Effects Of Issue Salience Research Articles

Are policymakers responsive to public demand in climate politics?

AbstractNormative theories of democracy agree that public demand should be the main guide in policymaking. But positive theories and related empirical research disagree about the extent to which this holds true in reality. We address this debate with an empirical focus on climate change policy. Specifically, we are interested in whether observable variation in public demand for climate change mitigation can help explain variation in adopted national climate policies. Using our own data to approximate public demand, we estimate the responsiveness of policymakers to changes in public demand in six OECD countries from 1995 to 2010. We find that policymakers are responsive and react in predicted ways to variation in our opinion component of measured public demand, rather than to the mere salience of the climate issue. The effect of issue salience is strongest in combination with our opinion measure as this creates a scope for action. The results underscore the importance and usefulness of our concept and empirical measures for public demand, as well as of our disaggregated analysis of climate policy outputs in this area.

Issue reframing by parties: The effect of issue salience and ownership

Issue reframing occurs when parties, while addressing an issue, shift the frame toward other policy domains. The literature has found that party issue framing affects how voters think about issues, yet scholars remain largely in the dark as to when and how parties frame issues. The study at hand theorizes and investigates when and how parties reframe issues in their external communication. Drawing on novel Belgian data about parties’ official stances regarding a large number of policy issues combined with their verbal argumentation of why they took this exact position, we test a new theory about the drivers and mechanisms of issue reframing. We find that parties reframe issues in terms of policy domains that are both salient to the general public and that are salient to the party itself—meaning that it has a history of devoting attention to the policy domain and “owns” it.

The Effects of Issue Salience, Elite Influence, and Policy Content on Public Opinion

When do citizens rely on party cues, and when do they incorporate policy-relevant information into their political attitudes? Recent research suggests that members of the public, when they possess some policy-relevant information, use that information as much as they use party cues when forming political attitudes. We aim to advance this research by specifying conditions that motivate people to use content over cues and vice versa. Specifically, we believe that increased issue salience motivates people to go beyond heuristics and engage in the systematic processing of policy-relevant information. Using data from a survey experiment that isolates the effects of policy-relevant information, party cues, and issue salience, we find that people are more likely to incorporate policy-relevant information when thinking about hydraulic fracturing (fracking), a relatively high-salience issue. When thinking about storm-water management, a relatively low-salience issue, people are more likely to rely on party cues.

Issue Salience, Subconstituency Politics, and Legislative Representation

To what extent are citizens able to control their elected officials? Does representation improve when issues become visible? Conflicting results in studies of legislative representation are frequently attributed to issue salience or subconstituency politics. However, most conclusions about the effect of issue salience rely on studies of responsiveness on issues held to be either important or visible. Consequently, we have little idea of how changes in salience serve to alter the representational relationship. To examine this question, we employ a natural experiment to exploit the sudden increase in issue visibility surrounding the consideration of the Armenian Genocide Resolution. We are unable to detect any evidence that salience (as measured by visibility) enhances responsiveness to majority preferences. Instead, salience appears to alter legislators’ sensitivity to different intense subconstituency groups in their districts.

Unemployment, Partisan Issue Ownership, and Vote Switching

How do voters respond to individual worries about the employment situation in elections? This paper examines the effect of issue salience of the employment situation on voter choice. Drawing theoretical insights from the partisan salience of issue voting theories, I argue that voters who previously supported parties on the right are likely to change their political allegiance to support a center-left party when they think the employment issue is one of the most salient issues in the election. Furthermore, I argue that middle income voters are more likely to respond to an increasing salience of the employment issue than other groups are. These theoretical arguments are tested against the post-crisis 2002 Korean presidential election survey data. The empirical evidence from the Korean case suggests that structural reforms of the economy and neoliberal economic policies can evoke particular voting patterns in the voters.

The Effects of Issue Salience on Political Decision-making

Game-theoretic models of political decision-making regard policy outcomes as a combined result of actor preferences and institutions. This paper explores the effects of adding relative issue salience to the analysis. I focus on non-cooperative models of complete and perfect information that are based on the concept of structure-induced equilibrium (Shepsle in Am J Polit Sci 23(1):27–59, 1979). Assuming a progressive agenda-setter and two conservative voters, I show how a change of the relative issue salience for players in a game results in a different equilibrium outcome in a political decision-making body.

Philippine media in transition: The effect of issue salience on credibility assessments

A probability sample of 250 adults in the Philippines' Central Luzon region responded to personal interviews that asked to compare the credibility of today's media system with that which prevailed before the ouster of the Marcos regime in 1986; and to make assessments of how salient the agrarian reform issue is to them and to their families. It was then tested whether these salience estimates had any bearing on judgments of mass media credibility. The data provided support for a curvilinear relationship between extremity of issue salience and credibility of media coverage, but against the hypothesized direction: those who perceived the issue as either highly salient or of no salience to them gave higher credibility ratings to the media than those for whom agrarian reform was moderately salient.

Understanding strategic agenda building and its implications for managing change

This article develops a model of strategic agenda building describing the conditions under which strategic issues are likely to receive collective organizational attention. The model depicts how the issue and organizational contexts determine the issues that reach the agenda. Within the issue context, the salience of an issue (i.e., its perceived magnitude, its abstractness, simplicity and immediacy) and the level of issue sponsorship (i.e., issue attachment and strategic location) determine the force behind an issue and the likelihood that it will be placed on the strategic agenda. However, the effect of issue salience and sponsorship on an issue's force is moderated by the size and variety of issues already under consideration (i.e., the agenda structure). The article concludes with consideration of the theoretical and practical implications of this dynamic, process-oriented approach to strategic issue identification and legitimation.