Compare methods
Review your selected methods side by side; rows that differ are highlighted.
| Issue Framing Experiment× | Motivated Reasoning Experiment× | |
|---|---|---|
| Field | Political Psychology | Political Psychology |
| Family | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Year of origin≠ | 1997 | 2006 |
| Originator≠ | Thomas Nelson; Dennis Chong & James Druckman | Charles Taber & Milton Lodge |
| Type | Survey/lab experiment | Survey/lab experiment |
| Seminal source≠ | Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A., & Oxley, Z. M. (1997). Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91(3), 567-583. DOI ↗ | Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755-769. DOI ↗ |
| Aliases | Framing Effects Experiment, Emphasis Framing Study, Equivalence Framing Experiment | Directional Motivated Reasoning Study, Biased Assimilation Experiment, Disconfirmation Bias Paradigm |
| Related | 4 | 4 |
| Summary≠ | An issue framing experiment manipulates how a political issue is described, emphasizing different considerations, to test how framing shifts opinion. Nelson, Clawson and Oxley's (1997) classic study showed that framing a Klan rally as a free-speech issue versus a public-order issue changed tolerance judgments, and Chong and Druckman (2007) systematized framing theory and the experimental methods used to estimate framing effects. | A motivated reasoning experiment tests whether people process political information to reach conclusions they are directionally motivated to hold rather than the most accurate ones. Building on Kunda's (1990) theory and crystallized by Taber and Lodge (2006), these designs expose partisans to attitude-congruent and incongruent arguments and measure biased assimilation, disconfirmation bias, attitude polarization, and selective exposure. |
| ScholarGateDataset ↗ |
|
|