媒体框架、党派认同和澳大利亚银行业丑闻

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Australian Journal of Political Science Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI:10.1080/10361146.2021.1879009
Pepper D. Culpepper, Taeku Lee
{"title":"媒体框架、党派认同和澳大利亚银行业丑闻","authors":"Pepper D. Culpepper, Taeku Lee","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2021.1879009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In 2017 the Australian government appointed a Royal Commission of inquiry into malfeasance in the banking sector. This article reports findings from a 2018 survey on attitudes to financial regulation and a survey experiment testing different media treatments. Attitudes on financial regulation are distinct from left-right positions on redistributive issues; we find no significant relationship between partisan identification and preferences for financial regulation. In the experimental treatment, all three frames catalysed anger and disgust from readers. However, neither of the two strong partisan frames moved policy preferences. The non-partisan frame – which included messages associated with both left and right, and which linked both parties to systemic capture by the banks – was the only article that had any effect on policy preferences, but only with non-partisan identifiers. Our results suggest that persuasive frames focused on the capture of politics by banking interests can move opinions of swing voters on financial regulation.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"56 1","pages":"73 - 98"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10361146.2021.1879009","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Media frames, partisan identification and the Australian banking scandal\",\"authors\":\"Pepper D. Culpepper, Taeku Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10361146.2021.1879009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In 2017 the Australian government appointed a Royal Commission of inquiry into malfeasance in the banking sector. This article reports findings from a 2018 survey on attitudes to financial regulation and a survey experiment testing different media treatments. Attitudes on financial regulation are distinct from left-right positions on redistributive issues; we find no significant relationship between partisan identification and preferences for financial regulation. In the experimental treatment, all three frames catalysed anger and disgust from readers. However, neither of the two strong partisan frames moved policy preferences. The non-partisan frame – which included messages associated with both left and right, and which linked both parties to systemic capture by the banks – was the only article that had any effect on policy preferences, but only with non-partisan identifiers. Our results suggest that persuasive frames focused on the capture of politics by banking interests can move opinions of swing voters on financial regulation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46913,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Political Science\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"73 - 98\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10361146.2021.1879009\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Political Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1879009\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1879009","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要2017年,澳大利亚政府任命了一个皇家银行业渎职调查委员会。本文报道了2018年一项关于金融监管态度的调查结果,以及一项测试不同媒体处理方式的调查实验。对金融监管的态度不同于对再分配问题的左右立场;我们发现,党派认同与金融监管偏好之间没有显著关系。在实验处理中,所有三个框架都引发了读者的愤怒和厌恶。然而,这两个强大的党派框架都没有改变政策偏好。无党派框架——包括与左翼和右翼相关的信息,并将两党与银行的系统性捕获联系起来——是唯一一篇对政策偏好有任何影响的文章,但仅与无党派标识符有关。我们的研究结果表明,专注于银行利益集团获取政治的有说服力的框架可以改变摇摆选民对金融监管的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Media frames, partisan identification and the Australian banking scandal
ABSTRACT In 2017 the Australian government appointed a Royal Commission of inquiry into malfeasance in the banking sector. This article reports findings from a 2018 survey on attitudes to financial regulation and a survey experiment testing different media treatments. Attitudes on financial regulation are distinct from left-right positions on redistributive issues; we find no significant relationship between partisan identification and preferences for financial regulation. In the experimental treatment, all three frames catalysed anger and disgust from readers. However, neither of the two strong partisan frames moved policy preferences. The non-partisan frame – which included messages associated with both left and right, and which linked both parties to systemic capture by the banks – was the only article that had any effect on policy preferences, but only with non-partisan identifiers. Our results suggest that persuasive frames focused on the capture of politics by banking interests can move opinions of swing voters on financial regulation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Australian Journal of Political Science is the official journal of the Australian Political Studies Association. The editorial team of the Journal includes a range of Australian and overseas specialists covering the major subdisciplines of political science. We publish articles of high quality at the cutting edge of the discipline, characterised by conceptual clarity, methodological rigour, substantive interest, theoretical coherence, broad appeal, originality and insight.
期刊最新文献
Path contingency: advancing a spatial-institutionalist perspective on decision pathways for disaster risk governance ‘The Australian way’: the gendered and racial logics of Scott Morrison’s climate change narratives Religious freedom for whom? How conservative Christianity erodes the religious freedom of those it seeks to discriminate against Free speech, religious freedom and vilification in Australia Bridging the expectation gap: a survey of Australian PhD candidates and supervisors in politics and international relations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1