Political communication often primes citizens' opinions without changing them. This article argues that crystallized attitudes—like partisanship and basic values—are primed by new information, while less ingrained policy preferences are more likely to be altered. Analysis of five cases supports this distinction between predispositions and policy views, showing how media content tends to reinforce rather than reshape fundamental beliefs or modify surface-level opinions.
Core Argument: Crystallized attitudes (e.g., partisanship) are typically primed by new information, whereas less crystallized preferences can be changed based on prior convictions.
* Key Insight: Political messages often interact with citizens' underlying predispositions rather than shifting core beliefs directly.
* Underlying Mechanism: Attention shifts from policy issues to more relevant crystallized attitudes in priming scenarios.
* Contrast Method: Less ingrained opinions are susceptible to change via media content, unlike deeply held predispositions.
Empirical Evidence: Examination of five diverse cases demonstrates this dynamic between priming and opinion change mechanisms. The findings suggest political campaigns and media strategies often underestimate their impact on crystallized attitudes like partisanship or religiosity while overestimating effects on policy preferences.
| Priming Predispositions and Changing Policy Positions: An Account of When Mass Opinion Is Primed or Changed was authored by Michael Tesler. It was published by Wiley in AJPS in 2015. |
