框架效应与公众对教育政策中种族平等的态度

IF 2.4 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
David M. Quinn
{"title":"框架效应与公众对教育政策中种族平等的态度","authors":"David M. Quinn","doi":"10.3102/01623737231200202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Frames shape public opinion on policy issues, with implications for policy adoption and agenda-setting. What impact do common issue frames for racial equity in education have on voters’ support for racially equitable education policy? Across survey experiments with two independent representative polls of California voters, framing effects were moderated by voters’ prior policy preferences. Among respondents concerned with tax policy, a frame emphasizing the economic benefits of equity elicited higher priority for racial equity in education. Among respondents concerned with social justice, an “equal opportunity” frame elicited higher priority ratings. However, exploratory analyses showed frames only mattered when respondents held mixed policy preferences. Among respondents who (a) valued both tax policy and social justice issues, or who (b) valued neither, both frames were equally impactful.","PeriodicalId":48079,"journal":{"name":"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis","volume":"76 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Framing Effects and the Public’s Attitudes Toward Racial Equity in Education Policy\",\"authors\":\"David M. Quinn\",\"doi\":\"10.3102/01623737231200202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Frames shape public opinion on policy issues, with implications for policy adoption and agenda-setting. What impact do common issue frames for racial equity in education have on voters’ support for racially equitable education policy? Across survey experiments with two independent representative polls of California voters, framing effects were moderated by voters’ prior policy preferences. Among respondents concerned with tax policy, a frame emphasizing the economic benefits of equity elicited higher priority for racial equity in education. Among respondents concerned with social justice, an “equal opportunity” frame elicited higher priority ratings. However, exploratory analyses showed frames only mattered when respondents held mixed policy preferences. Among respondents who (a) valued both tax policy and social justice issues, or who (b) valued neither, both frames were equally impactful.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48079,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737231200202\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737231200202","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

框架塑造公众对政策问题的看法,对政策采纳和议程设置产生影响。教育中种族平等的共同议题框架对选民对种族平等教育政策的支持有什么影响?在对加州选民进行的两次独立代表性民意调查中,框架效应受到选民先前政策偏好的调节。在关注税收政策的受访者中,强调公平的经济利益的框架使教育中的种族平等得到了更高的优先考虑。在关注社会公正的受访者中,“机会均等”的框架获得了更高的优先级。然而,探索性分析表明,只有当受访者持有混合政策偏好时,框架才起作用。在(a)同时重视税收政策和社会正义问题,或(b)两者都不重视的受访者中,这两个框架的影响是一样的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Framing Effects and the Public’s Attitudes Toward Racial Equity in Education Policy
Frames shape public opinion on policy issues, with implications for policy adoption and agenda-setting. What impact do common issue frames for racial equity in education have on voters’ support for racially equitable education policy? Across survey experiments with two independent representative polls of California voters, framing effects were moderated by voters’ prior policy preferences. Among respondents concerned with tax policy, a frame emphasizing the economic benefits of equity elicited higher priority for racial equity in education. Among respondents concerned with social justice, an “equal opportunity” frame elicited higher priority ratings. However, exploratory analyses showed frames only mattered when respondents held mixed policy preferences. Among respondents who (a) valued both tax policy and social justice issues, or who (b) valued neither, both frames were equally impactful.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis (EEPA) publishes manuscripts of theoretical or practical interest to those engaged in educational evaluation or policy analysis, including economic, demographic, financial, and political analyses of education policies, and significant meta-analyses or syntheses that address issues of current concern. The journal seeks high-quality research on how reforms and interventions affect educational outcomes; research on how multiple educational policy and reform initiatives support or conflict with each other; and research that informs pending changes in educational policy at the federal, state, and local levels, demonstrating an effect on early childhood through early adulthood.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信