Public opinion on energy development: the interplay of issue framing, top-of-mind associations, and political ideology

Clarke, Christopher E., Hart, Philip S., Schuldt, Jonathon P., Evensen, Darrick T. N. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8892-0052, Boudet, Hilary S., Jacquet, Jeffrey B. and Stedman, Richard C. 2015. Public opinion on energy development: the interplay of issue framing, top-of-mind associations, and political ideology. Energy Policy 81 , pp. 131-140. 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.02.019

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

In this article, we examine framing effects regarding unconventional oil and gas extraction using hydraulic fracturing (or fracking): an issue involving considerable controversy over potential impacts as well as terminology used to describe it. Specifically, we explore how two commonly used terms to describe this issue – fracking or shale oil or gas development – serve as issue frames and influence public opinion. Extending existing research, we suggest that these frames elicit different top-of-mind associations that reflect positive or negative connotations and resonate with people's political ideology. These associations, in turn, help explain direct and indirect framing effects on support/opposition as well as whether these effects differ by political ideology. Results of a split-ballot, national U.S. survey (n=1000) reveal that people are more supportive of the energy extraction process when it is referred to as shale oil or gas development versus fracking, and this relationship is mediated by greater perceptions of benefit versus risk. Political ideology did not moderate these effects. Further analysis suggests that these findings are partly explained by the tendency to associate fracking more with negative thoughts and impacts and shale oil or gas development more with positive thoughts and impacts. However, these associations also did not vary by political ideology. We discuss implications for communicating risk regarding energy development.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Psychology
Subjects:	B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology G Geography. Anthropology. Recreation > GE Environmental Sciences J Political Science > JC Political theory
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Energy development; Hydraulic fracturing; Framing; Risk communication
Publisher:	Elsevier
ISSN:	0301-4215
Date of Acceptance:	21 February 2015
Last Modified:	31 Oct 2022 11:05
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/87421

Citation Data

Cited 109 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item