Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-7tmb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-29T20:53:55.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

23 - Politics from the Perspective of Minority Populations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Dennis Chong  and
Jane Junn
Edited by
James N. Druckman ,
Donald P. Greene ,
James H. Kuklinski  and
Arthur Lupia
Dennis Chong
Affiliation:
Northwestern University
Jane Junn
Affiliation:
University of Southern California
James N. Druckman
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Illinois
Donald P. Greene
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
James H. Kuklinski
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Arthur Lupia
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Get access

Summary

Experimental studies of racial and ethnic minorities in the United States have focused on the influence of racial considerations in political reasoning, information processing, and political participation. Studies have analyzed the types of messages and frames that prime racial evaluations of issues, the effect of racial arguments on opinions, and the impact of racial cues on political choices. Underlying this research is the premise, developed in observational studies (e.g., Bobo and Gilliam 1990; Dawson 1994; Tate 1994; Lien 2001; Chong and Kim 2006; Barreto 2007), that there are racial and ethnic differences in how individuals respond to cues and information. For this reason, almost all studies give special attention to the mediating and moderating influences of racial group identification, a core concept in the study of minority politics.

There are too few studies yet to constitute a research program, but the initial forays have successfully featured the advantages of experimental design and distinct perspectives of minority groups. We review the methodology and findings of these experimental studies to highlight their contributions and limitations and to make several general observations and suggestions about future directions in this field. As we show, randomization and control strengthen the internal validity of causal inferences drawn in experiments; however, of equal importance, the interpretation and significance of results depends on additional considerations, including the measurement of variables, the external validity of the experiment, and the theoretical coherence of the research design.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science , pp. 320 - 336
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abrajano, Marisa A., Nagler, Jonathan, and Alvarez, R. Michael. 2005. “A Natural Experiment of Race-Based and Issue Voting: The 2001 City of Los Angeles Elections.” Political Research Quarterly 58: 203–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appiah, O. 2002. “Black and White Viewers' Perception and Recall of Occupational Characters on Television.” Journal of Communications 52: 776–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barreto, Matt A. 2007. “Si Se Puede! Latino Candidates and the Mobilization of Latino Voters.” American Political Science Review 101: 425–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobo, Lawrence, and Gilliam, Frank. 1990. “Race, Sociopolitical Participation and Black Empowerment.” American Political Science Review 84: 379–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobo, Lawrence D., and Johnson, Devon. 2004. “A Taste for Punishment: Black and White Americans' Views on the Death Penalty and the War on Drugs.” DuBois Review 1: 151–80.Google Scholar
Chong, Dennis. 2000. Rational Lives: Norms and Values in Politics and Society. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, Dennis, and Druckman, James N.. 2007. “Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies.” American Political Science Review 101: 637–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, Dennis, and Druckman, James N.. 2008. “Dynamic Public Opinion: Framing Effects over Time.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston.Google Scholar
Chong, Dennis, and Kim, Dukhong. 2006. “The Experiences and Effects of Economic Status among Racial and Ethnic Minorities.” American Political Science Review 100: 335–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, Dennis, and Rogers, Reuel. 2005. “Racial Solidarity and Political Participation.” Political Behavior 27: 347–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clawson, Rosalee A., Kegler, Elizabeth R., and Waltenburg, Eric N.. 2003. “Supreme Court Legitimacy and Group-Centric Forces: Black Support for Capital Punishment and Affirmative Action.” Political Behavior 25: 289–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, Michael. 1994. Behind the Mule Race and Class in African American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Fazio, Russell H., and Olson, Michael A. 2003. “Attitudes: Foundations, Functions, and Consequences.” In The Handbook of Social Psychology, eds. Hogg, Michael A. and Cooper, Joel M.. London: Sage, 139–60.Google Scholar
Feldman, Stanley, and Zaller, John. 1992. “The Political Culture of Ambivalence: Ideological Responses to the Welfare State.” American Journal of Political Science 36: 268–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forehand, Mark R., and Deshpande, Rohit. 2001. “What We See Makes Us Who We Are: Priming Ethnic Self-Awareness and Advertising Response.” Journal of Marketing Research 38: 336–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaines, Brian J., Kuklinski, James H., and Quirk, Paul J.. 2007. “Rethinking the Survey Experiment.” Political Analysis 15: 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia Bedolla, Lisa, and Michelson, Melissa R.. 2009. “What Do Voters Need to Know? Testing the Role of Cognitive Information in Asian American Voter Mobilization.” American Politics Research 37: 254–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., and Green, Donald P.. 2000. “The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review 94: 653–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., Green, Donald P., and Larimer, Christopher W.. 2008. “Social Pressure and Voter Turnout: Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review 102: 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 1999. Why Americans Hate Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Anti-Poverty Policy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilliam, Frank D.., and Iyengar, Shanto. 2000. “Prime Suspects: The Impact of Local Television News on the Viewing Public.” American Journal of Political Science 44: 560–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Donald P. 2004. “Mobilizing African-American Voters Using Direct Mail and Commercial Phone Banks: A Field Experiment.” Political Research Quarterly 57: 245–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herek, Gregory M., Gillis, J. Roy, and Glunt, Erik K.. 1998. “Culturally Sensitive AIDS Educational Videos for African American Audiences: Effects of Source, Message, Receiver, and Context.” American Journal of Community Psychology 26: 705–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, Gregory A., and Lapinski, John S.. 2008. “Testing the Implicit–Explicit Model of Racialized Political Communication.” Perspectives on Politics 6: 125–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurwitz, Jon, and Peffley, Mark. 2005. “Explaining the Great Racial Divide: Perceptions of Fairness in the U.S. Criminal Justice System.” Journal of Politics 67: 762–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald R.. 1987. News That Matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R., and Sanders, Lynn M.. 1996. Divided by Color: Racial Politics and Democratic Ideals. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R., and Winter, Nicholas. 2001. “Exploring the Racial Divide: Blacks, Whites, and Opinions on National Policy.” American Journal of Political Science 45: 439–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuklinski, James H., and Hurley, Norman L.. 1996. “It's a Matter of Interpretation.” In Political Persuasion and Attitude Change, eds. Mutz, Diana C., Sniderman, Paul M., and Brody, Richard A.. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 125–44.Google Scholar
Lien, Pei-te. 2001. The Making of Asian America through Political Participation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Lodge, Milton, and Taber, Charles. in press. The Rationalizing Voter. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Marschall, Melissa. 2001. “Does the Shoe Fit? Testing Models of Participation for African-American and Latino Involvement in Local Politics.” Urban Affairs Review 37: 227–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendelberg, Tali M. 2001. The Race Card: Campaign Strategy, Implicit Messages and the Norm of Equality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michelson, Melissa R. 2005. “Meeting the Challenge of Latino Voter Mobilization.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 601: 85–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Arthur, Gurin, Patricia, Gurin, Gerald, and Malanchuk, Oksana. 1981. “Group Consciousness and Political Participation.” American Journal of Political Science 25: 494–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peffley, Mark, and Hurwitz, Jon. 2007. “Persuasion and Resistance: Race and the Death Penalty in America.” American Journal of Political Science 51: 996–1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petty, Richard E., and Cacioppo, John T.. 1986. Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petty, Richard E., Fleming, Monique A., and White, P. H.. 1999. “Stigmatized Sources and Persuasion: Prejudice as a Determinant of Argument Scrutiny.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76: 19–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petty, Richard E., and Wegener, D. T.. 1999. “The Elaboration Likelihood Model: Current Status and Controversies.” In Dual Process Theories in Social Psychology, eds. Chaiken, Shelly and Trope, Yaacov. New York: Guilford Press, 41–72.Google Scholar
Ramirez, Ricardo. 2005. “Giving Voice to Latino Voters: A Field Experiment on the Effectiveness of a National Nonpartisan Mobilization Effort.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 601: 66–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, David O., Sidanius, Jim, and Bobo, Lawrence, eds. 2000. Racialized Politics: The Debate about Racism in America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Shingles, Richard D. 1981. “Black Consciousness and Political Participation: The Missing Link.” American Political Science Review 75: 76–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., and Theriault, Sean M.. 2004. “The Structure of Political Argument and the Logic of Issue Framing.” In Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change, eds. Saris, Willem E. and Sniderman, Paul M.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 133–65.Google Scholar
Tate, Katherine. 1994. From Protest to Politics: The New Black Voters in American Elections. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Terkildsen, Nayda. 1993. “When White Voters Evaluate Black Candidates: The Processing Implication of Candidate Skin Color, Prejudice, and Self-Monitoring.” American Journal of Political Science 37: 1032–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trivedi, Neema. 2005. “The Effect of Identity-Based GOTV Direct Mail Appeals on the Turnout of Indian Americans.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 601: 115–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Xiao, and Arpan, Laura M.. 2008. “Effects of Race and Ethnic Identity on Audience Evaluation of HIV Public Service Announcements.” Howard Journal of Communications 19: 44–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, Ismail K. 2007. “When Race Matters and When It Doesn't: Racial Group Differences in Response to Racial Cues.” American Political Science Review 101: 339–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, Paul H., and Harkins, Stephen G.. 1994. “Race of Source Effects in the Elaboration Likelihood Model.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67: 790–807.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whittler, Tommy E., and Spira, Joan Scattone. 2002. “Model's Race: A Peripheral Cue in Advertising Messages?” Journal of Consumer Psychology 12: 291–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, Janelle S. 2005. “Mobilizing Asian American Voters: A Field Experiment.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 601: 102–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×