Political actions and outcomes depend on people's preferences over candidates, policies, and other politically relevant phenomena. For this reason, a great deal of political activity entails attempts to change other people's preferences. When do politically relevant preferences change? Addressing this question requires recognition of two realities: () Many stimuli compete for every person's attention, and () every person's capacity to pay attention to information is limited. With these realities in mind, we review research on preference change in competitive environments. We discuss how individuals allocate attention and how individuals' values and identities affect their use of the information to which they attend. We then discuss how this work has been applied to a new problem: improving the communication of scientific facts in increasingly politicized environments.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Aarøe L. 2011. Investigating frame strength: the case of episodic and thematic frames. Polit. Commun. 28:207–26 [Google Scholar]
  2. Abdelal R, Herrera YM, Johnston AI, McDermott R. 2009. Measuring Identity: A Guide for Social Scientists Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  3. Akerlof GA, Kranton RE. 2010. Identity Economics: How Our Identities Shape Our Work, Wages, and Well-Being Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  4. Althaus S, Coe K. 2011. Priming patriots: social identity processes and the dynamics of public support for war. Public Opin. Q. 75:65–88 [Google Scholar]
  5. Arceneaux K. 2012. Cognitive biases and the strength of political arguments. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 56:271–85 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bartels LM. 2002. Beyond the running tally: partisan bias in political perceptions. Polit. Behav. 24:117–50 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bartels LM. 2005. Homer gets a tax cut: inequality and public policy in the American mind. Perspect. Polit. 3:15–31 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bartels LM. 2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  9. Baum MA, Groeling T. 2010. Reality asserts itself: public opinion on Iraq and the elasticity of reality. Int. Organ. 64:443–79 [Google Scholar]
  10. Baumeister RF, Leary MR. 1995. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol. Bull. 117:497–529 [Google Scholar]
  11. Baumgartner FR, Green-Pedersen C, Jones BD. 2006. Comparative study of policy agendas. J. Eur. Public Policy 13:959–74 [Google Scholar]
  12. Berinsky AJ. 2015. Rumors and health care reform: experiments in political misinformation. Br. J. Polit. Sci. In press. doi: 10.1017/S0007123415000186 [Google Scholar]
  13. Bloom PB, Arikan G, Courtemanche M. 2015. Religious social identity, religious belief, and anti-immigration sentiment. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 109:203–21 [Google Scholar]
  14. Blumer H. 1958. Race prejudice as a sense of group position. Pac. Sociol. Rev. 1:3–7 [Google Scholar]
  15. Bobo LD, Hutchings VL. 1996. Perceptions of racial group competition: extending Blumer's theory of group position to a multiracial social context. Am. Sociol. Rev. 61:951–72 [Google Scholar]
  16. Bobo LD, Tuan M. 2006. Prejudice in Politics: Group Position, Public Opinion, and the Wisconsin Treaty Rights Dispute Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  17. Bohner G, Dickel N. 2011. Attitudes and attitude change. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 62:391–417 [Google Scholar]
  18. Bolsen T, Druckman JN. 2015. Counteracting the politicization of science. J. Commun. 65745–69 [Google Scholar]
  19. Bolsen T, Druckman JN, Lomax Cook F. 2014. How frames can stunt support for scientific adaptations: politicization and the status quo bias. Public Opin. Q. 78:1–26 [Google Scholar]
  20. Boudreau C. 2009. Closing the gap: When do cues eliminate differences between sophisticated and unsophisticated citizens?. J. Polit. 71:964–76 [Google Scholar]
  21. Boudreau C, MacKenzie SA. 2014. Informing the electorate? How party cues and policy information affect public opinion about initiatives. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 58:48–62 [Google Scholar]
  22. Brewer MB, Roccas S. 2001. Individual values, social identity, and optimal distinctiveness. Individual Self, Relational Self, Collective Self C Sedikides, M Brewer 219–37 Philadelphia: Psychol. Press [Google Scholar]
  23. Brewer PR. 2008. Value War: Public Opinion and the Politics of Gay Rights Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield [Google Scholar]
  24. Brooks DJ, Valentino BA. 2011. A war of one's own: understanding the gender gap in support for war. Public Opin. Q. 75:270–86 [Google Scholar]
  25. Bullock JG. 2011. Elite influence on public opinion in an informed electorate. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 105:496–515 [Google Scholar]
  26. Carroll SJ, Fox RL. 2006. Gender and Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  27. Chapp CB. 2012. Religious Rhetoric and American Politics: The Endurance of Civil Religion in Electoral Campaigns Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  28. Chong D, Druckman JN. 2007. Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 101:637–55 [Google Scholar]
  29. Chong D, Druckman JN. 2010. Dynamic public opinion: communication effects over time. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 104:663–80 [Google Scholar]
  30. Chong D, Kim D. 2006. The experiences and effects of economic status among racial and ethnic minorities. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 100:335–51 [Google Scholar]
  31. Clifford S, Jerit J, Rainey C, Motyl M. 2015. Moral concerns and policy attitudes: investigating the influence of elite rhetoric. Polit Commun. 33:229–48 [Google Scholar]
  32. Cobb MD, Nyhan B, Reifler J. 2013. Beliefs don't always persevere: how political figures are punished when positive information about them is discredited. Polit. Psychol. 34:307–26 [Google Scholar]
  33. Cohen GL. 2003. Party over policy: the dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 85:808–22 [Google Scholar]
  34. Conley D, Rauscher E. 2013. The effect of daughters on partisanship and social attitudes toward women. Sociol. Forum 28:700–18 [Google Scholar]
  35. Crano WD, Prislin R. 2006. Attitudes and persuasion. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 57:345–74 [Google Scholar]
  36. Dancey L, Sheagley G. 2013. Heuristics behaving badly: party cues and voter knowledge. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 57:312–25 [Google Scholar]
  37. Davidov E, Schmidt P, Schwartz SH. 2008. Bringing values back in: the adequacy of the European Social Survey to measure values in 20 countries. Public Opin. Q. 72:420–45 [Google Scholar]
  38. Dawson MC. 1995. Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African-American Politics Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  39. Dawson MC. 2001. Black Visions: The Roots of Contemporary African-American Political Ideologies Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
  40. DellaVigna S, Gentzkow M. 2010. Persuasion: empirical evidence. Annu. Rev. Econ. 2:643–69 [Google Scholar]
  41. Dietz T. 2013. Bringing values and deliberation to science communication. PNAS 109:14081–87 [Google Scholar]
  42. Druckman JN. 2015. Eliminating the local warming effect. Nat. Clim. Change 5:176–77 [Google Scholar]
  43. Druckman JN, Bolsen T. 2011. Framing, motivated reasoning, and opinions about emergent technologies. J. Commun. 61:659–88 [Google Scholar]
  44. Druckman JN, Hennessy CL, St. Charles K, Webber J. 2010. Competing rhetoric over time: frames versus cues. J. Polit. 72:136–48 [Google Scholar]
  45. Druckman JN, Lupia A. 2000. Preference formation. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 3:1–24 [Google Scholar]
  46. Druckman JN, Peterson E, Slothuus R. 2013. How elite partisan polarization affects public opinion formation. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 107:57–79 [Google Scholar]
  47. Egan PJ, Mullin M. 2012. Turning personal experience into political attitudes: the effect of local weather on Americans' perceptions about global warming. J. Polit. 74:796–809 [Google Scholar]
  48. Feldman S. 2003. Values, ideology, and the structure of political attitudes. The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology D Sears, L Huddy, R Jervis 477–508 New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  49. Feldman S, Zaller J. 1992. The political culture of ambivalence: ideological responses to the welfare state. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 36:268–307 [Google Scholar]
  50. Freudenburg WR, Gramling R, Davidson D. 2008. Scientific certainty argumentation methods (SCAMs): science and the politics of doubt. Sociol. Inq. 78:2–38 [Google Scholar]
  51. Gastil J, Braman D, Kahan D, Slovic P. 2005. The “Wildavsky heuristic”: the cultural orientation of mass political opinion Work. Pap. No. 107, Yale Law Sch. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=834264 [Google Scholar]
  52. Gastil J, Braman D, Kahan D, Slovic P. 2011. The cultural orientation of mass political opinion. PS: Polit. Sci. Polit. 44:711–14 [Google Scholar]
  53. Gay C. 2004. Putting race in context: identifying the environmental determinants of black racial attitudes. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 98:547–62 [Google Scholar]
  54. Gay C, Tate K. 1998. Doubly bound: the impact of gender and race on the politics of black women. Polit. Psychol. 19:169–84 [Google Scholar]
  55. Goren P. 2005. Party identification and core political values. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 49:882–97 [Google Scholar]
  56. Goren P. 2013. On Voter Competence New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  57. Hatemi PK, McDermott R. 2011. Man is by Nature a Political Animal: Evolution, Biology, and Politics Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
  58. Healy A, Lenz GS. 2014. Substituting the end for the whole: why voters respond primarily to the election-year economy. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 58:31–47 [Google Scholar]
  59. Healy A, Malhotra N. 2013a. Childhood socialization and political attitudes: evidence from a natural experiment. J. Polit. 75:1023–37 [Google Scholar]
  60. Healy A, Malhotra N. 2013b. Retrospective voting reconsidered. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 16:285–306 [Google Scholar]
  61. Herring M, Jankowski TB, Brown RE. 1999. Pro-black doesn't mean anti-white: the structure of African-American group identity. J. Polit. 61:363–86 [Google Scholar]
  62. Hochschild J, Einstein KL. 2015. Do Facts Matter? Norman: Univ. Okla. Press [Google Scholar]
  63. Hochschild JL, Weaver VM. 2007. The skin color paradox and the American racial order. Soc. Forces 86:643–70 [Google Scholar]
  64. Hochschild JL, Weaver VM, Burch TR. 2012. Creating a New Racial Order: How Immigration, Multiracialism, Genomics, and the Young Can Remake Race in America Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  65. Holm EM. 2012. Emotions as Mediators of Framing Effects Aarhus, Den: Politica [Google Scholar]
  66. Huber GA, Hill SJ, Lenz GS. 2012. Sources of bias in retrospective decision making: experimental evidence on voters' limitations in controlling incumbents. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 106:720–41 [Google Scholar]
  67. Huddy L. 2003. Group identity and political cohesion. The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology DO Sears, L Huddy, R Jervis 511–58 New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  68. Huddy L, Mason L, Aarøe L. 2015. Expressive partisanship: campaign involvement, political emotion, and partisan identity. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 109:1–17 [Google Scholar]
  69. Hutchings VL, Valentino N. 2004. The centrality of race in American politics. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 7:383–408 [Google Scholar]
  70. Hutchings VL, Wong C. 2014. Racism, group position, and attitudes about immigration among blacks and whites. Du Bois Rev.: Soc. Sci. Res. Race 11:419–42 [Google Scholar]
  71. Iheduru O. 2006. Social values, democracy, and the problem of African American identity. J. Black Stud. 37:209–30 [Google Scholar]
  72. Iyengar S, Sood G, Lelkes Y. 2012. Affect, not ideology: a social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opin. Q. 76:405–31 [Google Scholar]
  73. Jacoby WG. 2014. Is there a culture war? Conflicting value structures in American public opinion. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 108:754–71 [Google Scholar]
  74. Jasanoff SS. 1987. Contested boundaries in policy-relevant science. Soc. Stud. Sci. 17:195–230 [Google Scholar]
  75. Jerit J, Barabas J. 2006. Bankrupt rhetoric: how misleading information affects knowledge about Social Security. Public Opin. Q. 70:278–303 [Google Scholar]
  76. Jost JT, Amodio DM. 2012. Political ideology as motivated social cognition: behavioral and neuroscientific evidence. Motiv. Emot. 36:55–64 [Google Scholar]
  77. Junn J. 2007. From coolie to model minority: U.S. immigration policy and the construction of racial identity. Du Bois Rev: Soc. Sci. Res. Race 4:355–73 [Google Scholar]
  78. Jussim L. 2012. Social Perceptions and Social Reality: Why Accuracy Dominates Bias and Self-Fulfilling Prophecy New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  79. Kahan DM. 2010. Fixing the communications failure. Nature 463:296–97 [Google Scholar]
  80. Kahan DM. 2015. Climate-science communication and the measurement problem. Adv. Polit. Psychol. 36:1–43 [Google Scholar]
  81. Kahneman D. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow New York: Farrar, Strauss & Giroux [Google Scholar]
  82. Kang SK, Bodenhausen GV. 2015. Multiple identities perception and interaction: challenges and opportunities. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 66:547–74 [Google Scholar]
  83. Karpowitz CF, Mendelberg T. 2014. . The Silent Sex: Gender, Deliberation, and Institutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  84. Kelman M. 2011. The Heuristics Debate New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  85. Kinder DR, Kam CD. 2010. Us Against Them: Ethnocentric Foundations of American Opinion Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
  86. Klar S. 2013. The influence of competing identity primes on political preferences. J. Polit. 75:1108–24 [Google Scholar]
  87. Klar S, Robison J, Druckman JN. 2013. Political dynamics of framing. New Directions in Media and Politics TN Ridout 173–92 New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  88. Kuklinski JH, Quirk PJ. 2000. Reconsidering the rational public: cognition, heuristics, and mass opinion. Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality A Lupia, MD McCubbins, SL Popkin 153–82 New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  89. Kuklinski JH, Quirk PJ, Jerit J, Schwieder D, Rich RF. 2000. Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. J. Polit. 62:790–816 [Google Scholar]
  90. Kull S, Ramsay C, Lewis E. 2003. Misperceptions, the media, and the Iraq war. Polit. Sci. Q. 118:569–98 [Google Scholar]
  91. Lau RR, Redlawsk DP. 2001. Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 45:951–71 [Google Scholar]
  92. Lau RR, Redlawsk DP. 2006. How Voters Decide: Information Processing in Election Campaigns New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  93. Lavine HG, Johnston CD, Steenbergen MR. 2012. The Ambivalent Partisan: How Critical Loyalty Promotes Democracy Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  94. Lien P, Conway MM, Wong J. 2004. The Politics of Asian Americans: Diversity and Community New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  95. Lowery BS, Unzueta MM, Knowles ED, Goff PA. 2006. Concern for the in-group and support for affirmative action. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 90:961–74 [Google Scholar]
  96. Lupia A. 2013. Communicating science in politicized environments. PNAS 110:14048–54 [Google Scholar]
  97. Lupia A. 2014. What is the value of social science? Challenges for researchers and government funders. PS: Polit. Sci. Polit. 47:1–7 [Google Scholar]
  98. Lupia A. 2015. Uninformed: Why People Know So Little About Politics and What We Can Do About It New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  99. Lupia A, Levine AS, Menning JO, Sin G. 2007. Were Bush tax cut supporters “simply ignorant”? A second look at conservatives and liberals in “Homer gets a tax cut.”. Perspect. Polit. 5:773–84 [Google Scholar]
  100. Lupia A, McCubbins MD. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know? Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  101. Maio GR, Olson JM. 2000. What is a value expressive attitude?. Why We Evaluate: Functions of Attitudes GR Maio, JM Olson 249–69 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
  102. Malhotra N, Kuo AG. 2008. Attributing blame: the public's response to Hurricane Katrina. J. Polit. 70:120–35 [Google Scholar]
  103. Masuoka N. 2011. The “multiracial” option: social group identity and changing patterns of racial categorization. Am. Polit. Res. 39:176–204 [Google Scholar]
  104. Mondak JJ. 2010. Personality and the Foundations of Political Behavior New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  105. Monroe KR, Hankin J, Van Vechten RB. 2000. The psychological foundations of identity politics. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 3:419–47 [Google Scholar]
  106. Nelson TE, Garst J. 2005. Values-based political messages and persuasion: relationships among speaker, recipient, and evoked values. Polit. Psychol. 26:489–516 [Google Scholar]
  107. Nicholson S. 2012. Polarizing cues. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 56:52–66 [Google Scholar]
  108. Niemi RG, Jennings MK. 1991. Issues and inheritance in the formation of party identification. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 35:970–88 [Google Scholar]
  109. Nyhan B, Reifler J. 2010. When corrections fail: the persistence of political misperceptions. Polit. Behav. 32:303–30 [Google Scholar]
  110. O'Keefe DJ. 2016. Persuasion: Theory and Research Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  111. Oreskes N, Conway EM. 2010. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming New York: Bloomsbury [Google Scholar]
  112. Oswald A, Powdthavee N. 2010. Daughters and left-wing voting. Rev. Econ. Stat. 92:213–27 [Google Scholar]
  113. Pérez EO. 2015. Ricochet: how elite discourse politicizes racial and ethnic identities. Polit. Behav. 37:155–80 [Google Scholar]
  114. Pielke RA. 2007. The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  115. Piurko Y, Schwartz SH, Davidov E. 2011. Basic personal values and the meaning of left-right political orientations in 20 countries. Polit.. Psychol. 32:537–61 [Google Scholar]
  116. Poortinga W, Aoyagi M, Pidgeon NF. 2013. Public perceptions of climate change and energy futures before and after the Fukushima incident: a comparison between Britain and Japan. Energ. Policy 62:1204–11 [Google Scholar]
  117. Pornpitakpan C. 2004. The persuasiveness of source credibility: a critical review of five decades' evidence. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 34:243–81 [Google Scholar]
  118. Prewitt K. 2013. Is any science safe?. Science 340:525 [Google Scholar]
  119. Prewitt K, Schwandt TA, Straf ML. 2012. Using Science as Evidence in Policy Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press [Google Scholar]
  120. Robison J. 2014. Why politics? Understanding the motives behind political interest PhD thesis, Northwest. Univ., Evanston, IL [Google Scholar]
  121. Rogers RR. 2006. Afro-Caribbean Immigrants and the Politics of Incorporation: Ethnicity, Exception, or Exit Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  122. Rokeach M. 1968. Beliefs, attitudes, and values: a theory of organization and change. J. Soc. Issues 24:13–33 [Google Scholar]
  123. Rokeach M. 1973. The Nature of Human Values New York: Free Press [Google Scholar]
  124. Sapiro V. 2004. Not your parents' political socialization: introduction for a new generation. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 7:1–23 [Google Scholar]
  125. Schwartz SH. 1992. Universals in the content and structure of values: theory and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 25 M Zanna 1–65 New York: Academic [Google Scholar]
  126. Schwartz SH. 1994. Are there universal aspects in the content and structure of values?. J. Soc. Issues 50:19–45 [Google Scholar]
  127. Schwartz SH, Boehnke K. 2004. Evaluating the structure of human values with confirmatory factor analysis. J. Res. Pers. 38:230–55 [Google Scholar]
  128. Schwartz SH, Caprara GV, Vecchione M. 2010. Basic personal values, core political values, and voting: a longitudinal analysis. Polit. Psychol. 31:421–52 [Google Scholar]
  129. Schwartz SH, Caprara GV, Vecchione M, Bain P, Bianchi G. et al. 2014. Basic personal values underlie and give coherence to political values: a cross national study in 15 countries. Polit. Behav. 36:899–930 [Google Scholar]
  130. Schwarz N, Sanna LJ, Skurnik I, Yoon C. 2007. Metacognitive experiences and the intricacies of setting people straight: implications for debiasing and public information campaigns. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 39:127–61 [Google Scholar]
  131. Shafer EF, Malhotra N. 2011. The effect of a child's sex on support for traditional gender roles. Soc. Forces 90:209–22 [Google Scholar]
  132. Shildkraut DJ. 2011. National identity in the United States. Handbook of Identity Theory and Research 2 SJ Schwartz, K Luyckx, VL Vignoles 845–65 New York: Springer [Google Scholar]
  133. Shildkraut DJ. 2014. Boundaries of American identity: evolving understandings of “us.”. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 17:441–60 [Google Scholar]
  134. Shrestha LB. 2006. The changing demographic profile of the Unites States Rep. RL32701, CRS Rep. Congr., Libr. Congr., Washington, DC [Google Scholar]
  135. Sidanius J, Levin S, Van Laar C, Sears D. 2008. The Diversity Challenge: Social Identity and Intergroup Relations on the College Campus New York: Russell Sage [Google Scholar]
  136. Sides J, Citrin J. 2007. European opinion about immigration: the role of identities, interests and information. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 37:477–504 [Google Scholar]
  137. Simien EM. 2005. Race, gender, and linked fate. J. Black Stud. 35:529–50 [Google Scholar]
  138. Sniderman PM, Bullock J. 2004. A consistency theory of public opinion and political choice: the hypothesis of menu dependence. Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change WE Saris, PM Sniderman 337–57 Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  139. Sniderman PM, Fletcher JF, Russell PH, Tetlock PE, Gaines BJ. 1991. The fallacy of democratic elitism: elite competition and commitment to civil liberties. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 21:349–70 [Google Scholar]
  140. Sniderman PM, Hagendoorn L. 2007. When Ways of Life Collide: Multiculturalism and Its Discontents in the Netherlands Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  141. Sniderman PM, Highton B. 2011. Facing the Challenge of Democracy: Explorations in the Analysis of Public Opinion and Political Participation Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  142. Sniderman PM, Petersen MB, Slothuus R, Stubager R. 2015. Paradoxes of Liberal Democracy Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  143. Sniderman PM, Stiglitz EH. 2012. The Reputational Premium: A Theory of Party Identification and Policy Reasoning Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  144. Sniderman PM, Theriault SM. 2004. The structure of political argument and the logic of issue framing. Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change W Saris, PM Sniderman 133–65 Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  145. Somin I. 2006. Knowledge about ignorance: new directions in the study of political information. Crit. Review 18:1–3255–79 [Google Scholar]
  146. Steketee M. 2010. Some skeptics make it a habit to be wrong. The Australian Nov. 20. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/some-sceptics-make-it-a-habit-tobe-wrong/story-fn59niix-1225956414538 [Google Scholar]
  147. Stoker L, Jennings MK. 1995. Life-cycle transitions and political participation: the case of marriage. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 89:421–33 [Google Scholar]
  148. Strolovitch DZ. 2007. Affirmative Action: Race, Class, and Gender in Interest Group Politics Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
  149. Suhay E, Druckman JN. 2015. Introduction to the politics of science: political values and the production, communication, and reception of scientific knowledge. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 658:6–15 [Google Scholar]
  150. Tajfel H. 1970. Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Sci. Am. 223:96–102 [Google Scholar]
  151. Tajfel H. 1981. Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  152. Tate K. 1994. From Protest to Politics: The New Black Voters in American Elections Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  153. Tate K. 2010. What's Going On? Political Incorporation and the Transformation of Black Public Opinion Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  154. Transue JE. 2007. Identity salience, identity acceptance, and racial policy attitudes: American national identity as a uniting force. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 51:78–91 [Google Scholar]
  155. van der Linden SL, Leiserowitz AA, Feinberg GD, Maibach EW. 2015. The scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: experimental evidence. PLOS ONE 10:e0118489 [Google Scholar]
  156. Van Deth JW, Abendschön S, Vollmar M. 2011. Children and politics: an empirical reassessment of early political socialization. Polit. Psychol. 32:147–74 [Google Scholar]
  157. Warner RL. 1991. Does the sex of your children matter? Support for feminism among women and men in the United States and Canada. J. Marriage Fam. 53:1051–56 [Google Scholar]
  158. Washington E. 2008. Family socialization: how daughters affect their legislator fathers' voting on women's issues. Am. Econ. Rev. 98:311–32 [Google Scholar]
  159. Weaver VM. 2012. The electoral consequences of skin color: the “hidden” side of race in politics. Polit. Behav. 34:159–92 [Google Scholar]
  160. Weber EU, Stern P. 2011. The American public's understanding of climate change. Am. Psychol. 66:315–28 [Google Scholar]
  161. White IK. 2007. When race matters and when it doesn't: racial group differences in response to racial cues. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 101:339–54 [Google Scholar]
  162. Wildavsky A. 1987. Choosing preferences by constructing institutions: a cultural theory of preference formation. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 81:3–22 [Google Scholar]
  163. Winter NJG. 2008. Dangerous Frames: How Ideas About Race and Gender Shape Public Opinion Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
  164. Zaval L, Keenan EA, Johnson EJ, Weber EU. 2014. How warm days increase belief in global warming. Nat. Clim. Change 4:143–47 [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error