Publication Type
Journal Article
Version
publishedVersion
Publication Date
3-2015
Abstract
We draw from theories of motivated reasoning, dual-processing models, and attribution of responsibility to examine how scientific messages may increase public polarization with respect to emerging risk issues such as Lyme disease. A nationally representative sample of Americans (N = 460) read messages about Lyme disease that varied the framing of responsibility for the prevalence of the disease (human/wildlife vs. wildlife only) and when its effects will occur (today vs. in the next 10 years). The influence of framing was contingent on participants’ partisanship, which resulted in a boomerang effect among Republicans and increased the degree of political polarization regarding support for proenvironmental behaviors.
Keywords
framing, motivated reasoning, temporal distance, dual-processing, One Health
Discipline
Business and Corporate Communications | Health Policy | Social Influence and Political Communication
Research Areas
Corporate Communication
Publication
Science Communication
Volume
37
Issue
3
First Page
340
Last Page
370
ISSN
1075-5470
Identifier
10.1177/1075547015575181
Publisher
SAGE Publications (UK and US)
Citation
Sungjong ROH; MCCOMAS, Katherine A.; RICKARD, Laura N.; and DECKER, Daniel J..
How motivated reasoning and temporal frames may polarize opinions about wildlife disease risk. (2015). Science Communication. 37, (3), 340-370.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/4836
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Additional URL
https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547015575181
Included in
Business and Corporate Communications Commons, Health Policy Commons, Social Influence and Political Communication Commons