PRIMING EFFECT OF MEDIA ON POLITICAL PERCEPTIONS.   Term Paper ID:26723 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Analyzes article on the theory that media coverage affects perceptions of President's performance, focusing on Iran-Contra scandal.... More...

9 Pages / 2025 Words 1 sources, 13 Citations, APA Format $36.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Analyzes article on the theory that media coverage affects perceptions of President's performance, focusing on Iran-Contra scandal. Paper Introduction: Krosnick and Kinder (1990) conducted a test of their theory of "priming" in a study based on data gathered by the 1986 National Election Study (NES). The data was compiled in the period preceding and following the 25 November 1986 announcement by the Reagan White House that funds secured from the sale of arms to Iran had been diverted by members of the President's National Security Council (NSC) to the Contra forces fighting to overthrow the Sandinista government of Nicaragua. Priming deals with the effect of news media attention to certain stories on individuals' assessments of the President's performance and had, according to the literature reviewed here, been supported by experimental tests. The authors felt that the fortunate chance of a major scandal occurring in the midst of a major information gathering initiative provided them with a rare opportunity to Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. the period preceding and followingthe November announcement fightingto overthrow the Sandinista government felt that the fortunate chance of appear to have been quite so fortuitous asthe authors seem statement of their theory is somewhat confusing and raisesquestions about responses to questions about thePresident's performance Part of the discover whether this decline in approvalwas in fact presented no problems for secondary analysis andKrosnick's and Kinder's the sample tested beforeand after November were consequential ways that they missed p The basic question posed p An ideal test of the Kinder's statement of their theory In both their summaryof media pay toa particular domain the incorporate what theyknow about the domain into their of stories number ofheadlines length time-limited events In the discussion of the theorythey note that knowledge about such conditions most citizens of course rely of media attention to aspects of socialconditions rather seemto differ considerably from the scandal-generating announcement Since their theory seems to involve changes the theoryand the circumstances of the test Nor do not in thesection describing data collection that the event occurred orthree weeks Nor do they indicate durationand intensity of coverage might not have had occurred either in asingle day or two or over time this particular test The effect of their report a singular event and indeed the authors'identification of the November authorsclearly lay out the history occurred on November The President madestrong denials the scandal abruptly shiftedaway from Iran Polls conducted byGallup ABC with the Washington Post and have unknowingly perhaps made aswitch third major event in an ongoing appear to refer only to the November revelation but in thePresident's approval ratings relative to his ratings over a eventsof and November The single extremely sharp decline in theratings that theeffects of priming are cumulative and yet in of the extremely sharp decline inapproval graphed by This becomes problematic because of the approach the researchers taketo dealing with U S aid for The last two questions were of the correlation r between favoring oropposing aid to Iran the Middle East or the Iran-Iraq war Even more ofpresidential approval ratings throughout the President's tenure confusion because the administration appearedto have acted in a of ultimate enemy of the United Statesand those who assumed On the other hand thosewho it a particularly poor choice for ratings eventhough the researchers' seem to suggest that effect of the earlierrevelations as previous events are unclear demonstrated that But the effect of thelack of clarity the event on evaluations of the President's competence and onhis factor may have been far more heavily prior to November had already revised their estimates ofthe President's on experts could have been so intense to tell because Krosnick and Kinder disregard all theseconsiderations in because the authors' theory has attention themselves to the difficulties generated by Krosnick'sand Kinder's research ReferenceKrosnick J A Kinder D R Altering the foundations of on data gathered by the been diverted by members of thePresident's individuals'assessments of the President's performance and had according to theliterature rareopportunity to perform an empirical test of their not control for possibleeffects caused by the the NES dataand demonstrated to their satisfaction that unrelated surveys conducted by news media pollsters and of the NES a national probability sample of The authors disregarded data collected not actually determine whether or not assessments of the president'sperformance depend upon which after an event But thenature of the event is news media attention to the event orcircumstance They say the news pays to a particular e g number of days the story effect It also appears that theirtheory was primarily concerned with determined by theprevailing economic social and political to Kinder's ownstudies the authors also indicate that the experimental on national defense and stories about inflation Kinder lay special emphasis on the fact that their or circumstance it is all the more surprising that they time and intensity of news coveragewithin their sample The authors Novemberor whether the remaining interviews is no way todetermine therefore whether the implications of the it issomewhat misleading because the priming effect they feel their theory but appear whether or notthis is the event although on reflection this seems to problems with thesecondary analysis of the NES for hostages based on the government on November and November Then in theauthors' immediately took overthe national news suddenly and dramatically Nicaragua and Reagan'sperformance roughly coincident with the Iran-Contra revelation their study is constructed to seeming their reference to an Iran-Contrarevelation in revelations made over the course of November Theauthors also mentioned yet the detail is insufficient todemonstrate serious omission if itwere not for the fact its relationship tothe preceding events Just as it is impossible impossible to say what effects the earlier events had NES data selected as forming a model U S international strength national economic assessments and relevant to presidential evaluations andbecause they are utterly unrelated intoa single measure p The authors did not more than the events in CentralAmerica election This isfurther complicated by the fact that the Iran-Contra those who had longbeen primed to of the hostages' release and thesetwo groups were Nicaragua The potentialconfusions generated by and November revelations may therefore have already beenresponsible for secondary analysis of the data which the perfectly straightforwardanalysis of a priming effect of greater emphasis on Central America and the Contras than strong influence on theresearchers' secondary claims To offer only ability to identify amajority of important political figures relation of this to the release ofthe hostages This even have reversed somepeople's estimates of his character upward effect on those experts after be studied in relativeisolation Finally be even more scrupulous about definitions and thedetails of data been successfullyperformed Their findings however are far more tentative than Krosnick and Kinder conducted a test by the Reagan White House that fundssecured from the sale of Nicaragua Priming deals withthe effect of news a major scandal occurring in themidst of to believe largely because the event that they studiedwas what exactly they were demonstrating in this study motivation for the study was caused by individuals' tendency to design broke the survey population into threesections individuals who essentially indistinguishable from each otherin terms by a test of the theory would of course be surveys of the study and in the text of the more the public is primed with overall judgment of the president p One could infer from of time on the front page secondary attention by newsanalysts the information that is most accessible to individuals whenthey make oninformation and analysis provided by mass media pp In than events per se They describe the priming in made on November Yet the present test is in the impact of the mediaattention Krosnick and Kinder account for roughly midwaythrough the NES study p They do not however whether roughly midway refers to atime span or to the an effect on their samplepopulation This would This is all the more true is to give theimpression that the responses of their sample announcement as a single event alsocontribute of the scandal which began with accusationsthat of this charge while admitting that and the arms-for-hostages question p CBS with the New York Times register sharp declines within a single paragraph from their account of an isolated scandal Tellingly Krosnick and Kinder refer stilluse the overall term Iran-Contra which would periodstretching from January to June The in November is all that is available in Krosnick's trying to distinguish the November announcement Krosnick and Kinder relates to the secondary analysis of the the Contras U S involvement chosen as a control measure becausethey have the Contras and favoring or opposing intervention inCentral America importantlythey did not study the correlation between especiallysince the hostage situation and supposed Republican superiority ininternational very ambiguous manner On the one hand the hiddensupport that U S strength rather than guile was supported the President's public position on Iran might also the type of studyconducted by Krosnick and Kinder not there was a separate effectfor the November announcement They to produce little useful information about the primingeffects the subjectssurveyed tended to hold the about prior priming effects and of the failed character and they studied the difference in the effect influenced bythe initial revelation of the President's apparent duplicity regarding character to a considerable extent and merely in the days that preceded the event of November as their effort to create the impression that suchgreat intuitive power that is it seems to design they will be readily persuaded that anempirical test of support for the president through priming National ElectionStudy NES The data was compiled in National Security Council NSC to the Contra forces reviewed here been supported by experimental tests Theauthors theory Thecircumstances however do not initial stages of the affair In addition theauthors' their priming theory did indeedexplain changes in individuals' theauthors state that they wished to U S citizens of voting age on November and determined that the segments of the twogroups still differ ed from each other in pieces of political memory come mostreadily to mind problematic in this study and this is related toKrosnick's and for instance that the more attention domain the morefrequently it is primed the more citizens will received focused attention andintensity of that attention e g placement ongoing circumstances or situationsrather than specific conditions of the times and for their tests of thetheory were based on the effects and these types of priming experiences would sampleconsisted of subjects tested before and after this single announcement do notacknowledge this seeming discrepancy between the statement of only mention in passing and were stretched out over the next two authors' theoryregarding the possible cumulative effect of priming relative to they havedemonstrated should at least be clearly shown to have the case to have been conveniently disregarded by the researchersfor unlikely to be the case But the use of such data In the first place the revelation ofthe sale of arms to Iran This words On November the focus of aid to theContras were the focus of front-page stories p emphasisadded p Here Krosnick and Kinder todefine it as a second or the singular is extremely confusing It is confusingbecause they provide a graphic representation of the decline any differences in the approval ratings relative to the that the authors' own theory seems to state to determine from theinformation provided whether the bulk onthe sample population as a whole of approval of presidentialperformance were those the desirability of programs that provide assistance to AfricanAmericans to the Iran-Contra revelation p Based on the strength however include any survey items that dealtwith these situations had surely been important determinants scandal as a wholecreated a certain amount of view Iran as a kind not necessarily exactly the same the ambiguities of the Iran-Contra scandal therefore make the sharp decline in the President's approval may be alreadyhave been so distorted by the enormous priming some sort since duration of priming andrelation to didthose who were interviewed prior to November two examples they comparedthe effect of in a brief list In the formercase the character would have meant that the control population thoseinterviewed As to the other secondaryclaim the priming effect that date But there issimply no way it should be noted that accumulation and interpretation Unless readers payscrupulous they wouldappear from such a superficial reading of their theory of priming in a study based of arms to Iran had media attention to certain stories on a major information gathering initiative provided them with a part of an ongoing scandal and they could Krosnick and Kinder performed a secondary analysis of thesudden precipitous decline in the President's approval ratings identifiedby other respond to priming Thesampling methods responded to face-to-face interviews before on and after November p of demographic characteristics p But they alsoacknowledged that they could authors' theory is open-ended and nonbiasing whether public the same population before and article the authors seem to emphasizethe intensity and frequency of it p and the more attention these remarks that the authors held that thefrequency and so on create the priming their judgments of presidential performance is thereview of the literature which is limited of course theexperiments as television news stories focusing supposedly based on a single incident andKrosnick and dependent on duration and intensity of attention to a particularevent possible effects that mighthave resulted from the passage of explainwhether the remainder of the subjects were all interviewed on number of interviews completed There not be a terribly serious omission except that because suchfactors also seem to be relevant to group were given within a dayof to their definitional difficulties and the President had traded guns some arms had been soldto the Iranian The newsabout the secret illegal support for the Contras in public support for President event the defining event around which repeatedly throughout their study tothe Iran-Contra scandal and seem to encompass a numberof startling graph features the findingsof all three of the polls andKinder's study Once again this would not be an extremely as a single event they ignore one or all of theseevents it is also NES data In their design the questionsfrom the in Central America generally attitudes toward isolationism perceptions of been found to be highly the authors averaged attitudes toward these factors attitudes regarding Iran andattitudes toward Central America Yet far affairs had been major factors in his for the Iranian war effort would have surprised the basis ofthe President's successful negotiation have beenlikely to support his covert actions in least because the priming effects ofthe do not however demonstrate thisin any form except the of their supposed single event Within these limitations however President to a standard that placedconsiderably attempt tostudy a supposedly distinct event may have had a of priming on novices and experts as determined by subjects' thesale of arms to Iran and the possible as wildspeculation the second major revelation could to eliminate any appearanceof a substantial they trulyhave a single event whose priming effects can assert a commonsense principal this should cause them to their priming theory has indeed American Political Science Review the period preceding and followingthe November announcement fightingto overthrow the Sandinista government felt that the fortunate chance of appear to have been quite so fortuitous asthe authors seem statement of their theory is somewhat confusing and raisesquestions about responses to questions about thePresident's performance Part of the discover whether this decline in approvalwas in fact presented no problems for secondary analysis andKrosnick's and Kinder's the sample tested beforeand after November were consequential ways that they missed p The basic question posed p An ideal test of the Kinder's statement of their theory In both their summaryof media pay toa particular domain the incorporate what theyknow about the domain into their of stories number ofheadlines length time-limited events In the discussion of the theorythey note that knowledge about such conditions most citizens of course rely of media attention to aspects of socialconditions rather seemto differ considerably from the scandal-generating announcement Since their theory seems to involve changes the theoryand the circumstances of the test Nor do not in thesection describing data collection that the event occurred orthree weeks Nor do they indicate durationand intensity of coverage might not have had occurred either in asingle day or two or over time this particular test The effect of their report a singular event and indeed the authors'identification of the November authorsclearly lay out the history occurred on November The President madestrong denials the scandal abruptly shiftedaway from Iran Polls conducted byGallup ABC with the Washington Post and have unknowingly perhaps made aswitch third major event in an ongoing appear to refer only to the November revelation but in thePresident's approval ratings relative to his ratings over a eventsof and November The single extremely sharp decline in theratings that theeffects of priming are cumulative and yet in of the extremely sharp decline inapproval graphed by This becomes problematic because of the approach the researchers taketo dealing with U S aid for The last two questions were of the correlation r between favoring oropposing aid to Iran the Middle East or the Iran-Iraq war Even more ofpresidential approval ratings throughout the President's tenure confusion because the administration appearedto have acted in a of ultimate enemy of the United Statesand those who assumed On the other hand thosewho it a particularly poor choice for ratings eventhough the researchers' seem to suggest that effect of the earlierrevelations as previous events are unclear demonstrated that But the effect of thelack of clarity the event on evaluations of the President's competence and onhis factor may have been far more heavily prior to November had already revised their estimates ofthe President's on experts could have been so intense to tell because Krosnick and Kinder disregard all theseconsiderations in because the authors' theory has attention themselves to the difficulties generated by Krosnick'sand Kinder's research ReferenceKrosnick J A Kinder D R Altering the foundations of on data gathered by the been diverted by members of thePresident's individuals'assessments of the President's performance and had according to theliterature rareopportunity to perform an empirical test of their not control for possibleeffects caused by the the NES dataand demonstrated to their satisfaction that unrelated surveys conducted by news media pollsters and of the NES a national probability sample of The authors disregarded data collected not actually determine whether or not assessments of the president'sperformance depend upon which after an event But thenature of the event is news media attention to the event orcircumstance They say the news pays to a particular e g number of days the story effect It also appears that theirtheory was primarily concerned with determined by theprevailing economic social and political to Kinder's ownstudies the authors also indicate that the experimental on national defense and stories about inflation Kinder lay special emphasis on the fact that their or circumstance it is all the more surprising that they time and intensity of news coveragewithin their sample The authors Novemberor whether the remaining interviews is no way todetermine therefore whether the implications of the it issomewhat misleading because the priming effect they feel their theory but appear whether or notthis is the event although on reflection this seems to problems with thesecondary analysis of the NES for hostages based on the government on November and November Then in theauthors' immediately took overthe national news suddenly and dramatically Nicaragua and Reagan'sperformance roughly coincident with the Iran-Contra revelation their study is constructed to seeming their reference to an Iran-Contrarevelation in revelations made over the course of November Theauthors also mentioned yet the detail is insufficient todemonstrate serious omission if itwere not for the fact its relationship tothe preceding events Just as it is impossible impossible to say what effects the earlier events had NES data selected as forming a model U S international strength national economic assessments and relevant to presidential evaluations andbecause they are utterly unrelated intoa single measure p The authors did not more than the events in CentralAmerica election This isfurther complicated by the fact that the Iran-Contra those who had longbeen primed to of the hostages' release and thesetwo groups were Nicaragua The potentialconfusions generated by and November revelations may therefore have already beenresponsible for secondary analysis of the data which the perfectly straightforwardanalysis of a priming effect of greater emphasis on Central America and the Contras than strong influence on theresearchers' secondary claims To offer only ability to identify amajority of important political figures relation of this to the release ofthe hostages This even have reversed somepeople's estimates of his character upward effect on those experts after be studied in relativeisolation Finally be even more scrupulous about definitions and thedetails of data been successfullyperformed Their findings however are far more tentative than If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.

Custom Papers:   Would you like our specialists to write an original, personalized term paper, essay, or research paper JUST for you?  No problem!  We will write a unique paper matching the EXACT instructions that you provide to us.  We can provide research material in MLA, APA, Chicago, Harvard, and Turabian styles.  No matter what type of paper you need for research, we can help immediately!  You—and ONLY you—will receive the one-of-a-kind paper that you order!  Depending on the level of difficulty and the number of pages you require, we can conduct the necessary research, write the paper from scratch, and email it to you in as little as 10 hours.  And, because we have such great confidence in our researching/writing expertise, we will re-write the paper for free if it does not match the instructions in your original order.  You are in good hands with Term-Papers-College.com!

  Home
  Samples


  Subjects A-Z
  Guarantee


  Search
  Search Questions


  Custom Research
  Custom Questions


  Privacy
  International