Mimicking Public Debate? How Do Multiple Frame Environments Affect Attitudes Toward Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions?

Abstract

Prior research on multiple frame environments has employed hypothetical issues to examine the effects of individual level characteristics on public opinion. This work adds to the literature by examining attitudes toward current and divisive issues, same-sex marriage and civil unions. These issues are particularly good tests of the effects of multiple frame environments in that same-sex marriage is best understood as an ‘easy’ issue, whereas civil unions, require subjects to have greater knowledge of the policy, and are better understood as a ‘hard’ issue.To examine these related, but distinct, questions I rely on a variety of framing environments which vary the strength and direction (support or opposition for the issue) of the frames provided to respondents. Results indicate that framing environments produce substantial variation in subject response across both the same-sex marriage and civil unions treatments. In particular, framing environments which employ frames of equivalent strength appear to moderate subject opinion across both issues. Framing environments which employ stronger and weaker frames do bias responses in the direction of the stronger frame. Providing multiple frames advocating the same position on an issue also bias subject response in the direction of the frames presented. These effects persist when controlling for subject core values and political sophistication, and across other gay rights issues.