Moments That Last - The Impact of Stereotypes on Framing Effect Duration

Research on political communication, framing and priming has cast doubt on the idea that individuals develop their attitudes towards political alternatives based solely on rational-choice considerations. Instead, tiny differences in the presentation and promotion of different options through, i.e., frames have been shown to affect citizens’ decisions. Given this paradigm change in our understanding of voters’ decision-making, it is surprising that the duration of effects evoked by such methods of political communication has not yet been thoroughly scrutinized. The large-N (n ≈ 6000) study at hand addresses this shortcoming by investigating the longevity of framing effects when they are accompanied by stereotypes. A prominent theory of framing holds that framing effects occur when a dimension of an issue or object to be evaluated is made more accessible, applicable or cognitively available by a frame. Stereotypes, on the other hand, are highly accessible, familiar bits of information that introduce additional facets of meaning to an issue. When these additional facets are applicable to the context of the frame, framing effects should change: though higher familiarity will curtail immediate framing effectiveness, the additional facets of meaning of stereotypical frames should generate longer-lasting framing effects. To empirically support these theoretical expectations, a 2x2 survey experiment is implemented in Germany in June 2023. Germany provides a fitting study context as it received considerable numbers of refugees both in 2015 and 2022. During these time periods, the differing compositions of refugee groups in terms of gender led to diverse reactions by various agents of civic discourse and triggered controversial public debates. Thereby, both on- and offline reactions frequently played on gender stereotypes to portray refugees differently and propose differing treatments. Against this backdrop, the experiment frames the gender of refugees, by presenting respondents with information on the percentage of female refugees, or, alternatively, with information on the overall gender composition of refugees in Germany. Further, either a stereotype-inducing supplement or no stereotype-inducing supplement is shown. Respondents are then asked to assess a policy aimed specifically at supporting female refugees with childcare benefits - a policy identified to align with common stereotypes associated with female refugees. Finally, in a follow-up survey, respondents are retested for their attitudes towards the proposed policy, and those respondents in the framing condition paired with the stereotype-inducing supplement are expected to exhibit opinions most closely aligned to their views stated immediately after initial treatment. The results of this study contribute to the understanding of frames in political communication: By introducing stereotypes as relevant moderators of framing effects, knowledge on when framing effects last is empirically expanded. Taking these two together, the study carves out the exceptional impact of frames and stereotypes on non-rational-choice decision-making. To the best of my knowledge, the present study is the first to establish this connection. It thus adds to the modern understanding of voters’ decision-making.