Processing the War in Iraq While Learning About American Politics

Abstract

When political knowledge is scarce, affective attitudes, which can consist of emotion-driven feelings regarding political figures, government, country, and foreign nations, often assist policy judgment. Based on pre- and postsurveys administered in Introduction to American Politics courses, fall 2003–fall 2005, this study examines how political learning affects the formulation of students' policy preferences on the war in Iraq. With political knowledge gains for our students, the relative impact of affective attitudes such as confidence in the President, trust in government, and enemy images of Iran declined with regard to Iraq policy preferences, while the relationship between issue preferences such as defense spending and Iraq policy strengthened. Our students' attentiveness and surveillance knowledge of contemporary political figures and facts was more significantly related to preferences on the current occupation than on the past decision to invade Iraq. Teaching methods with more extensive course integration of TV news and film clips had higher surveillance knowledge gains that reduced student's reliance on affective attitudes, wherein the learning impact appeared more influential than potential emotion evoked by heightened awareness of political figures and facts related to a contentious and contemporary debate.