Click here for the syllabus
Readings are below. Let me know if any links do not work...
Week 1. Jan 14
Introductions.
Week 2. Jan 22
Definitions from public policy, IR, comparative politics, sociology, and communications.
Stone, Deborah A. 1989. Causal Stories and the Formation of Policy Agendas. Political Science Quarterly 104, 2 (Summer): 281–300.
Haas, Peter M. 1992. Introduction. Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination. International Organization 46 (1): 1-35.
Hall, Peter A. 1993. Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics 25: 275–96.
Schneider, Anne, and Helen Ingram. 1993. Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy. American Political Science Review 87 (2): 334–47.
Entman, R. M. 1993. Framing: Towards Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication 43 (4): 51–58.
Benford, Robert D., and David A. Snow. 2000. Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment. Annual Review of Sociology 26: 611-39.
Campbell, John L. 2002. Ideas, Politics, and Public Policy. Annual Review of Sociology 28: 21-38.
Week 3. Jan 29
Cognitive basics.
Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. 1973. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science 185 (4157): 1124-31.
Simon, Herbert A. 1985. Human Nature in Politics: The Dialogue of Psychology with Political Science. American Political Science Review 79: 293–304.
Slovic, Paul. 1987. Perception of Risk. Science 236 (4799): 280-85.
Quattrone, George A., and Amos Tversky. 1988. Contrasting Rational and Psychological Analyses of Political Choice. American Political Science Review 82, 3 (Sept.): 719–736.
Baumeister, Roy F., Ellen Bratslavsky, Catrin Finkenauer, and Kathleen D. Vohs. 2001. Bad Is Stronger Than Good. Review of General Psychology 5: 323-370. [ok to skim this one]
Dijksterhuis, Ap. 2004. Think Different: The Merits of Unconscious Thought in Preference Development and Decision Making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 87 (5): 586–98.
Huntsinger, Jeffrey R. 2013. Anger Enhances Correspondence Between Implicit and Explicit Attitudes. Emotion 13, 2: 350–7.
Graham, Jesse, Jonathan Haidt, and Brian A. Nosek. 2009. Liberals and Conservatives Rely on Different Sets of Moral Foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96, 5: 1029–46.
Week 4. Feb 5
Motivated reasoning.
Lord, Charles G., Lee Ross, and Mark R. Lepper. 1979. Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered Evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 (11): 2098-2109.
Kunda, Ziva. 1990. The Case for Motivated Reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108(3): 480-98.
Ditto, Peter H. and David F. Lopez. 1992. Motivated Skepticism: Use of Differential Decision Criteria for Preferred and Nonpreferred Conclusions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 63 (4): 568-84.
Edwards, Kari, and Edward E. Smith. 1996. A Disconfirmation Bias in the Evaluation of Arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71 (1): 5-24.
Taber, Charles S. and Milton Lodge. 2006. Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 755-69.
Gaines, Brian J., James H. Kuklinski, Paul J. Quirk, Buddy Peyton and Jay Verkuilen. 2007. Interpreting Iraq: Partisanship and the Meaning of Facts. Journal of Politics 69 (4): 957-74.
Peffley, Mark and Jon Hurwitz. 2007. Persuasion and Resistance: Race and the Death Penalty in America. American Journal of Political Science 51(4): 996-1012.
Nyhan, Brendan and Jason Reifler. 2010. When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions. Political Behavior 32: 303–30.
Note: One-page memo due describing your term paper topic in conceptual terms and a general idea of the empirical / theoretical approach, relevant literature, and your goals in it (article project, MA thesis idea, PhD idea, etc.). It is ok to give multiple possible topics so we can choose the best one.
Week 5. Feb 12
Source credibility and competitive reframing.
Riker, William H. 1986. The Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven: Yale University Press, ch. 10, Warren Magnuson and Nerve Gas.
Baumgartner, Frank R., Jeffrey M. Berry, Marie Hojnacki, David C. Kimball, and Beth L. Leech. 2009. Lobbying and Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, chapter 9, Washington: The Real No-Spin Zone, pp. 166-89. part 1 and part 2 (PDF is too bid otherwise; make sure you get both parts)
Chaiken, Shelly. 1979. Communicator Physical Attractiveness and Persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37, 8: 1387-97.
Druckman, James N. 2004. Political Preference Formation: Competition, Deliberation, and the (Ir)relevance of Framing Effects. American Political Science Review 98 (4): 761–86.
Druckman, James N. 2001. On the Limits of Framing Effects: Who Can Frame? Journal of Politics 63, 4 (November): 1041–66.
Druckman, James N. and Dennis Chong. 2013. Counter-Framing Effects. Journal of Politics 75: 1–16.
Druckman, James N., and Kjersten R. Nelson. 2003. Framing and Deliberation: How Citizens’ Conversations Limit Elite Influence. American Journal of Political Science 47, 4 (October): 729–45.
Week 6. Feb 19 Race and framing
Eberhardt, Jennifer L., Phillip Atiba Goff, Valerie J. Purdie, and Paul G. Davies. 2004. Seeing Black: Race, Crime, and Visual Processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 87, 6: 876–93.
Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo, Amanda Lewis, and David G. Embrick. 2004. I Did Not Get That Job Because of a Black Man...: The Story Lines and Testimonies of Color-Blind Racism. Sociological Forum 19, 4 (December): 555-81.
Henricks, Kasey. 2018. “I’m Principled Against Slavery, but…”: Colorblindness and the Three-Fifths Debate. Social Problems 2018 65: 285–304.
Hetey, Rebecca C., and Jennifer L. Eberhardt. 2014. Racial Disparities in Incarceration Increase Acceptance of Punitive Policies. Psychological Science 25, 10 (October): 1949-54.
Rattan A, Levine CS, Dweck CS, Eberhardt JL. 2012. Race and the Fragility of the Legal Distinction between Juveniles and Adults. PLoS ONE 7, 5: e36680.
Eberhardt, Jennifer L., Paul G. Davies, Valerie J. Purdie-Vaughns, and Sheri Lynn Johnson. 2005/06. Looking Deathworthy: Perceived Stereotypicality of Black Defendants Predicts Capital-Sentencing Outcomes. Psychological Science 17, 5: 383-6.
Eberhardt, Jennifer L., Nilanjana Dasgupta, and Tracy L. Banaszynski. 2003. Believing is Seeing: The Effects of Racial Labels and Implicit Beliefs on Face Perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29, 3 (March): 360-70.
Gilliam, Franklin D., Jr., and Shanto Iyengar. 2000. Prime Suspects: The Influence of Local Television News on the Viewing Public. American Journal of Political Science 44, 3 (July): 560–573.
Kteily, Nour S. and Emile Bruneau. 2017. Darker Demons of Our Nature: The Need to (Re)Focus Attention on Blatant Forms of Dehumanization. Current Directions in Psychological Science 26, 6: 487–494.
Note: Annotated bibliography due. This means you should have identified the key source material you are planning to use. You don’t have to have read it all yet but you should have identified the likely suspects. A longer bibliography is better than a short one. No need for extensive annotations, but rather just a list of readings organized by the topics that you plan to cover.
Week 7. Feb 26 Framing as attention-shifting
Jones, Bryan D. 1994. Reconceiving Decision-Making in Democratic Politics: Attention, Choice, and Public Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Week 8. Mar 5. The policy effects of framing
Baumgartner, Frank R., Suzanna L. De Boef and Amber E. Boydstun. 2008. The Decline of the Death Penalty and the Discovery of Innocence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Baumgartner, Frank R., and Bryan D. Jones. 1991. Agenda Dynamics and Policy Subsystems. Journal of Politics 53 (November): 1044–74.
Rose, Max, and Frank R. Baumgartner. 2013. Framing the Poor: Media Coverage and US Poverty Policy, 1960–2008. Policy Studies Journal, 41, 1: 22–53
Note: Research design statement due. This means you should have identified the key data source material you are planning to use and provide a plan for the logistics of your empirical project. If this is a qualitative project, explain the cases you will be exploring. If quantitative, explain the data and analytic power you expect to have. Again, you don’t have to have done much, but you must have a plan. The more information you can give me, the better.
Spring Break, March 9-17
Week 9. Mar 19. Framing inequality, understanding the politics of the estate tax
McCall, Leslie. 2013. The Undeserving Rich: American Beliefs about Inequality, Opportunity, and Redistribution. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Scheve, Kenneth, and David Stasavage. 2012. Democracy, War, and Wealth: Lessons from Two Centuries of Inheritance Taxation. American Political Science Review 106, 1 (February): 81-102.
Green, Joshua. 2011. Meet Mr. Death. The American Prospect. 19 December.
The Case for Death Duties. 2007. The Economist. 25 October.
Week 10. Mar 26. Policy change by a single professional entrepreneur based on very little data.
Armstrong, Elizabeth M. 2003. Conceiving Risk, Bearing Responsibility: Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and the Diagnosis of Moral Disorder. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Jones, Kenneth L., David W. Smith, Christy N. Ulleland, and Ann Pytkowicz Streissguth. 1973. Pattern of Malformation in Offspring of Chronic Alcoholic Mothers. The Lancet 1, 7815 (9 June): 1267–71.
Note: Detailed outline of paper due. This should include a full structure, planned cites, methods, etc. The text need not be written but the structure should be complete, in outline form. You’ll be surprised how easy it is to complete the paper if you have a complete outline in the proper order.
Week 11. Apr 2. Policy change that makes no sense: The worldwide craze for abolition of alcohol sales.
Schrad, Mark Lawrence. 2010. The Political Power of Bad Ideas: Networks, Institutions, and the Global Prohibition Wave. New York: Oxford University Press.
Week 12. Apr 9. Charter Schools: why?
Henig, Jeffrey R. 2008. Spin Cycle: How Research Is Used in Policy Debates: The Case of Charter Schools. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Week 13. Apr 16. How the Supreme Court was taken over, a long-term view
Teles, Steven M. 2008. The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Week 14. Apr 23. Why some good ideas never catch on.
Carpenter, Charli. 2014. “Lost” Causes: Agenda Vetting in Global Issue Networks and the Shaping of Human Security. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Note: Papers Due, paper copies in class, also emailed to me before class time.