9423125 Stimson This Doctoral Dissertation Research Support addresses the question: Why at some times, does the American public favor governmental action to promote racial equality, whereas at other times, the public opposes such action? Existing theories of racial attitudes cannot account for such swings between liberalism and conservatism. The dissertation student will propose a theory of public opinion that can explain such variation over time. It begins with the premise that most citizens feel value conflict on issues of public policy, sympathizing with both sides of most issues. The balance of these "competing considerations" is tipped by a variety of personal and situational forces. Among these the national media, which frame political issues in the context of values, become the keys to accounting for over time macro movements of opinion. As the media's framing of issues changes over time, as it did in the case of race, then so will the balance of competing considerations in the minds of individuals, and hence the balance of policy preferences in the aggregate. Specifically, when the national media frame their coverage of racial issues in the context of egalitarianism, the public comes to prefer a more active government to promote equality. In contrast, when the media frame their coverage in the language of individualism, the public becomes less enthusiastic about such government activity. These shifts in public opinion, it is argued, lead to changes in public policy, which in turn have significant consequences for relative equality between blacks and whites. The thesis is tested in a longitudinal design where racial public opinion is measured from existing survey materials, media framing is tapped by content analysis, and other plausible influences are included for full model specification. ***
