dalton, Beck and Huckfeldt (1998) are limited by their reliance

on data from the 1992 presidential election. Hetherington (1996) suggests that the 1992

presidential election had uncharacteristically high levels of media effects because of the

poor economy at the time. The dominance of negative economic news coverage during

the campaign caused large media effects on voting decisions, but media effects were

much weaker during the 1984 and 1988 presidential elections. Thus, sole reliance on the

1992 election might have exaggerated the influence of the news media on public opinion.

Reliance on survey data also poses many of the same problems with external validity that

plague most survey research. For one, it is impossible to know whether the survey

3 Subsequent analysis showed that opinion columns and editorials influenced voting decisions even whenreaders interpersonal communications were taken into account (Beck et al., 2002).

8


9/27


10/27

Third, I expand on past research by examining whether media effects are

influenced by the salience of the issues discussed. If opinion columns do influence

support for public policies, is the influence magnified on issues of low salience? I

examine opinions on two issues: Social Security and bankruptcy reform. Social Security

is a moderately salient issue as two years before the experiment, reforming the system

was at the top of President Bushs agenda. Bankruptcy reform took a back seat to Social

Security reform in spring 2005, which likely resulted in people having less knowledge or

interest in the bankruptcy issue. As I discuss in the results section, the lower salience of

the bankruptcy issue is evidenced by the lower levels of interest in bankruptcy reform

(compared to Social Security reform) among participants in my experiment. Looking at

these issues allows me to investigate whether media effects are more powerful on low

salience issues. It is likely that manipulation and persuasion are greater on issues of low

interest or when people have few previous considerations concerning the issues.

Theory

Given the results of past research, I expect opinion columns will have a larger

influence on public opinion than straight news articles. Past research has shown that the

news media act to reinforce, rather than change public opinion (Klapper, 1960). I expect

that reading a biased presentation of a reform plan will not influence peoples level of

support for that plan. Those reading biased news articles are likely to have the same

levels of support as those reading balanced articles.

Although I do not expect straight news articles will influence public opinion, I do

expect opinion columns will be persuasive in bringing people to the side advocated by the

columnist. As mentioned, past research indicates that bias in opinion content influences

readers voting decisions. This leads me to expect opinion content to have a significant

10


11/27

influence on public opinion. Those reading opinion columns written in opposition to the

plan will have significantly less support for the plan than those only reading balanced

straight news articles.

Opinion columns are likely to have more influence because they are meant to be

persuasive. The influence of the opinion sections results from the fact that opinion

columns and editorials generally argue a position. Opinion columnists are typically

political elites who are skilled at developing the best argument for or against a policy.

They also possess the ability to frame the argument in the best possible light, making

some values and considerations appear more relevant than others (Nelson, Clawson and

Oxley, 1997). In short, the persuasiveness of opinion columns and editorials results from

the quality of argument found in the articles.

Another expectation relates to the difference in salience between the two issues

involved in my research. I expect that media effects will have an inverse relationship

with the salience of the issues discussed. The less someone knows about or cares about

an issue, the more likely they are to be influenced by the medias presentation of that

issue. Media effects are more likely to occur on low salience issues compared to higher

salience issues.

Experimental Procedures

For the experiment, participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups.

All participants were exposed to articles concerning Social Security and bankruptcy

reform legislation. One article was written in spring 2005 and concerned adding private

accounts to the Social Security system. Also in the spring of 2005, Congress passed

bankruptcy reform legislation that altered the laws regulating how people could file for

11


12/27

bankruptcy and the rules regarding repayment. In the control group, participants were

exposed to articles presenting both positive and negative aspects of the reform plans; I

refer to this group as the balanced group. A separate group was exposed to the same

articles as the control group, but those articles were modified to exclude almost all

negative considerations concerning the plans.5 This group presents a biased account of

the reform plans, and thus I refer to it as the biased group. Articles for both groups

mentioned positives concerning the bankruptcy and private accounts policies, but only

the balanced group read the negative aspects of the plans. The experiment effectively

isolated the lack of negative considerations as the treatment condition. A comparison of

opinion between the balanced group and the biased group will indicate whether exposure

to a one-sided communication flow influences support for the plan.

A third group of participants were exposed to both the balanced straight news

articles and opinion columns concerning each issue. In other words, the opinion column

group read the two-sided articles (just like the balanced group) but also read opinion

columns concerning each issue.6 The opinion columns were written in theNew York

Times and are opposed to both reform plans. A comparison between the balanced group

and the opinion columns group allows me to determine whether the addition of opinion

columns influences the participants support for the plans.

The participants in the experiment were recruited from undergraduate political

science classes at Washington State University. In all, there were 153 participants in the

5 Articles in both the control and experimental groups provided party cues on the issue. This allows themto use the party as a heuristic to determine whether they support or oppose the policy. The Social Securityarticle mentions Bushs support, but the Bankruptcy article only mentions Republican Senators assupporting the plan; Bushs name is absent. Providing party cues tests whether people rely more oninformation in evaluating policy or rely more on heuristics using effective evaluations of parties (Brady andSniderman, 1985).6 Those in the opinion columns group read four pieces altogether. They read two articles: one articleconcerning bankruptcy, one concerning Social Security. In addition, they read an opinion columnconcerning Social Security and an opinion column concerning bankruptcy reform.

12


13/27

experiment and all received course credit in exchange for their participation. Although

the drawbacks to using undergraduates are well-documented (Sears, 1986), I do not

expect my results to stand alone. My experiment is designed to supplement past research

indicating that editorials and opinion columns have more influence on public opinion

than straight news articles (Dalton, Beck and Huckfeldt, 1998; Beck et al., 2002). The

experiment allows me to overcome the internal validity problems of past research by

isolating opinion columns as the causal stimulus influencing any measured opinion

change. In short, the findings of Dalton, Beck and Huckfeldt (1998) provide external

validity for the basic findings of my experiment, and my results provide the necessary

internal validity lacking in their survey-based research.

Perhaps the most important criticism of using undergraduate students in

experiments is that, because they are younger, they are typically more susceptible to

opinion change or manipulation than a representative sample (Sears, 1986). I attempt to

overcome this problem by comparing the influences of two different stimuli. By

comparing the influence of opinion columns to the influence of news articles, I control

for the increased susceptibility to manipulation found among undergraduates. If

undergraduates are more susceptible to influence, it will cause opinion change in both

groups. If opinion columns are found to be persuasive, but news articles are not, it is not

likely due to the increased susceptibility of college students, but rather it is due to the

persuasiveness of the opinion columns. In other words, by comparing the influence of

opinion columns to biased news articles, I am able to control for undergraduates greater

susceptibility to influence. Essentially, the balanced and biased articles groups serve as

tests of the influence of normal or biased articles on undergraduates perceptions of bias.

Survey Questions

13


14/27

After reading the articles, all participants completed surveys asking various

questions concerning their opinions on the issues. The dependent variables in this study

were the participants opinions on the Social Security and bankruptcy reform policies.

Support for Social Security reform is measured by the following question: Do you

support or oppose changing the current Social Security system to include personal

retirement accounts? Opinion on bankruptcy reform was measured by asking: In 2005,

new laws were passed that made it more difficult to file for bankruptcy. Based on what

you know about the changes to the past laws, do you support or oppose those changes?

For each of these questions, participants were asked to rate their level of support on a 7-

point scale from strongly oppose to strongly support.

14


15/27

Interest in the issues was measured by asking participants to: Please rate how

closely you follow news concerning the following issues on the scale below. The

participants rated their interest in the Social Security and bankruptcy issues on 7-point

scales ranging from not at all interested to very interested. Ideology was measured

on a 7-point scale ranging from liberal (one) to conservative (seven). In addition,

participants were asked whether they consider themselves Republicans or Democrats.

15

Table 1 Characteristics of Participants Across Groups

Balanced Group Biased Group Opinion Columns

Age 20.51 20.71 20.33

Female 57% 40% 37%

Ideology 4.09 4.25 4.29

S.S. Interest 3.78 3.75 3.64

Bank Interest 3.36 3.01 2.96

Republican 38% 47% 43%

Democrats 38% 32% 39%

Television 1.05 1.03 0.77

Newspapers 0.83 0.78 0.72

Internet 1.24 0.84 1.03

Radio 0.17 0.28 0.27

N 47 55 51

The columns represent the characteristics of the participants in the study according to the groups to whichthey were assigned. Age is in years and female shows the percentage of women in each group. Ideology isthe mean for the group and is based on a 7-point scale with 1 representing the most liberal position and 7representing the most conservative position. Interest in both bankruptcy and Social Security reform arealso measured on 7-point scales from not at all interested to very interested. Both the Republican andDemocrat rows represent the percentage of participants in each group identifying as Republicans orDemocrats, respectively. The rest of the participants are used as the baseline for comparison. All of theexposure media sources variables were the mean number of hours in an average day that participantsreceived news from that source. The bottom row represents the number of participants in each group.


16/27

Participants were also asked how many hours per day they usually get news from

television, newspapers, radio, or the internet.

Accompanying these measures were other standard demographic variables such

as age and gender. Table 1 reports the basic demographics, ideology, partisanship and

media attention of the participants by experimental group. The groups were similar

across most independent variables. One exception to this was the distribution of female

participants across the groups, which ranged from 57% in the balanced group to 37% in

group opinion columns group. Because of these differences, all of the models below

include a dummy variable indicating gender. Age was not included in the final models

because it was found to have little influence on the overall results or on the dependent

variables.

Results

Are opinion columns more persuasive than straight news articles? Before getting

to the influence of opinion columns, it is important to understand the influence (or lack of

influence) of straight news articles. Table 2 reports the results from an ordered probit

regression model with support for Social Security and bankruptcy reform as the

dependent variables. The results indicate that the contents of straight news articles have

little influence on participants support for reform. On both issues, the coefficients for

membership in the biased group were negative, indicating that those reading articles

biased in favor of reform had less support than those reading balanced articles.

Therefore, taking away all negative aspects of a policy did not cause more support for

that policy. This is consistent with my expectations given the results of previous research

finding minimal media effects (Klapper, 1960). Surprisingly, on both issues the biased

16


17/27

group showed less support for the plans than the balanced group when other predictors

are taken into account. This is an interesting finding as the biased articles did not present

any negative aspects of the reform plans. One would expect that exposure to only

positive aspects of the plans would cause at least a modest increase in support for the

reform plan. The direction of the influence provides strong evidence that the content (or

slant) of straight news articles does not influence public opinion on political issues. In

short, the contents of straight news articles are not persuasive even when they present a

biased account of public policies.

Table 2 Influences on support for Social Security and bankruptcy reform.

Social Security Opinion Bankruptcy Opinion

Biased Group -.240 (.219) -.031 (.216)

Opinion Columns Group -.525 (.227)* -.477 (.222)*

Ideology .113 (.072) .122 (.071)

Republican .566 (.264)* -.038 (.260)

Democrat .052 (.252) -.544 (.249)*

Interest in the Issue .183 (.065)** -.020 (.068)

Female .199 (.188) -.345 (.185)

Television -.280 (.112)* -.112 (.109)

Paper .179 (.129) -.059 (.125)

Internet -.131 (.091) -.101 (.092)

Radio .082 (.117) .090 (.115)

Cut 1 -0.878 (.495) -2.823 (.528)

Cut 2 0.039 (.483) -1.825 (.475)

17


18/27

Cut 3 0.322 (.481) -1.27 (.468)

Cut 4 1.647 (.492) -0.858 (.466)

Cut 5 2.679 (.515) 0.136 (.463)

Cut 6 1.308 (.468)

N 150 150Log Likelihood -207.93 -232.26

Chi-Square (11) (p-value) 35.44 (p< .001) 35.69 (p< .001)

The results in the first column are from an ordered-probit with opinion toward Social Security as thedependent variable. The second column reports the results with opinion toward bankruptcy as thedependent variable. The columns report the coefficients for both models with standard errors in

parentheses. Both dependent variables are on a 7-point scale, with 1 representing strong opposition and 7representing strong support for the Social Security and bankruptcy reform measures discussed in thearticles and throughout spring of 2005. The biased group and opinion column group variables are dummyvariables indicating the group of the participants. The balanced group is used as the base-line forcomparison to the other groups. Interest in the issues is based on a 7-point scale (with 7 representing veryinterested and 0 indicating no interest) and was asked for each issue separately. Ideology represents a 7-

point scale (with 7 as most conservative). The Republican and Democrat variables are dummy variablesindicating identification with a political party. Those not identifying with either party are used as the

baseline for comparison. Finally, the television, paper, internet and radio variables represent how manyhours in the average day that participants get news from those sources.*p< .05 **p


19/27

Another explanation is that news articles have more influence on public opinion

in Senate elections compared to presidential elections. The lower levels of interest and

knowledge about Senate elections might cause the impressions supplied in news coverage

to be more important in those elections than in presidential elections. Also, in Senate

elections, people are generally restricted to one newspaper for coverage of their Senator,

but there are many different sources in presidential elections that cover the race. Another

factor could be the generally favorable relationship between most Congressmen and their

local reporters (Arnold, 2004; Prior, 2006). This is a matter for future research, as I will

turn to an investigation of the power of opinion columns to influence public opinion.

Although articles have little power to influence public opinion, opinion columns

appear to have some persuasive power over readers. Participants in the opinion columns

group read the same balanced articles read by the control group, and also read one

opinion column on each issue. The results indicate that reading opinion columns

decreased support for the reform plans. This effect is in the expected direction, as the

opinion columns were written in opposition to both plans. Thus, the opinion columns

were persuasive in moving opinion toward opposition (the desired direction) to both

Social Security and bankruptcy reform. This provides strong evidence that opinion

columns can influence public opinion more than straight news articles. In addition, these

findings show that the influences of opinion columns are not confined to voting decisions

in presidential elections, as previous research has found (Dalton, Beck and Huckfeldt,

1998). Opinion columns can also have an influence on public opinion concerning such

issues as Social Security and bankruptcy reform. These findings, coupled with the results

in Dalton, Beck and Huckfeldt (1998) suggest that opinion columns have broad

persuasive power to influence public opinion.

19


20/27

The influence of opinion columns on support for reform is similar for both issues.

Bankruptcy reforms status as a lower salience issue did not influence the persuasiveness

of the opinion columns. The low salience of bankruptcy in comparison to Social Security

is evidenced by the lower levels of interest in the bankruptcy issue. When all the groups

are combined, bankruptcy had a mean score of 3.10 on a 7-point scale. This score is

significantly lower than the participants interest in the Social Security issue (3.72).7

Although bankruptcy is a lower salience issue than Social Security, reading opinion

columns had a similar influence on both issues. Opinion columns had the same influence

on peoples support for bankruptcy reform as they did on support for Social Security

reform. The salience of the issues also had little influence the manipulative power of

straight news articles. In short, the lack of interest in the bankruptcy issue did not appear

to have any impact on peoples susceptibility to influence from either straight news

articles or opinion columns.

What other factors influence support for reform? Surprisingly, ideology had very

little influence on peoples level of support for the plans. Republicans were more likely

to support reforming Social Security than Democrats or Independents, but Democrats

were no less likely to oppose reform than Independents. On the bankruptcy issue,

Republicans were no more likely to support reform than Independents, but Democrats

were significantly more likely to support reform than either Republicans or Independents.

The strongest predictor of support for Social Security reform was interest in the issue, but

this had little influence on opinions toward bankruptcy reform.

An interesting finding is the influence of watching television on peoples support

for Social Security reform. The more television one watched, the more likely they were

7 A difference in means test showed a significant difference between interest in the two issues (t = 5.82, p

Documents

Media Efect