Abstract
Combining data from a content analysis of leading newspapers, a random-sampled national survey ([Formula: see text]), and a semantic network analysis of Facebook postings, this study applies Network Agenda Setting and attribute-priming effects to examine how perceptions of risks, benefits, and trust in government regulation influenced the public’s evaluation of the Presidential performance in the 2012 controversy over imports of American beef in Taiwan. The results show that only perceived risks to health directly affected the public’s evaluation of the President; other types of risks damaged the public’s trust in government regulation, which consequently harmed their evaluation of the President’s performance.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call