Roles of Linked Fate and Black Political Knowledge In

Home , Acronym (organization), Black elite, Don Lemon, Hill Harper, HuffPost, Marc Lamont Hill

Roles of Linked Fate and Black Political Knowledge in

Shaping Black Responses to Group Messages

Dissertation

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy

in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

Brianna Nicole Mack

Graduate Program in Political Science

The Ohio State University

2018

Dissertation Committee

Kathleen McGraw, Advisor

Thomas Nelson, Co-Advisor

Nathaniel Swigger

Ismail K. White

Copyrighted by

Brianna Nicole Mack

2018

Abstract

This dissertation explores the relationship between linked fate, political knowledge and message cues. I argue there is a relationship between Black political knowledge, linked fate, and attitudes that varies based on the salience of the issue in question, the source of the message, tone of the message and the recipient’s strength of linked fate and amount of Black political knowledge they possessed. This argument draws on research on political attitudes, political knowledge, and psycho-political behavior within the Black community. I conceptualize Black political knowledge as the range of factual information about Black racial group’s role in and relationship with the

American political system stored in one’s memory. Afterwards I introduce the Black political knowledge battery, a 14-item measurement of said concept with questions about the historical, policy, and partisanship aspects of the racial group’s political behavior.

Afterwards, I use the battery in a survey experiment to examine the relationship between issue salience, message cues, linked fate and Black political knowledge.

The data analysis chapter determined support for as well as rejection of the theoretical framework, albeit aspects of the model. Results determined linked fate and Black political knowledge have profound influence on Black responses to group messages regardless of the salience of the issue in the message. However, that influence can be affected by message cues in less racially salient treatments. Likewise, a two-way

ii significant interaction between Black political knowledge and linked fate was discovered, where highly linked and knowledgeable individuals give vastly different responses than high-linked, low-knowledge individuals. This finding supports the theoretical assertion that there is a difference between linked fate and Black political knowledge, such that those who are highly linked but have low knowledge will be more likely to agree with the message described.

iii

Dedication

To my mother, Mable H. Mack, and in memory of my aunts Mary A. Moseley and Adel

L. Hatcher for wanting me to have everything I wanted for myself. Thanks for believing in me.

Acknowledgments

“My soul looks back and wonders how I got over”

- Clara Ward 1950

First, I want to give glory and honor to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ who is the head of my life; Who has watched over and protected me; Who has ordered my steps and allowed me to be curious about social and political phenomena; Who has provided solace and comfort when this work seemed unbearable and told me to keep going when I thought this degree was unattainable. I know that everything that I am and will be is in accordance to Your Divine Plan. I’m humbly grateful to know that my journey is a testimony to Your unfailing guidance and protection.

To my advisor, Kathleen McGraw, thanks for everything you’ve done for me, molding me into the scholar I am. You reeled me in from crazy tangents and encouraged me to explore more when I didn’t see the potential in doing so. I’m thankful for your patient guidance over the last 6 years. To the rest of my committee, Tom Nelson,

Nathaniel Swigger, and Ismail White, thanks for agreeing to serve on my committee. I realize my graduate journey was full of twists and turns and there were times where it seemed like I would never find a dissertation topic, get the data, or finish this program. I am grateful for your expertise, advice, and support.

To my mentor, Andra Gillespie, thanks for your unwavering support and careful attention. I still can’t believe that only 9 years have passed since I enrolled in your

Black Politics course as a Freshman. You helped me quantify and organize my research interests. You supported my interests and endeavors. When situations changed, you advocated for me behind the scenes and encouraged me to do so for myself. You listened to my concerns and advised me on my next steps. I’m so blessed to have you in my corner. To Julian Wamble and Chryl Laird, thanks for being there for me when I didn’t want to be there myself. Thanks for supporting me and having those hard conversations which contributed towards my development as a scholar today. Without you two, I would not have any Black politics scholars that I could engage with on a regular basis. The snatchings saved me, and I am thankful. To the larger OSU family, in particular Robert Bennet III, the Bell National Resource Center, Wendy Smooth, and

Korrie Edwards - Thanks for your support in providing feedback on my ideas, participants for many iterations of pilot studies related to this project, and encouragement on ways to promote distinguish myself in the academic job market. To my counselor and psychiatrist at the OSU Counseling and Consultation Center, thanks for helping me keep my sanity throughout my time here at OSU.

To my family and friends, thanks for your kind words, patience, and support. Your understanding of my weird working and sleeping habits, keeping me grounded, and making sure I had enough rest, food, and socialization. To my church family at

Williams Memorial CME and Stewart Memorial CME, thanks for your prayers, phone calls, cards, kind words, and support…The Lord answered our prayers.

To my best friend, Ashley Jordan, thanks for everything – for being an impromptu counselor, advisor, editor, researcher, and dissertation coach. I wouldn’t be at this point without your support. And finally, to my significant other, Donnell Harmon, words can’t truly express how thankful I am to have you in my life. Your support and encouragement are beyond measure. You listen to me as I worked through iterations of theory after theory, battery after battery, data analysis after analysis and helped me identify ways to improve so this would be a stronger project and I would be a stronger scholar. You push me to be more, do more, and see more while making sure the small details don’t get in the way. You’re the iron that sharpens my iron, and I love you for that.

vii

Vita

EDUCATION

M.A., Political Science, Major: American Politics, Minor: Political Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 2015

B.A., Major: Political Science, Minor: African American Studies, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, 2012

ACADEMIC EMPLOYMENT

Graduate Teaching Associate, Political Science, The Ohio State University, 2013-2018

Graduate Fellow, Political Science, The Ohio State University, 2012-2013

Field of Study

Major Field: Political Science

viii

Table of Contents

Abstract ...... ii Dedication ...... iv Acknowledgments...... v Vita ...... viii List of Tables ...... x List of Figures ...... xvi Chapter 1. Introduction ...... 1 Chapter 2. Theoretical Framework ...... 9 Theory ...... 29 Chapter 3. Measuring Black Political Knowledge ...... 38 Questionnaire Composition ...... 55 Creating a Final Black Political Knowledge Battery from the Pilot Battery ...... 65 Validity ...... 71 Chapter 4. Research Design ...... 83 Chapter 5. Data Analyses ...... 110 Low Salience Issue ...... 112 Medium Salience Issue ...... 145 High Salience Issue ...... 170 Discussion of Results ...... 190 Chapter 6. Conclusion ...... 193 Bibliography ...... 199 Appendix A. Supplemental Materials for Measuring Black Political Knowledge ...... 205 Pilot Study Questionnaire ...... 214 Appendix B. Supplemental Materials for Research Design ...... 251 Low Salience Articles ...... 251 Medium Salience Articles ...... 258 High Salience Articles ...... 264 Survey Experiment Wording ...... 270

List of Tables

Table 3.1 – Demographic Characteristics of Pilot Study Sample ...... 62 Table 3.2 – Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables among Black Sub-sample ...... 62 Table 3.3 – Correlation Between Scores on Sections of Pilot Knowledge Battery Among Black Respondents ...... 65 Table 3.4 – Cronbach Alpha Analyses for Each Subsection of Pilot Battery ...... 67 Table 3.5 – Factor Analysis Results for Pilot Battery ...... 69 Table 3.6 – Correlation Between Black Linked Fate and Performance on the Knowledge Batteries Among Black Respondents...... 71 Table 3.7 – Correlation Between Performance on Pilot Battery, Other Batteries and Specified Variables ...... 72 Table 3.8 – Mean Scores on the Three Political Knowledge Batteries Among Black and White Respondents ...... 75 Table 3.9 – Multivariate Regression of Performance on Pilot Black Political Knowledge Battery ...... 76 Table 3.10 – Multivariate Regression of White Participants’ Performance on Pilot Black Political Knowledge Battery ...... 78 Table 3.11 – Multivariate Regression of Black Participants’ Performance on Pilot Black Political Knowledge Battery ...... 79 Table 4.1- Experimental Treatment Cells (3 x 2 x 3) ...... 84 Table 4.2 - Questions in the Black Political Knowledge and Mainstream Batteries ...... 90 Table 4.3 -Summary Statistics for Variables of Interest ...... 93 Table 4.4 - Cronbach Alpha Analyses for Black Political Battery ...... 96 Table 4.5 - Cronbach's Alpha Analyses for Mainstream Battery ...... 97 Table 4.6 - Percentage of Mainstream and Black Political Knowledge Battery Questions Answered Correctly Among Participants ...... 98 Table 4.7 - Correlation Between Battery Scores and Participant Characteristics ...... 100 Table 4.8 - Means of Attitudinal and Importance Dependent Variables ...... 103 Table 4.9- Descriptive Statistics for Believability of Low Salience Issue Article by Source ...... 104 Table 4.10 – Descriptive Statistics for Credibility of Low Salience Issue Article By Source ...... 104 Table 4.11- Descriptive Statistics for Believability of Medium Salience Issue Article by Source ...... 105 Table 4.12- Descriptive Statistics for Credibility of Medium Salience Issue Article by Source ...... 105

Table 4.13 - Descriptive Statistics for Believability of High Salience Issue Article by Source ...... 106 Table 4.14 - Descriptive Statistics for Credibility of High Salience Issue Article by Source ...... 106 Table 4.15- Breakdown of Reading Check Questions Answered Correctly ...... 107 Table 5.1 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Importance of Resolving Diversity Visa Program ...... 112 Table 5.2 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 1 ...... 112 Table 5.3 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Attitudes on Diversity Visa Program ...... 113 Table 5.4 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 3 ...... 113 Table 5.5 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Attitudes Towards Use No-Fly Lists ...... 113 Table 5.6 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 5 ...... 114 Table 5.7 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Importance of Use of No-Fly Lists ...... 114 Table 5.8– 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Importance of Resolving Diversity Visa Program ...... 115 Table 5.9 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 8 ...... 116 Table 5.10 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitude towards Visa Program...... 116 Table 5.11 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 10 ...... 117 Table 5.12 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Importance of Resolving Use of No-Fly Lists ...... 118 Table 5.13– Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 12 ...... 118 Table 5.14 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitudes Towards Use of No-Fly Lists ...... 119 Table 5.15 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 14 ...... 119 Table 5.16 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Importance of Resolving No-Fly Lists ...... 121 Table 5.17 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 16 ...... 122 Table 5.18 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitudes Towards No-Fly Lists...... 123 Table 5.19 – Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 18 ...... 123 Table 5.20 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Importance of Resolving Diversity Visa Program ...... 124 Table 5.21 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 20 ...... 125 Table 5.22 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitude Towards Diversity Visa Program ...... 126 Table 5.23 – Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 22 ...... 126 Table 5.24 – 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Importance of Resolving No-Fly Lists ...... 130 Table 5.25 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 24 ...... 131 xi

Table 5.26 – 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on Attitude Towards Use of No-Fly Lists .... 132 Table 5.27 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 26 ...... 133 Table 5.28 – 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Importance of Resolving Diversity Visa Program ...... 134 Table 5.29 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 28 ...... 135 Table 5.30 – 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Attitude Towards Diversity Visa Program ...... 136 Table 5.31 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 30 ...... 137 Table 5.32– Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between the Importance of Resolving Diversity Programs, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics ...... 141 Table 5.33 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitude Towards Diversity Visa Program, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics ...... 141 Table 5.34 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Importance of Resolving Use of No-Fly Lists, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics ...... 142 Table 5.35 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitudes on Use of No-Fly Lists, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics ...... 142 Table 5.36 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Importance of Resolving Toxic Emissions Limits ...... 145 Table 5.37 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Attitudes on Toxic Emission Limits ...... 145 Table 5.38 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Importance of Resolving Chemical Plant Regulations ...... 146 Table 5.39 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Attitudes Towards Chemical Plant Regulations ...... 146 Table 5.40 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Importance of Resolving Toxic Emissions Limits ...... 147 Table 5.41– Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 40 ...... 147 Table 5.42 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitudes on Toxic Emission Limits ...... 148 Table 5.43– Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 42 ...... 148 Table 5.44 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Importance of Resolving Chemical Plant Regulations ...... 149 Table 5.45– Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 44 ...... 149 Table 5.46– 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitudes Towards Chemical Plant Regulations ...... 150 Table 5.47– Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 46 ...... 150 Table 5.48– 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Importance of Resolving Toxic Emissions Limits ...... 151 xii

Table 5.49- Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 48 ...... 152 Table 5.50 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitudes on Toxic Emission Limits ...... 152 Table 5.51- Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 50 ...... 153 Table 5.52 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Importance of Resolving Chemical Plant Regulations ...... 153 Table 5.53- Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 52 ...... 154 Table 5.54 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitudes Towards Chemical Plant Regulations ...... 154 Table 5.55 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 54 ...... 155 Table 5.56– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Importance of Resolving Toxic Emissions Limits ...... 156 Table 5.57 - Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 56 ...... 157 Table 5.58– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Attitudes on Toxic Emission Limits .. 158 Table 5.59 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 58 ...... 159 Table 5.60– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Importance of Resolving Chemical Plant Regulations ...... 160 Table 5.61- Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 60 ...... 161 Table 5.62– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Attitudes Towards Chemical Plant Regulations ...... 162 Table 5.63- Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 62 ...... 163 Table 5.64– Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Importance of Resolving Toxic Emission Limits, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics ...... 165 Table 5.65 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitudes on Toxic Emission Limits, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics ...... 166 Table 5.66– Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between the Importance of Resolving Regulations for Chemical Plants in Residential Areas, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics ...... 166 Table 5.67 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitudes on Regulations for Chemical Plants in Residential Areas, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics ...... 167 Table 5.68– 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects for Importance of Resolving Policing Issues ...... 170 Table 5.69– 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects for Attitudes Toward Use of Body Cams and Dashboard Cams ...... 170 Table 5.70 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects for Attitudes Toward Use of Police Oversight Boards ...... 171 Table 5.71– Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 70 ...... 171

xiii

Table 5.72– 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Importance of Resolving Policing Issues ...... 172 Table 5.73 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 72 ...... 173 Table 5.74 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitudes Toward Use of Body Cams and Dashboard Cams ...... 173 Table 5.75– Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 74 ...... 173 Table 5.76– 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitude Towards Use of Police Oversight Boards ...... 174 Table 5.77– Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 76 ...... 174 Table 5.78 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Importance of Resolving Policing Issues ...... 176 Table 5.79 - Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 78 ...... 176 Table 5.80– 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitudes Toward Use of Body Cams and Dashboard Cams ...... 177 Table 5.81- Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 80 ...... 178 Table 5.82 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitude Towards Use of Police Oversight Boards ...... 179 Table 5.83- Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 82 ...... 179 Table 5.84– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on Importance of Resolving Policing Issues. 182 Table 5.85- Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 84 ...... 183 Table 5.86 – 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitude Towards Use of Body Cameras in Policing ...... 184 Table 5.87 - Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 86 ...... 185 Table 5.88– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitude Towards Use of Police Oversight Boards ...... 186 Table 5.89- Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 88 ...... 187 Table 5.90 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Importance of Resolving Policing Issue, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics . 188 Table 5.91– Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitude Towards Use of Body Cameras and Dashboard Cameras, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics ...... 188 Table 5.92 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitudes on Use of Police Oversight Boards, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics ...... 189 Table A.1 - Percentage of Mainstream, Black Political Awareness and Pilot Knowledge Questions Answered Correctly by Race ...... 205 Table A.2 - Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables for Entire Sample ...... 209 Table A.3 – Correlation Between Black Linked Fate and Scores on the Batteries among White Respondents ...... 210 Table A.4– Correlations between Strength of Black Linked Fate and Scores on the Knowledge Batteries ...... 210 xiv

Table A.5 – Correlations Between Strength of Black Linked Fate and Scores on the Knowledge Batteries among Black Respondents ...... 211 Table A.6 - Cronbach’s Alpha Analyses for Black Elite Identification Subsection ...... 212 Table A.7– Descriptive Statistics for Proposed Subsections of Pilot Battery (after Cronbach Alpha and using Black subsample) ...... 213 Table A.8 – Multivariate Regression of Pilot Knowledge Scale With Linked Fate Scale Variables ...... 213

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 - Graphic Representation of the Roles of Linked Fate and Black Political Knowledge in Shaping Responses to Group Messages ...... 29 Figure B.1- Elite / Negative ...... 252 Figure B.2 Elite / Positive ...... 253 Figure B.3 - Poll / Negative ...... 254 Figure B.4 - Poll / Positive ...... 255 Figure B.5 - Non-Elite / Negative ...... 256 Figure B.6 - Non-Elite / Positive ...... 257 Figure B.7 - Elite / Negative ...... 258 Figure B.8 - Elite / Positive...... 259 Figure B.9 - Poll / Negative ...... 260 Figure B.10 - Poll / Positive ...... 261 Figure B.11 - Non-Elite / Negative ...... 262 Figure B.12 - Non-Elite / Positive ...... 263 Figure B.13 - Elite / Positive...... 264 Figure B.14 - Elite / Negative ...... 265 Figure B.15 - Poll / Positive ...... 266 Figure B.16 - Poll / Negative ...... 267 Figure B.17 - Non-Elite / Positive ...... 268 Figure B.18 - Non-Elite / Negative ...... 269

xvi

Chapter 1. Introduction

Black political behavior is a unique subsection of American political behavior because racial group norms encourages prioritization of group identity and needs over individual needs; to the point where the group needs serve as a stand-on for the individual’s needs. Previous research has determined that this prioritization is the result of a legacy of social, political, and economic oppression of the racial group; to the point where improvements for the group came as a result of collective action. That collective mindset is easily transferred into use in voting (Dawson 1994). This politicized racial identity, also known as linked fate, can be activated with message cues and subsequent attitudes are then made according to with whatever that person believes is in the best interest of African Americans as a racial group. This explains why most African

Americans vote for Democrat candidates – because the Civil Rights Legislation in the

1960s and 1970s were policies supported by Democrat legislators and two Democrat presidents (Dawson 1994; Tate 2010).

However, believing that one’s successes and failures are connected to the racial group’s successes and failures is only possible if that person also perceives racial discrimination and its consequences to be relevant in his or her life. Once linked fate is activated, is there a set of group specific political knowledge that become available for the person to refer to, or base their racialized political decisions on? Does every in-group

1 member know this set of factual knowledge? If so, one would expect the racial group to operate as a total political monolith – with 100% of registered Black voters supporting federal, state, and local candidates and policies from one political party and expressing the same stances on issues when prompted. However, that is not the case. While majority of Black people vote for Democrat candidates and policies, there are a few

Black people who identify as Republicans or with other political parties (Dawson 2001).

Is this variation within Black political behavior a result of varying strengths of linked fate, political knowledge, or something else?

Previous research has also determined not only are Black people receptive to information from different minded Black elites and White elites, the context in which their linked fate is activated, influences the attitudes they give (Kuklinski and Hurley

1994; White 2007; Laird 2014). An example of this took place during the 2004 presidential election. During this election, the Republican party tried to recruit Blacks to the party amid questions surrounding same-sex marriage and protection of family values.

This initiative was peculiar because in 2000, 90 % of African Americans voted for the

Democrat candidate, Al Gore (McDaniels 2007). How would the Republican party attempt to make inroads given the racial group’s past voting behavior? Through faith- based outreach; namely meeting with Black clergy. President Bush and the Republican party met with Black clergymen and they discussed the protection of family values and upholding Christian ideals. In comparison to the Democratic party, the Republicans argued they strove to maintain said values and ideals and recognize the importance of both within the Black community. Afterwards, these Black clergy began campaigning

2 for Bush in the pulpit, telling parishioners to vote for him. This slow gain ultimately encouraged the Republican Party to conduct voter mobilization efforts in Black communities using Black clergymen (McDaniels 2007).

Most African Americans still voted for the Democratic challenger, John Kerry, and ultimately Pres. Bush won his reelection bid. However, this outreach initiative is interesting because Republican party leaders recognized that Black faith leaders are

Black elite and can influence their parishioners to support the party. The initiatives were drawing so much attention that The Democratic Party and John Kerry’s campaign staff started mobilizing the Black church and relied on the NAACP for outreach to reenergize the Black vote. This brief description of the 2004 RNC’s black vote initiative identifies the role of Black elites in Black political behavior. How were these Black clergymen able to convince their parishioners to vote for George Bush despite the Republican party’s checkered relationship with the racial group? How could these clergymen support the Republican party given knowledge of the past? These same parishioners most likely voted for a Democrat in 2000, why would they support a Republican four years later?

2004 was not an isolated event, we see the political cooptation of the Black clergymen on same-sex marriage a few years later. When Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, 25 percent of Blacks expressed support for same-sex in comparison to

40 percent of Whites (Pew Research Center 2014). In early 2012, President Obama expressed support for same-sex marriage (Calmes 2013). Initially, there was conflict within the Black community. News outlets described how Black pastors condemned the president’s stance or cautioned their parishioners to support the president regardless of

3 his new stance because the Republicans do not have their best interests in mind (Thomas

2012). Before the end of the summer, the NAACP endorsed same-sex marriage (Barbaro

2012). By the end of 2012, Black support for same-sex marriage increased to 40 percent

(Pew Research Center 2014). This incident slightly differs from 2004 in that Black leaders doubled down on their support for the Democratic Party and Pres. Obama

But how could Black support for the Republican party as well as support for same sex marriage, change so quickly? The answer lies in disentangling the relationship between issue salience, racial group political knowledge, politicized racial identities, and source cues. We know from previous research that black attitudes do not change after one exposure to new information. We also know that the activation of politicized racial consciousness (linked fate) varies with the type of racial message communicated (Mack

2015; White 2007). Many scholars argue that people do not have pre-existing attitudes on most political issues and candidates and instead create an attitude when prompted for one. That attitude is the culmination of that person’s political knowledge and access to recent information about the issue in question (Zaller 1992). However, we do not know what happens in instances where the politicized racial identity is activated and the issue is not racially salient. Likewise, we do not know what happens if there is an accompanying set of in-group political knowledge that could help the individual give a response when prompted.

With this in mind, my dissertation questions are “What is the relationship between political knowledge, linked fate, and political attitudes? How do black people respond to politicized group messages? Do they rely on their politicized racial identity or their

4 political knowledge on the group? Can this choice vary based on the salience of the issue in the message or based on message cues?” In this study, I am interested in investigating the relationship between issue salience, the characteristics of the message source, and the characteristics of the recipient. The recipient characteristics I am interested in are the strength of his or her politicized racial identity (linked fate) and his or her levels of knowledge about black politics.

Identifying the ways in which political knowledge influences racialized political behavior would deepen our understanding of Black politics. This dissertation would serve as a contribution to the larger discourse on the role of political knowledge by promoting the argument for the use of black political knowledge in political attitude formation and expression. The rest of this chapter will provide an overview of what is to come in this dissertation.

Chapter 2 provides the theoretical background and argument for the dissertation.

Drawing on literature within social psychology and political behavior - specifically group norms, message sources and cues, attitude expression, and politicized racial identities, attitudes, and issues - I argue there is a relationship between group-specific knowledge, group identity, and attitudes that varies based on the salience of the issue in question, the source of the message, and the recipient’s strength of group identity and amount of group specific knowledge When the issue in question is highly salient, the racial group’s stance is widely known so the person’s attitude will reflect that. When the issue is medium or moderately salient, the group’s stance is less likely to be widely known. As a result, that person’s attitude is more likely to be a function of their group political knowledge and/or

5 their linked fate. When the issue is of low salience, the Black person will either rely on their political knowledge, or on their linked fate.

Chapter 3 delves into the literature surrounding political knowledge and its relationship with Black political behavior. In doing so, it examines the concept of political knowledge and explores the feasibility of creating a measurement for Black political knowledge. Delli Carpini and Keeter’s work on political knowledge demonstrates that knowledgeable people are more likely to participate in politics, are better able to recognize their own interests and ultimately advocate those interests through political actions. However, performance on their 5-question battery and similar political knowledge measurements is split along racial lines, socioeconomic lines, and gender lines such that researchers argue marginalized groups have lower scores on these measurements and as a result, are least able to advocate their issues in the political sphere

(Verba et. al 1993; Delli Carpini and Keeter 1997). Drawing upon social psychology, political psychology, racial politics and political behavior literature, I argue that Black people’s lower performance on the mainstream political knowledge battery (Delli Carpini and Keeter battery) does not indicate the racial group has lower levels of political interest or lower levels of ability to engage in the political process. Instead, Black people could rely on group-specific political knowledge. I introduce the concept of black political knowledge and create a 14-item battery measuring said concept. Black political knowledge is the range of factual information about the Black racial group’s role in and relationship with the American political system that is stored in one’s memory. The 14- item Black political knowledge battery was created as result of a 2016 pilot study.

Chapter 4 details the research design used to test the theoretical framework. In

March 2018, an online survey experiment was conducted using a Black panel from

Qualtrics. Participants read three articles on three issues. Each article discussed an issue of varying racial salience, source type, and tone then answered questions about their attitudes towards the issues in the articles, answered questions about other political topics, and completed the black political knowledge battery. Descriptive statistics are then presented, and operationalized variables are identified and defined. The Black political knowledge measurement is tested for validity based on comparing performance on the mainstream political knowledge battery as well as the sample’s performance on the Black political knowledge battery in general. Chapter 5 lists the results from the survey experiments. Using regressions, correlations, and analysis of variance I quantify the relationship between black political knowledge, linked fate, issue salience, and source cues. Black political knowledge and linked fate are determined to be two independent concepts that influence responses to group messages differently. Black political knowledge seems to be more influential in shaping attitudinal responses on an issue while linked fate is influential in shaping salient responses on an issue.

In the concluding chapter, I summarize the major findings from this dissertation - the introduction of black political knowledge as a concept, the application of the corresponding battery, the findings from the survey experiment, and whether they support the hypotheses I proposed in the theory chapter. Afterwards, I discuss caveats and limitations for these findings. Finally, I return to the real life political examples that

7 serve as motivations for this study, how the research findings can explain what happened in these examples, and what future research projects on this topic would look like.

Chapter 2. Theoretical Framework

Information is crucial to the formation of public opinion. Scholars have conceptualized the importance of information in two ways: information provided in the environment, through mass media and other persuasive messages; and as a cognitive construct representing what individuals know about the political world. For information provided in the environment, scholars like John Zaller (1992) asserts that people really do not have political attitudes and they only express an opinion when prompted for one.

This is a result of people paying little attention to political matters. As a result of the small attention span and low interest, the composition of one’s attitude is subject to the nature of the information that a person can easily access while formulating and expressing said attitude. This information has either been recently received or used and remains at the top of their head. However, what kind of information is a person accessing for his or her prompted attitude? What are the implications or consequences of the type of information that is used for said attitudes?

In terms of exploring information as a cognitive construct, scholars such as

Michael Delli Carpini and Scott Keeter (1993) explore it as the amount of factual information as it pertains to politics while scholars like Michael Dawson (1994) and later

Richard Lau and David Redlawsk takes the cognitive construct one step further and describe how and which mental shortcuts are used to quickly access information in order

9 to determine vote choice or attitudes. Within race politics, we know that attitudes can be vary based on the priming mechanisms, framing of an issue, and the salience of an issue

(White 2007; Laird 2014).

However, there is some research that explores the intersection of information in the environment and information as a cognitive construct and its effect on political attitudes. Yet, one can infer the role of environmental information on the cognitive construct and vice versa in the research. For Zaller, the extent of one’s political sophistication or knowledge determines the type of information that a person retrieves or considers when getting ready to express their attitudes. For Lau and Redlawsk, knowledge helps determine their understanding of the candidate’s viability and endorsements. The same level of political sophistication allows citizens to make decisions efficiently with said limited information. In Black politics, political knowledge allows Black people to efficiently gleam political beliefs, and arguably attitudes, within their day-to-day interactions (Harris-Perry 2004). Likewise, it helps Black people determine which identity should be activated and the attitudes expressed afterwards. This project is aimed at understanding the impact of both types of information – both external in terms of persuasive message and internal in terms of political knowledge – in shaping the attitudes of African Americans. This framework seeks to answer the following questions: What is the relationship between political knowledge, linked fate, and political attitudes? How do black people respond to politicized group messages? Do they rely on their politicized racial identity or their political knowledge on the group?

Can this choice vary based on the salience of the issue in the message or based on message cues?

I argue there is a relationship between group-specific knowledge, group-identity, and attitudes that varies based on the salience of the issue in question, the source of the message, and the recipient’s strength of group identity and amount of group-specific knowledge. When the issue is a highly salient group issue, a group member is likely to know the group’s “stance” on the issue. This is a result of the in-group member’s socialization in the group. High salience means it is known widely. When the issue is a medium salient group issue, a member is less likely to know the group’s stance on the issue. And as a result, that person’s subsequent attitude will be a function of that person’s knowledge about the group and/or his or her identity. By that I mean that person could ultimately end up relying on whatever the messenger says. Finally, when an issue is of low racial salience, I anticipate a Black person relying on the racialized cues in the message if this person also has low knowledge. Theoretical framework has a lot of moving parts: group norms, linked fate, political knowledge, source cues, and issue salience. Likewise, the relevant scholarship is enormous. As such, the following pages highlight key scholarship supporting my contention of how each moving part works in this formula.

Group Norms and Black Political Behavior

Group norms are the social standards that determine behavior within a group

(Terry and Hogg 2000). These norms can be promoted by elite members as prototypical

11 ideas or implicitly determined over time through generational socialization. Norms can be based on morals, ethics, and cultural traditions in a group. Group norms have a strong influence on members’ behavior. Likewise, they can be very difficult to change (Terry and Hogg 2000). Some members may not actually believe in the norms but do not mention it out of fear of sanctions. Nonbelieving members will continue to perform the normalized behavior (Bicchieri et. al 1997; White et. al 2013). These norms become a powerful aspect of group identity if they define the social group that contributes to someone’s self-concept. People who identify themselves as a part of a group of people who perform a particular behavior are more likely to internalize norms and regularly perform that behavior (Trafimow 2000). Self-identity in a group can determine someone’s attitudes in certain situations because some group attitudes are contextual.

Depending upon the member’s strength of their group identity, those attitudes may conflict or align with personal values (Terry and Hogg 1996). Group members govern themselves according to the norms for social approval and for intrinsic value to a lesser degree.

The collective self and private self are distinct components of the self-concept.

The private self is largely responsible for behavior while adherence to norms is related to the collective self. Culture determines whether the private self or the collective self is more accessible in the individual. Arguably, for African Americans, the collective self is more accessible and primed more often than the private self. Likewise, the position of the member affects his or her perception of the group. Guinote (2004) argues that the group’s hierarchal system effects the members’ perception of group. High status

12 members within the group perceive their group as complex and diverse. Lower status members perceive the group as homogeneous. Based on this in-group and outgroup variability, Guinote argued that low status group members increase their perception of outgroup variability because they cannot control their outcomes. These lower-status members are also more likely to inhibit their behavior in order to adhere to group norms

(Guinote 2004). Although Guinote was examining perceptions of homogeneity and heterogeneity within the majority group-minority group context, this argument is applicable to racial and oppressed groups. Group elites are more aware of the diverse opinions and behaviors that reside within their group while non-elite members perceive their group as a monolith. This difference can be attributed to the differing environments in which the elites and non-elite members socialize.

Compliance and conformity are expected of group members when they are placed in situations in which they perceive that they are supposed govern themselves according to their understanding of the group’s norms and expectations (Cialdini and Goldstein

2003). Compliance is the process of following an implicit request, as in a political campaign that describes the benefits of a proposed policy, or an explicit request, as a salesman asking to come inside the home of a potential customer (Cialdini and Goldstein

2003). Conformity is a member’s process of changing his or her behavior so it that matches the behavior of other group members. Cialdini and Goldstein (2003) argue there are two types of motivations that lead to conformity: informational motivation and normative motivations. Informational motivation is the innate desire to form an accurate understanding of the situation at hand and then governing oneself accordingly.

Normative motivation is the innate desire to govern oneself accordingly to get social approval from others. Normative and informational motivations can also encourage group members to conform their beliefs and attitudes so that they match what they perceive to be the group’s beliefs and attitudes. Although it is difficult to separate and identify the motivations after one conforms to the new status quo, conformity is an important aspect in the creation and maintenance of group norms and expectations.

Group norms represent prototypical beliefs, attitudes, feelings and behavior that maximize differences between members and nonmembers. Group norms can determine one’s behavior so long as that person strongly identifies with that group. Group norms can also determine one’s beliefs, preferences and attitudes. The process of identifying with the group encourages the member to use their understanding of the norms and expectations in their expression of the group identity. Group members comply with implicit or explicit requests to change their attitudes. Group members can also conform their beliefs and attitudes so they reflect the new developments within the group.

Complying and conforming allows members to continue receiving social approval from the group. This is the case for African Americans because the racial group’s social, political, and economic oppression encourages them to prioritize group interests over individual interests (Dawson 1994). People who identify themselves as a part of a group who performs a particular behavior or holds certain beliefs and attitudes are more likely to perform that behavior or express said attitude regardless of their personal belief or support in the underlying behavior. Interestingly enough, members will continue to adhere a norm if they think other members still adhere to that norm. This unwavering

14 adherence can delay the evolution of group behavior and expectations. It is possible that members will change their attitudes and behavior if they perceive that other group members have changed or shifted towards a new norm.

The intrinsic desire or need to be good group member can explain why members are receptive to information about their group. Social status and intensity of group membership can influence the way a member views their group. Elites, high-identifiers, and people high in racial knowledge, are more aware of the variety in behavior and attitudes within their group. Non-elite members. moderate-to-low identifiers, and low- race knowers are more aware of the variation in group behavior and attitudes within the outgroup and consider themselves to be homogeneous. Because they view their group as a monolith, non-elites, moderate-to-low identifiers, and low-race knowers are more likely to govern themselves according to their understanding of the group’s norms and expectations expressed about an issue. They should also be more likely to comply or conform their attitudes in accordance to the racial cue. The groups the aforementioned scholars studied were large residential communities or political parties. Likewise they measured adherence to new normative information about attitudes or adoption of new behaviors. Scholars have yet to explore whether their conclusions are applicable to minority groups.

With this understanding of group norms in mind, I'm assuming that the Black group is a collective in the same sense political parties and residential communities are.

There are recognizable elites within the group, there is access to or distribution of normative/group information, and the group is contains members with atypical beliefs of

15 the group. As a result, any findings here will indicate that Black group norms are unique in a racialized sense and could be susceptible to similar manipulative factors that other groups are.

As long as Black people continue to perceive the effects of racial oppression as having a presence in their lives then they will continue to contextualize their success and failure in relation to the racial group’s successes and failures. This phenomenon is known as linked fate and it is best seen in the application of the Black Utility Heuristic.

The Black Utility Heuristic is the mental shortcut linked Blacks use where the group interests are proxies for personal political interests (Dawson 1994). Both concepts are applicable as long as Blacks continue to believe that race is a salient issue in their lives.

Dawson also argues that perceptions of linked fate and Black oppression are paramount to analyzing perceptions of racial group interests (Dawson 1994). It is this expression of linked fate and use of the Black Utility Heuristic that are indicators of a politicized racial identity and attitudes.

Although African Americans have a multi-faceted politicized racial identity, circumstances can dictate which aspect of that identity is activated. White (2007) demonstrated that the activation of politicized racial consciousness (linked fate) varies with the type of racial message communicated. Issue frames that use abstract or implicit references to race activated African Americans’ negative representations of the group.

Conversely, issue frames that use explicit references to the racial group increased racial in-group identification for Black participants (White 2007). Variance in the type of racial attitude expressed is caused by the type of racial cue. Implicit cues do not activate the

16 politicized racial identity because those cues activate assumptions and attitudes about marginal subgroups and their deviant behavior. However if the subject of the implicit cue can be reframed as an explicit cue, then the positive politicized racial identity will be activated. Laird (2014) demonstrated that subsets of Blacks can express comparable levels of linked fate to the overall level of linked fate when the subject of the racial message is framed to be socioeconomically similar to the participant. Likewise, she demonstrated that African Americans’ politicized racial identity is multifaceted and that circumstances dictate which aspect of that identity is activated. That activated facet then gives the appearance of that identity as being unidimensional.

In Barbershops, Bibles, and BET, Melissa Harris-Lacewell investigates they best way to understand Black political ideology. One of her primary goals was to expand upon Dawson’s project describing the predominant Black political ideologies within the

Black community. However in the course of her research, she ends up disagreeing with

Zaller concerning the role of elites and apolitical communications in the formation individual’s political attitudes (Harris-Lacewell 2004). Her findings demonstrate that

Blacks use community dialogue, as seen in conversations at seemingly nonpolitical spaces like the barbershop, church, and televised music programming, to develop individual understandings of the collective group’s interests. The individualized understandings end up being classified into larger groups of similar preferences and considerations that are later given ideological identities such as Black Nationalism, Black

Feminism, Black Conservatism, and Liberal Integrationism (Harris-Lacewell 2004). She argues that the influence of local elites and people in daily interaction have a greater

17 influence on Black political ideology, however she does not explore the relationship between these interactions on their subsequent political attitudes. In the scope of this project, this relationship will be indirectly explored through the manipulation of the group status of the messenger because previous research has determined that the status of the messenger does influence its reception (Kuklinski and Hurley 1994; Mack 2015)

Katherine Tate (2010) argues that since the passage of the civil rights legislation the Black population has progressed towards moderate beliefs in terms of public opinion.

From the 1950s until the 1980s, Blacks were one of the most liberal groups in the nation

(Tate 2010). However after the 1980s, Blacks moved towards the center and have deepened their roots there ever since (Tate 2010). Tate contends the increase in affluence within the “Black community” caused by the removal of law-based discrimination explains this ideological shift towards the middle. Likewise, these developments allowed more Blacks to run for office in majority-non-Black areas and integrated communities in addition to running in majority-Black areas. Within these non-

Black communities, Black officials must deemphasize race and focus on the overarching issues, whether they are social or economically based, in order to maintain that area’s support (Tate 2010; Gillespie 2010). Most affluent Blacks live away from the Black communities, only to appear at sporadic events such as church services or at the barbershop. These affluent Blacks can be second- and third-generation middle to upper- middle class members. Thus, these new Black elites may not have the socio-economic connection Dawson defined as being one of the major components of linked fate

(Dawson 1994; Watkins-Hayes 2001; Gillespie 2010; Robinson 2010; Tate 2010). An

18 alternate explanation of the trickle-down assimilation of group political attitudes (i.e. the ideological shift in Black public opinion), is the change in the racial salience of certain issues. Without the clear racialized cues that would have been apparent in political issues during slavery and Jim Crow, such as categorical treatment as chattel slaves or exclusion from public spaces and adequate education due to the color of one’s skin, Blacks have been left to individually determine what the racial group’s needs are. They try to determine the group’s interest based on readily accessible information and their understanding of the group’s norms and expectations so they can use the Black Utility

Heuristic to make a political judgement on a less racially salient or nonracial issue.

Source Cues and Issue Salience

The manner in which information is presented can influence whether the individual changes their attitude to reflect the new group norm. Factors such as the social standing of the messenger, the type of messenger, and the context in which the message was communicated can influence how group members respond to new information about the group’s norms and expectations. Officially, scholars have identified five aspects that determine if a message is persuasive: source, message, channel, receiver, and destination. Likewise, the effectiveness of a messenger depends primarily on the source’s credibility, attractiveness and power (Pornpitakpan 2004). Pornpitakpan determined there are many traits that determine if a source is credible. These traits are related to expertise and trustworthiness. Because dynamics such as competence, charisma, and competence go into determining source credibility and source credibility

19 can vary based on the audience, message, and perception of source’s characteristics, it would be too distracting or complicated to introduce source credibility as a variable in this study. However, because we know that the type of messenger matters when determining if an individual with change their attitude. Especially if that information pertains to a group the individual strongly identifies with.

The source of the communication can influence how an individual to responds to a message. Source cues can cause change in public opinion. Source cues are an actor’s signals about his or her stance on an issue or situation (Nicholson 2011). Nicholson

(2011) found that source cues only cause change in opinion when the messenger endorses information that is contrary to his or her beliefs and feature a disliked outgroup.

Likewise, Arceneaux and Kolodny (2009) found that source cues can overwhelm message cues when the messenger represents an opposite group from the audience.

Mobilized individuals are more likely to reject the message if the messenger was from an opposite group even if they reported to agree with the group on that issue (Arceneaux and

Kolodny 2009). Perhaps there is a relationship between source cues and treatment of outgroup attitudes, information, and behavior. Taber and Lodge (2006) found that citizens are in fact biased when processing new information. They use motivated reasoning and seek out information that confirms priors, view evidence that is consistent with proper opinions as stronger and spend more time counter arguing and dismissing evidence that is inconsistent with prior opinions.

Scholars have known for years that individuals respond to elite cues. The manner in which African Americans respond to elite cues is particularly interesting. Kuklinski

20 and Hurley (1994) found that elite messages have a strong influence on Black public opinion. People focus on the contextual meaning of the statements instead of the semantic meaning when those statements concern real-world issues. The characteristics of the source influence the meaning participants assign to the information. Black participants were more likely to agree with a racial statement if the source was Black elite instead of White elite. This consensus is likely to occur regardless of the political ideology of the Black elite. Discussions of race can activate certain values and perceptions and influence whether individuals apply these considerations in racialized political judgments. Domke et. al (2000) found that this process takes place when the messengers are social and political elites and when their message is presented within a news media context. They argued that elites are perceived as highly credible because impartial journalists and anchors gave them that status. As a result the audience will have certain heuristics activated and consider adopting that elite’s message. It is also possible that the source/ messenger is not the cause of a recipient’s processing and incorporation of the message. In a study investigating the relationship between persuasive messages and in-group opinions, Mackie et. al (1990) determined that increased message processing, via group discussions, individual processing, etc., better explains in-group attitude change than persuasive cues from a source.

Ostfeld and Mutz (2014) find that case reports featuring identifiable victims are more likely to encourage viewers to be supportive of policy opinions than case reports with unidentifiable victims. They cite the potential for viewers to find similarities between themselves and the victim as the catalyst for this relationship. The perception of

21 others’ opinions can also influence personal opinions (Mutz 1998). Viewing a news story or reading an article that cites poll information with majority numbers can influence a person with non-attitudes to converge to that stated norm. Mutz calls this phenomenon impersonal influence - the influence the collective group has on an individual’s beliefs, attitudes, and expectations. The presentation of the collective opinion triggers the social influence process and encourages the viewer to update his or her opinion so that it is closer to the collective opinion (Mutz 1998). This phenomenon in conjunction with political shortcuts such as party identification and ideology, can help individuals quickly decided whether to support a given policy or candidate, using little information (Lau and

Redlawsk 2001). Rothschild and Malhotra (2014) determined public opinion poll reports, where a critical majority of the public support a given candidate or policy initiative, encourage a bandwagon effect on the general public. After exposure to the poll report, these individuals express attitudes similar to the attitudes expressed by majority of the polled respondents. They argued three mechanisms could explain why these individuals suddenly change their attitudes to reflect the new public norm: conformity, impersonal influence, and resolving cognitive dissonance (Rothschild and Malhotra

2014). They found respondents with weaker pre-treatment attitudes and understandings of public support were most likely to be influenced by the polling information.

Likewise, they also found that this effect is strongest on less salient issues (free-trade).

Because free-trade is not a party-specific platform, individuals do not have any clear elite cues to refer to for guidance on the issue. As a result, the impersonal influence swayed

22 the participant’s attitude to mirror the attitude expressed by the polled majority in the treatment article

The way an individual processes and responds to a message depends on the content of the message itself and the issue in question. Petty and Cacioppo (1986) argue that when an issue is important or salient, one’s attitudes are more likely to be stronger and stable. As a result, people are motivated to process the information and devote more cognitive resources to evaluating the quality and strength of arguments in a message.

Likewise they are less influenced by peripheral cues such as the characteristics of the messenger. When an issue is less important or not a salient issue (within the group), attitudes tend to be weaker, persuasive messages are less likely to be questioned, and people are more likely to be influenced by cues such as the characteristics of the messenger.

With this understanding of source cues and issue salience in mind, I am assuming that Blacks are in fact receptive to source cues, especially when the source is an elite member of the racial group. I’m also assuming that reports of the collective group’s opinions and experiences have a profound impact on members who are highly linked or identify with the racial group as a whole. Likewise, collective opinions can influence an individual’s attitude towards an issue. It is likely that for less salient issues, individual will conform or acquiesce to whatever the majority attitude is towards said issue so that the individual is in good standing with the larger group. The manner in which information is presented determines how that information is processed. The information itself is not a frame. However, one can argue that the characteristics of the messenger are

23 a framing mechanism. Elites are particularly successful at activating certain ideas and inspiring individuals to adopt and apply those ideas in political evaluations. Although

Domke et. al were examining the relationship between race of a messenger and the embrace of a racialized message for White audiences, their theory and findings should be extended to cases where the elite is Black and the audience is Black. There is a relationship between the strength of in-group membership and impersonal influence.

Likewise, I am assuming the strength of the in-group membership motivates African

Americans to consider and process information as it pertains to the group. With all of this in mind, I anticipate three types of sources that Black people are responsive to.

Blacks will be most responsive to an in-group elite messenger because they are able to activate certain ideas and encourage others to use said ideas in political evaluations.

Blacks will be moderately responsive to a collective group message because information about the collective racial group’s stance will encourage the individual to adopt said opinion so that he or she is in line with the collective. Black people will be least responsive to the non-elite in-group messenger because the messenger would not be considered credible as a result of the lower status in the group. However, there is a chance Black people will respond to the non-elite because of Harris-Perry’s argument that daily interaction with Black people in social spheres serve to expose and reinforce political identities and attitudes.

Political Knowledge and Attitude Expression

Political knowledge is an important dynamic in the study of political behavior.

Many studies measuring public opinion use a questionnaire in order to measure

24 respondents knowledge about current events or aspects of the American political system. previous research has demonstrated that political knowledge can serve as an indicator for sophistication awareness and engagement (Delli Carpini and Keeter 1993). Studies have determined that there are age gaps educational gaps and racial gaps in performance on political knowledge questionnaires (Verba et al 1993). These disparities could be a result of lower levels of interest however I argue that current batteries are not measuring the kind of knowledge that African-Americans are using or know. Likewise, political knowledge does not translate into policy knowledge (Gilens 2001). A person can know every aspect of the federal government and not know anything about taxation practices or how public assistance is dispersed throughout the country. While previous research on political knowledge has established that understanding the national political landscape is a consistent indicator of an individual’s awareness of the political environment and shed light on the complexity, stability, and consistency this or her attitudes, there has been little research on the relationship between specialized knowledge, general (political) knowledge, and political attitudes. Kathleen McGraw and Neil Pinney’s 1990 article is one of the few projects that examine this relationship. In their project they argue that political knowledge, like other types of knowledge, is multifaceted and as a result, people can become experts in specific subtypes of American political knowledge without becoming experts in political knowledge at the general / national level. Likewise, people can be interested in certain issues and express attitudes about them and be indifferent towards others (and possibly express non-attitudes if prompted to give an opinion)

(McGraw and Pinney 1990). They provide three explanations for the relationship

25 between general and domain-specific knowledge and that relationship to political attitudes: domain-specific political expertise and global political expertise may be related

(ex. Environmental policies); domain-specific expertise may discourage an individual to maintain global political expertise because they prioritize their limited cognitive resources to maintaining their specialized knowledge; and specialized knowledge and global knowledge may be two separate phenomena , meaning specialized knowledge may not be predictive of general political knowledge (McGraw and Pinney 1990). They argue the strongest draw for domain-specific expertise is that it is drawn from “direct behavioral experience [but it does not need to] be used on a day-to-day basis” (McGraw and Pinney, 12, 1990). The benefit of “regular use” of specialized knowledge is that it is readily accessible and well developed within the expert’s mind. McGraw and Pinney found that general political knowledge and specialized knowledge are separate phenomena and as a result, their relationship is a function of the nature of the specialized knowledge and that the three relationships they proposed are possible (McGraw and

Pinney 1990).

Returning to attitude formation and expression research, Zaller asserts his

“receive, accept, sample” (RAS) model explains how people respond to political information they encounter. The four axioms - reception, resistance, accessibility, and response - describe how an individual expresses an attitude when prompted (Zaller 1992).

Reception refers to the greater a person’s level of cognitive engagement with an issue, the more likely they are to be exposed, comprehend and ultimately receive political messages about said issue. Resistance refers to people’s tendency to resist arguments that are

26 inconsistent with their political predispositions but only to the extent they actually possess the contextual information necessary to perceive a relationship between the message and their predispositions. The accessibility axiom refers to how recently a consideration can be recalled or thought about and as a result, it will take less time to retrieve that consideration from memory and bring them to the top of the head for use.

Lastly, the response axiom refers to individuals answering survey questions by averaging across all of the considerations that are accessible to them. The inconsistencies and instability of one’s public opinion can be attributed to that person’s level of political sophistication that will cause variation in the expressed attitudes; which are the end- product of the RAS model (Zaller 1992).

Richard Lau and David Redlawsk (2001) argue that people generally rely on five heuristics when making a vote choice. These five heuristics are a candidate’s party affiliation, the candidate’s ideology, endorsements of the candidate, viability, and the candidate’s appearance. It is also possible that five heuristics are also used when composing or expressing a political attitude when prompted to do so. Now these five heuristics somewhat differ from the generally accepted five traits or factors that are discussed in the larger behavior canon is used for determining a person’s vote choice: social identities, party identification, incumbent’s performance, party issues, and candidate traits (Flanigan et. al 2007; Sides et. al 2012).

Regardless of whatever traits or heuristics are used, where do they come from?

Zaller argues that this information from these traits would come from whatever the person is watching so the news TV whatever is the easiest source or easiest file that they

27 can easily access. He also argues that the general public is incapable of actually having an ideology this is a result of the mass public not being politically sophisticated about to articulate and express true political beliefs or attitudes (Zaller 1992). Melissa Harris-

Perry on the other hand contends that is not true. She argues that, especially for African-

Americans, an ideology or political beliefs are reinforced not only in interactions media - wise, but they it is also introduced and reinforced in day-to-day interactions with people

(Harris-Perry 2004). Therefore, talking while walking to work or while getting a haircut or even when you go to church functions, these interactions with others within the community introduce and reinforce your political beliefs and stances on certain issues.

African-Americans in particular are relying on information is coming from places that are larger or arguably more refined than what Zaller contend the average person gets their information from. Ismail White (2007) contends that the type of information that people would rely upon for a certain issue depends on the issue itself. By that he means if prompted for politicized racial attitude, the difference between giving a generic attitude and said politicized racial attitude depends on whether the participant is of that same group and if the message itself activates the politicized version of that identity. Like most people, African Americans have interests and could know more about topics that interest them or directly affect them. But it is possible to have an interest in something and not know much about it or its related larger topic. Interest and knowledge are two different things. Thus, the next chapter explores the nuances of political knowledge, the feasibility of conceptualizing Black Political Knowledge, and creating a measurement for use Black political behavior research.

Theory

Figure.1.1 - Graphic Representation of the Roles of Linked Fate and Black Political Knowledge in Shaping Responses to Group Messages We know that an identity is the expression of an individual's belief system and social affiliations. Race, nationality, gender and socioeconomic status can influence the formation and expression of said identity. Political identity is the expression of an individual's beliefs and attitudes that are based in the member's group affiliation (Simon and Pettigrew 1990). The type of groups include race-based, gender-based, partisan- based, etc. Likewise we know that the Black politicized identity includes linked fate, group consciousness and group solidarity and that the strength of one's sense of connection varies in response to the way the Black political identity is activated (McClain

29 et. al 2009). There are generational differences in expressions of belief in linked fate.

African Americans under the age of 40 are least likely to express belief. Even though the likelihood of expressing belief increases with age, generational trends never overlap or meet (Mack 2011; Mack 2013). We also know that Black political attitudes can change based on the context of the message (White 2007; Laird 2014). However we don’t know whether Black political attitudes concerning issues beyond the scope of Black group norms, can be influenced by source cues or the context of new information.

With all of this in mind, I argue there is a relationship between group-specific knowledge, group-identity, and attitudes that varies based on the salience of the issue in question, the source of the message, and the recipient’s strength of group identity and amount of group-specific knowledge. Figure 1 outlines linked fate and political knowledge influences responses to messages. The independent variables are the messages and the dependent variable is the subsequent attitude. The aspects of the message that will be manipulated are the source, issue/subject matter, and tone. The moderating variable is the participant’s reported belief in linked fate and strength of said belief. The moderating variable is the participant’s performance on the political knowledge batteries.

A Black person can be highly linked and not know what the group’s interests are, especially when issues are not racialized, and as a result use the Black Utility Heuristic to express an attitude that actually goes against the racial group’s interest. There are strongly linked Black people who may know very little about Black politics. Likewise there are weakly linked Black people who may know a lot about Black politics. Linked

30 individuals would be more likely to rely on the normative aspects or cues of the politicized racial identity when processing information about less-racially salient issues.

For linked Blacks who are also less politically knowledgeable, the normative cues of the group identity could be manipulated in such a way that they would accept any kind of political consideration and express it as their own so long as it is for the greater good of the racial group and will make them comply with the new standard expressed in the communication.

Most Blacks express moderate-to-high levels of linked fate, which encourages them to use the group’s interests as a substitute for personal interests. As a result of this heuristic, Blacks are motivated to view and consider information that pertains to the group. They incorporate normative information and update their understanding of the group based on the strength of their identity or location within the group, the source of the information, and the type of information conveyed. However, we do not know whether this strong group identification truly translates into knowledge or understanding about the group’s needs and interests. The nature of the group motivates non-elite members to receive and incorporate info from elite members. Likewise, they will be motivated to receive and incorporate information from the collective group. Blacks with moderate levels of belief in linked fate view the group as a homogenous entity and want to view themselves as good typical members of the group. As such, they will update their attitudes based on the information from group elites and the collective group. Subsequent expressions about the attitude would be close to the new information expressed. Blacks with low racial knowledge will also be motivated to receive and incorporate information

31 about the group’s “stance” towards an issue regardless of the source because they want to view themselves as typical members of the group.

Given the nature of the relationship between the independent and dependent variables, moderating variable, and moderating variable, the hypotheses are broken down into each variable’s isolated anticipated effect on political attitudes:

Source

• H1 - Participants will be most receptive to the message from the elite source. Participants will be moderately receptive to the message from the collective group and will be least receptive to the message from the non-elite source.

This hypothesis directly draws upon the literature cited in the group norms and message source sections. The Black racial group has recognizable elites whose attitudes and statements can encourage members to conform in accordance to the statement so they can continue to be in good-standing with the larger group. Likewise in-group status will encourage participants to be more receptive to the Black elite status as opposed to the non-elite status because studies show non-elites believing the elites know more about the dynamics of the group as a whole and as such their statements are more trustworthy than those of a non-elite member. Finally, drawing from the message source literature, I anticipate participants being most receptive to the message when the source is the collective group, as seen in the critical majority in poll reports.

Issue Salience

• H2 –Participants will be most responsive to information in the message when the issue is of least racial salience. Participants will be somewhat responsive to the message when the topic is of moderate racial salience. Participants will be unresponsive to the message when the topic is of high racial salience.

Drawing upon Petty and Cacioppo’s Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion, I assert that when an issue is racially salient for Black people, their attitudes are more likely to be stronger and stable. As a result, those attitudes will not be affected by source cues and messages that promote an opposing attitude on the salient issue. Petty and

Cacioppo (1986) also argue that people who have ability and motivation (which will be indicated by their Black Politics Battery score) are less influenced by source cues and more attentive to the message itself. As a result, Black people will focus on the overall message and quickly determine whether the message fits with their understanding of an issue based on accessible considerations. Highly racial issues require little time to process because reliance on linked fate and the Black Utility Heuristic is applicable

(because race is the central point in those issues) and a contrary message (regardless of the source) will not have an impact. An example of an issue with high racial salience is the #BlackLivesMatter movement where recent media discussion is split over characterizing supporters as racist terrorist supporters or impassioned individuals concerned over the rising number of Black deaths as a result of police brutality.

Moderately racial issues require some more time to process because activation of linked fate takes longer because it is not clear if race is the central point in those issues.

Because more time is needed to process the issue, Black people are more likely to be responsive to source cues and the message so their processing is guided and faster. An 33 example of a moderately racial issue is the role of government, specifically increasing the role of the federal government. The group rationale for supporting increasing the role of federal government is not readily accessible as the “race aspect” takes time to identify.

Federal oversight encourages states not to discriminate against persons of color in terms of their social, political, and economic rights. Lastly, nonracial issues require the most time to process because activation of linked fate may not happen unless it is done so through the source who can implicitly or explicitly introduce a racialized component to the issue (White 2007). So a nonracial issue becomes racial because the messenger activates the politicized racial identity, Black people will conform to the message based on the type of messenger. An example of a nonracial issue is campaign finance reform.

The recent Supreme Court ruling that essentially gave business corporations the right to donate large amounts of money to a candidate’s campaign speaks to the larger ethical issue of the role of money in political campaigns but does not have any implications for

Black people as a whole. As such, it is likely that Black people do not have any considerations they can refer to when processing information about campaign finance reform so they will conform to the messenger’s expressed attitude.

Linked Fate (moderating effect)

• H3 – African Americans with high levels of linked fate (high identifiers) will be more responsive to the collective group’s message and less likely to respond to the message from in-group individuals, regardless of the messenger’s status • H4 –African Americans with moderate levels of linked fate (moderate identifiers) will be more responsive to the collective group’s message as well as the elite’s message and less likely to respond to the message from the non-elite.

• H5 –African Americans with low levels of linked fate (low identifiers) will only be responsive to the collective group’s message, and less likely to respond to the message from in-group individuals regardless of the messenger’s status.

These hypotheses are based on the message source, group norms, and Black politics literature. Because individuals who believe in linked fate prioritize the group’s best interests and ultimately use those interests as proxies for their own interests, I expect responsiveness to the source cues to be based on the strength of the person’s linked fate.

While high identifiers and moderate identifiers can be receptive to the new information, it is likely high identifiers could have a stronger “understanding” of the group norms, recognize the variation within the group, and will be more likely to dismiss the new information based on the status of the messenger. If the messenger is in fact the collective group, then the high identifier will conform to the stated new group stance on said issue. Moderate identifiers will instead be more receptive to the information if the messenger is an elite member of the group. H4 is based on group norms and message source literature. I expect moderate identifiers to be receptive to the new information if it is presented as the collective group’s opinion. Although these individuals may privately disagree with the new information impersonal influence and perceptions of in-group homogeneity will encourage them to express attitudes reflective of the new information in order to be perceived as good group members. H5 is based in group norms and Black politics literature. Because low identifiers do not readily identify with the racial group as a whole, or could express situational linked fate, these individuals would formulate and maintain their political attitudes in a similar fashion that Zaller argues the average

American does. As a result, low identifiers would not place special consideration on processing group messages from the actual group or its representatives.

Black Political Knowledge (moderating effect)

• H6 – Participants with higher scores on the Black Political Knowledge Battery will be less responsive to message cues and exhibit the least attitude change. Participants with lower scores on the Black Political Knowledge Battery will be more responsive to message cues and exhibit more attitude change to reflect the message.

This hypothesis is based on the political knowledge and attitude expression literatures. Assuming the participants formulate their opinions using Zaller’s RAS Model, this means that participants with lower amounts Black political knowledge should be responsive to the political communication because they are less aware and do not actively seek out political communications and regularly update their considerations. As a result, they are more likely to be influenced to update their attitudes based on the source of the message and strength their group identity to reflect this new “standard”. Likewise, Taber

& Lodge’s (2006) work suggests the people higher in knowledge engage in motivated reasoning and hold on to their prior attitudes when exposed to new information that challenges said priors. I am expecting highly knowledgeable Blacks to be unresponsive to the source cues in the messages because their higher scores indicate they are more politically sophisticated, having higher group awareness, and are more politically engaged. I am expecting moderately knowledgeable Blacks to vary in their responsiveness to source cues and the message because their lower scores indicate they are not as politically sophisticated, have lower group awareness, and are less politically engaged. As a result, the source cues will be more influential in issue areas that they do 36 not know about. Likewise, they will be more responsive to the message the source is communicating. I am expecting less knowledgeable Blacks to be receptive to the messages and source cues in the treatments because they will be relying on their heuristics to process the information quickly and express an attitude when prompted.

However, because their low score indicates they may not be as politically engaged, or sophisticated as their in-group peers, I anticipate they will be accepting the messages and their subsequent attitudes will reflect the newly acquired information (which may not be reflective of their predispositions). Overall, I am asserting that this Black political knowledge is a type of domain specific knowledge and as such I am expecting it to function similarly as general political knowledge as an indicator of sophistication, awareness, and engagement.

Chapter 3. Measuring Black Political Knowledge

On March 7, 2016 in Flint, Michigan, CNN anchors Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper moderated the Democratic Presidential debate between former Secretary of State Hillary

Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders (New York Times 2016). During the debate, Don

Lemon asked Sec. Clinton about her plans to end mass incarceration because Black men now face a 33 percent chance of being incarcerated at any time in their lives. This statistic was alarming because of her and her husband’s widespread support and approval in the Black community even though she supported the 1994 Crime Bill that has created the incarceration problem. Why should Black people trust her to remedy the issue? In preparation to answering the question, Clinton reminds Lemon and the viewers that Sen.

Sanders also supported that bill and should answer the question as well. Ultimately

Clinton and Sanders provided their responses: Clinton acknowledged the bill addressed the rising crime rates during that time but also created more issues that affect Black lives today; Sanders acknowledged that he did vote for the bill because it had great provisions, namely a ban on assault weapons and the violence against women act which were initiatives that he fought for throughout his political career, but that bill also had bad aspects that he did not support but ultimately conceded (New York Times 2016). he did in fact vote for the bill. This brief exchange within this debate will be revisited throughout the dissertation as one of the working examples of the research questions 38 pertaining to the relationship between linked fate, political knowledge, issue salience, source cues and attitudes.

This exchange is important for the sake of this chapter because Don Lemon, a

Black man, asks a racialized question to a woman who enjoys positive support in the

Black community because her husband is a beloved political figure. But the question challenges the preconceived “support” of the Black community by introducing to some viewers, and reminding others, that all of the legislation and initiatives during Clinton

Administration did not benefit Black people. Most people are not aware of all the federal legislation and initiatives that are proposed and passed in Washington D.C. and only recall salient events or laws (Zaller 1992). In response to this jarring question, Sec.

Clinton reminds everyone that Sen. Sanders was also involved in that bill as well and should also receive this critique and skepticism. If Americans, notably Black people, who are most likely to interact with the criminal justice system at any point in their lives, had widely known about that the Clinton Administration supported those “tough on crime” laws that continue to politically, socially, and economically stigmatize and marginalize people of color, then it’s possible that public discourse on her involvement in the laws would have started as early as 2000, when she ran for New York US Senate seat, or more notably when she ran for president in 2008 and 2016. Likewise, Black public opinion of Hillary Clinton should have decreased in light of the information. But why didn’t (enough) people know about this?

In this chapter, I examine political knowledge as a concept and explore the feasibility of creating a battery of questions that measure Black political knowledge.

Black political knowledge as a topic has been studied only as a subgroup's performance on questionnaires about the national political scene; a scene that caters to the majority's interests and knowledge and assumes the minority groups would learn and govern themselves accordingly. A proposed Black Politics measure would be one of the first studies that explore Black political knowledge as a domain-specific topic like healthcare or taxes. I conducted a pilot study using a comprehensive survey with questions about

Black American history, Blacks’ relationship with the political parties, policy initiatives targeted towards Blacks, identification of group elites, and identification of Black media sources to identify the kinds of questions that should appear on a finalized battery. This survey also included the traditional political knowledge battery by Michael Delli Carpini and Scott Keeter that is used in the American National Election Studies and Ismail

White’s 2004 knowledge battery in order to compare performance on the preliminary questions to performance on the traditional battery and a suggested specialized battery.

This chapter discusses the results of the pilot study and describes the transitional steps for using the results of the pilot study in the treatments that will be used in the survey experiment for the second phase of the research design.

Conceptualizing Political Knowledge

Political knowledge is an important dynamic aspect in the study of political behavior. Political knowledge is correct awareness or familiarity or holding correct information concerning civics, issues, or candidate information (Hoffman 2012).

Studying political knowledge is based in the basic understanding of participation in society – in order to participate you must know what is going on (Hoffman 2012; Shea

2015). Political knowledge is also sometimes referred to as political sophistication or political expertise. Most Scholars examine political knowledge as a predictor, moderator, or mediator in a variety of attitude relationships. Political knowledge may encourage discussion of politics in one’s social networks, change or stabilize political attitudes, or influence the relationship between media use and political participation (Delli Carpini and Keeter 1993). However, political knowledge cannot be directly measured, it is assessed through scores on tests.

Because political knowledge is measured indirectly, Michael Delli Carpini and

Scott Keeter (1996) defined and operationalized political knowledge as the “range of factual information about politics that is stored in the long-term memory”. Many studies measuring public opinion include a battery of questions that attempt to measure the respondent’s knowledge of current events or current aspects of the American government in order to describe the amount and type of information citizens must have to fully participate fully in American society. For scholars who do not conflate political knowledge with political sophistication or political expertise, a person’s level of political knowledge can serve as an indicator for political sophistication, awareness, and engagement (Carpini and Keeter 1993). On its own, political knowledge measurements can indicate how much an individual understands about fundamental aspects of American politics. With this in mind, I use the Delli Carpini and Keeter definition and operationalization of political knowledge and will avoid conflating the term with sophistication and expertise and using them interchangeably.

Delli Carpini and Keeter’s 1993 project introduced the five-question political battery that is now included in many surveys including the American National Election

Study surveys. Their five questions - Who has the final responsibility to decide if a law is constitutional or not – is it the President, Congress or the Supreme Court? Which party has the most members in the House of Representatives? Which party is more conservative – the Democrats or the Republicans? How much of a majority is required for the Senate and House to override a presidential veto – half plus one majority, two- thirds majority, or three-fourths majority? What job or political office is currently held by [insert current Vice President’s name]? – measures key aspects of the American political system; aspects that change and aspects that have stayed the same for generations. In later research, Delli Carpini and Keeter surmise that Americans’ knowledge is varied, but on average considered low on their 5 and 10 question batteries

(Delli Carpini and Keeter 1996). Respondents knew important facts details about the separation of powers; definitions of terms such as veto and party platform; civil rights such as the right to a trial by jury, free speech, and religious freedom; and the stands of presidential candidates and political parties on some of the “major” current issues.

However, respondents did not know the definitions of terms such as liberal and conservative; what is the bill of rights; the names or issue stands of most public officials at the state and local level; and key socio-political conditions such as the unemployment rate or how much of the federal budget is spent on defense or foreign aid (Delli Carpini and Keeter 1996). Despite the gaping differences in knowledge about static aspects (such as the balance of powers and veto requirements) and topical or changing aspects (such as

42 the unemployment rate and allocations in the federal budget), Americans are not as uninformed or incapable of being informed as previously thought.

There have been other studies that investigate current event levels among the public and whether political knowledge levels vary between groups. Verba, Scholzman and Brady’s 1993 study where Black respondents on average correctly answered 3 of 8 political questions while Latino respondents on correctly answered fewer than 3 questions. Because these minority respondents also reported lower levels of political participation and activity than White respondents, Verba et. al concluded that ethnic and racial minorities are less politically informed than Whites and could explain their lower levels of political involvement in comparison to Whites but once differences in access to political relevant resources are controlled, they find no significant difference between the three groups’ political participation. Though problematic, there are studies that find similar findings for generational cohorts. Recently, the Pew Research Center released a study that determined that Americans know more about historical figures and federal deadlines than they did about domestic politics and international affairs (Pew Research

Center 2015). In that study, 51 percent of respondents could identify Sen. Elizabeth

Warren (D-MA) which was an improvement from 2013’s study where 43 percent of respondents could identify her. The most interesting finding from this study, that also reiterates long-held facts about political participation among young adults, is that people aged 18-34 are less likely to answer correctly political questions than people aged 70+

(Pew Research Center 2015). However, young adults were more likely to correctly answer questions about the economy and taxes than older adults. The report did not

43 provide explanations for this difference however, it is likely young respondents were more likely to answer those questions correctly because the unemployment rate and the healthcare issue on filing taxes are topics that directly affect their daily lives where as those issues are not as important for older Americans. In a similar study, Marisa

Abrajano (2015) wanted to investigate the underlying causes of the racial gap in political knowledge – specifically why so many studies have determined African American and

Latino respondents know less about American politics than White respondents. She determined that African American and Latino respondents are correctly answering some questions but because they could be indirectly giving the correct answer, the interviewer just marked their responses as incorrect. Once Abrajano corrected for interpersonal comparability, she found that Black and Latino respondents are similarly knowledgeable as White respondents on issue and ideological positions of prominent figures in the 2008

ANES and in the 2012 ANES (Abrajano 2015). While she concludes that interviewer bias and other confounding variables are the true causes of the racial gap we see in political knowledge levels, the relevant research she describes in her review section suggests that like the young respondents in the Pew study, Black and Latino respondents are more knowledgeable about political aspects that directly affect their daily lives or racial/ethnic identity.

It is safe to assume that if measuring political knowledge is important then measuring political ignorance and non-attitudes is also important. Understanding what a person does not know or which issues a person does not have an opinion has greater implications than understanding how much a person knows or how strongly he or she

44 feels about an issue. In his 2001 study investigating the consequences of political ignorance on our larger understanding of democracy and policy preferences, Martin

Gilens argues that levels of political knowledge are unlikely to influence political choices or preferences. Instead this knowledge is a complicated indicator of a host of factors that essentially measures one’s capacity to understand the political world (Gilens 2001).

Gilens seems to imply political knowledge and political preferences are two separate entities. In his study, he finds that policy-specific facts greatly influence respondents’ political judgements however ignorance of this specific information leads respondents to hold political views different from those they have otherwise. Ultimately, Gilens determines that policy ignorance is the greatest for people with the highest levels of political knowledge because most political knowledge questionnaires only measure respondents’ understanding of the national political landscape and not their understanding of details or implications of major policies. However, Gilens optimistically concludes that higher levels of political knowledge facilitate the incorporation of new information, namely policy-specific information, into political judgements and attitudes (Gilens 2001).

Michael Cobb and Mark Nance use Gilens’s research and investigate a normative question – why should public opinion influence policy debates? In examining whether non-attitudes affected depictions of North Carolinian public opinion on free trade policies, they argued non-attitudes are ideological byproducts of policy ignorance. They find that respondents are not voting with trade issues in mind and frankly do not “care” about trade issues. Instead respondents express trade issue opinions based on their understanding of their preferred political party or ideology stance and not using localized

45 issue-specific information (Cobb and Mark 2011). Ultimately their research indicates that non-attitudes can affect the way scholars understand public opinion and specifically the policy implications non-attitudes in public opinion can have. Non-attitudes can distort estimates for support for or against issues and larger conclusions drawn from the problematic data.

While previous research on political knowledge has established that understanding the national political landscape is a consistent indicator of an individual’s awareness of the political environment and shed light on the complexity, stability, and consistency this or her attitudes, there has been little research on the relationship between specialized knowledge, general (political) knowledge, and political attitudes. Kathleen

McGraw and Neil Pinney’s 1990 article is one of the few projects that examine this relationship. In their project they argue that political knowledge, like other types of knowledge, is multifaceted and as a result, people can become experts in specific subtypes of American political knowledge without becoming experts in political knowledge at the general / national level. Likewise, people can be interested in certain issues and express attitudes about them and be indifferent towards others (and possibly express non-attitudes if prompted to give an opinion) (McGraw and Pinney 1990). They provide three explanations for the relationship between general and domain-specific knowledge and that relationship to political attitudes: domain-specific political expertise and global political expertise may be related (ex. Environmental policies); domain- specific expertise may discourage an individual to maintain global political expertise because they prioritize their limited cognitive resources to maintaining their specialized

46 knowledge; and specialized knowledge and global knowledge may be two separate phenomena , meaning specialized knowledge may not be predictive of general political knowledge (McGraw and Pinney 1990). They argue the strongest draw for domain- specific expertise is that it is drawn from “direct behavioral experience [but it does not need to] be used on a day-to-day basis” (McGraw and Pinney, 12, 1990). The benefit of

“regular use” of specialized knowledge is that it is readily accessible and well developed within the expert’s mind. McGraw and Pinney found that general political knowledge and specialized knowledge are separate phenomena and as a result, their relationship is a function of the nature of the specialized knowledge and that the three relationships they proposed are possible (McGraw and Pinney 1990).

With political knowledge serving as a cognitive construct representing what information people know about the political world, scholars have explored if and how individuals use said knowledge when making political decisions or giving political attitudes. Though explained in more detail in the theoretical framework chapter, Zaller’s work contends that people really do not have political attitudes and they only express an opinion when prompted for one. He contends that elite-focused communications influence and constrain public opinion. However, the communication’s positive or negative influence is mediated by the individual’s political awareness. It is this awareness that determines the salience of certain attitudes in mass opinion (Zaller 1992).

People vary in their attention to politics and subsequently, their exposure to political elites and political information varies. The “Receive-Accept-Sample” model is Zaller’s theoretical explanation for the formation of political preferences by the general public. In

47 the “receive” phase, an individual receives considerations from communications (usually in the media) and reflect upon them. In the “accept” phase, an individual then accept certain considerations based on their consistency with prior held/formed beliefs. Finally, in the “sample” phase, individual’s express attitudes when prompted to do so, based on what is most accessible in their minds at the time (Zaller 1992). Because respondents are expressing opinions based on the most salient considerations at the time when prompted, people rarely have fixed attitudes. Instead, issue attitudes are created spontaneously when an issue is prompted.

Based on his larger argument and RAS Model, Zaller contends people’s response to political communication is only influential to the extent that they are politically knowledgeable. With this varying level of interest and salience towards certain considerations and issues, an individual’s political opinion is based on ideas related to those two factors and how recent or accessible they are in his or her mind (Zaller 1992).

People who are politically aware are more likely to “receive” more political communications but are more selective in determining which communications they

“accept”. The considerations these aware people will accept will be consistent with each other and with the individual’s political predispositions. People who are less politically aware will be less likely to expose themselves to political communications and as a result, “receive” fewer communications and considerations. In turn, less aware individuals will be inconsistent in choosing the considerations they “accept” and their subsequent opinions will not be ideologically consistent with their predispositions (Zaller

1992). Instead their opinions will be the culmination of readily accessible considerations

48 that are not reflective of their true preferences. Ultimately, he extends Converse’s argument by saying attitude change is a result of the change in the composition of the types of considerations people are exposed to. Likewise changes in political information communication does not directly cause attitude change. Instead change is the result of the smaller changes in the balance of considerations that are present in people’s mind and accessible when an individual is prompted to express an opinion (Zaller 1992).

Implications from Zaller’s study is that people who are not politically aware can be easily influenced in situations where the political information available is extremely high (as seen in presidential elections) and are also likely to accept almost all of the considerations they are exposed to. As a result, politically unaware people’s attitudes during this time are highly inconsistent and unstable.

Both Zaller’s work and McGraw and Pinney’s work draws upon the Petty and

Cacioppo’s (1986) Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion, that explains the various ways of processing information, why those ways are used, and how those ways effect the subsequent decisions a person makes. The ELM argues when a person encounters a message, they can process the information with varying levels of thought (elaboration), ranging from little thought to a lot of thought. Essentially, there are two routes people can take in response (persuasion) to said message. People who take the central route are persuaded to their final decision as a result of careful consideration of the information in the message while people who take the peripheral route are persuaded to their final decision as a result of association with the message cues or simple inferences based on the message. Decisions made through the central route are more stable and less prone to

49 outside influence from message cues. Decisions made through the peripheral route are unstable and more prone to influence from message cues in addition to the person’s motivation and ability to evaluate the information in the message (Petty and Cacioppo

1986).

Applying this social psychological model to political behavior, this means that the differences in expressed political attitudes varies on the ELM route the survey respondent took when prompted for an attitude. Individuals with high political knowledge and overall sophistication are more likely to use the central route when preparing to give an attitude while individuals with low knowledge are more likely to use the peripheral route and rely on message cues in addition to similar inferences based on information they can quickly access in their minds when preparing to give an attitude. Heuristics can be used in ELM however if used in the central route, the subsequent attitude will be reached quicker and would still be stable while an attitude quickly formulated because of the mental shortcut and the peripheral route would not reflect that person’s true attitude.

However, there is still value in studying attitudes resulting from the peripheral route, particularly if the information in question pertains to an overarching understanding of the racialized nature of the American political system.

Black Political Attitudes and Knowledge

Returning to the dynamics of Black political identity and behavior, it is important to conceptualize and discuss the phenomena that informs and explains Black Public

Opinion. Group solidarity is the acknowledgement of one’s status within a socially marginalized group but without the presence of collective action or any method as the

50 means for improving the group’s status while Group consciousness is politicized in- group identification according to set of ideological beliefs about one’s group’s social standing, and a belief that collective action is the best means by which the group can improve its status (Chong and Rogers 2005; McClain et al. 2009). Individuals who exhibit group consciousness also express group solidarity. However, expressing solidarity does not indicate that the individual expresses group consciousness.

Regardless of the solidarity or consciousness, the person identifies themselves as members of the racial group. As long as Black people continue to perceive the effects of racial oppression as having a presence in their lives then they will continue to contextualize their success and failure in relation to the racial group’s successes and failures. This phenomenon is known as linked fate and it is best seen in the application of the Black Utility Heuristic where the group interests are proxies for personal political interests (Dawson 1994). Both concepts are applicable as long as Blacks continue to believe that race is a salient issue in their lives. It is this expression of linked fate and use of the Black Utility Heuristic that are indicators of a politicized racial identity and attitudes.

In Alternative Spheres of Influence, Ismail White (2005) examines the role racially segregated exposure to political information plays in the differences between

Black and White public opinion. He argues that Blacks’ exposure to political messages from in-group elites through Black institutions, and Whites’ lack of exposure to this alternative information, causes the two groups to interpret political phenomena differently. Black elite discourse encourages regular Black people to refer and respond to

51 a set of cues about the meaning and importance of political issues and events. This discourse influences and guides Black people’s interpretations of and positions on issues in directions that are different from the messages of mainstream political elites (White

2005). In this project, White develops a measure of “Black political awareness” to assess the internalization of the Black elite discourse, or in other words, their knowledge about factual aspects of the racial group’s history and political engagement. He asserts exposure and internalization of Black elite discourse causes intergroup and intragroup differences in how aware Black and White people are of Black politics vis-à-vis mainstream politics.

White’s knowledge battery included four parts: explicitly political Black knowledge, general Black knowledge, common knowledge, and mainstream knowledge

(White 2005). The explicitly political Black knowledge questions measured the respondent’s knowledge of information that would only be known if he or she were exposed to Black elite messages through Black institutions (“Do you happen to know who is the President of the NAACP?” or “Do you happen to know the name of Jesse

Jackson’s activism organization?). General Black knowledge questions measured the respondent’s knowledge of Black history, cultural sources, and important figures in Black media (“Do you know what was the proposed restitution for freed Black slaves after the

Civil War?” or “Do you happen to know the name of one of the Women’s only

Historically Black College/Universities?”) Answers to these questions did not heavily predicate on exposure to alternative discourse or participation in Black institutions. The common knowledge section measured the respondent’s knowledge or identification of

Black involvement in top positions in mainstream politics (“Do you happen to know what position Clarence Thomas holds?” or “Do you happen to know what position

Condoleezza Rice holds?”). Finally, the mainstream knowledge questions measured respondents’ level of familiarity with the aspects of the American political system that are now used as the measure of political knowledge. White used the Delli Carpini and

Keeter five-question battery and included two questions identifying the Head of the

Department of Defense and the Speaker of the House. The results from testing his awareness measure indicated that there is in fact a difference in the distinct political messages distributed through mainstream resources and in Black institutions because

Black respondents scores on the Black political awareness and the mainstream politics versus White respondents’ performance on the same batteries was different. Black respondents performed better on the Black political awareness battery than White respondents did; especially on the questions pertaining to information only accessible through interaction or participation in Black institutions (White 2005).

Like most people, African Americans have interests and could know more about topics that interest them or directly affect them. But it is possible to have an interest in something and not know much about it or its related larger topic. For example, there are fans who enjoy watching professional football but are unaware of the struggles within the

National Football League about informing coaches and players about the link between tackles, concussions and lasting brain damage (Breslow 2014). Interest and knowledge are two different things. Likewise, I assume and acknowledge that being politically knowledgeable is important but like Abrajano, I am wary of saying the Black racial group

53 is less knowledgeable than Whites due to a myriad of factors. McGraw and Pinney’s argument that specific knowledge is unique because it draws from direct behavioral experience fuels my interest in measuring how influential the “Black political experience” is for a Black person. Black political knowledge is something that has been studied only as a subgroup's performance on batteries about the national political scene.

A scene that caters to the majority's interests and knowledge and assumes the minority groups would learn accordingly. Although White created an awareness battery measuring Black respondent’s knowledge concerning factual information that is normally disseminated in Black institutions and Black informational channels he was not trying to measure or conceptualize Black political knowledge in the way Delli Carpini and Keeter did in their studies and subsequently what I am trying to do with this project. Likewise, my research differs from Delli Carpini and Keeter and White because I am not examining levels of, gaps or deficiencies in mainstream political knowledge or identifying politicized group information from alternative sources, instead I am examining how political group knowledge and linked fate function in influencing attitudes on issues of varying racial salience. With all of this in mind, I define Black political knowledge as

“the range of factual information about Black racial group’s role in and relationship with the American political system that is stored in one’s memory”. This definition draws on

Delli and Carpini’s definition of political knowledge, McGraw and Pinney’s justification for examining specialized knowledge, and White’s conceptualization of Black political awareness.

Questionnaire Composition

With Black political knowledge’s definition as “the range of factual information about Black racial group’s role in and relationship with the American political system that is stored in one’s memory”, measuring the concept requires the creation of a “Black politics battery”. However, this is a daunting task because the conceptualization of Black political knowledge is abstract, yet the battery must be concrete. As such, a comprehensive preliminary questionnaire featuring questions about American history and politics, Black history, culture, and politics, and political attitudes is necessary in order to identify the type of questions that should be in the final battery. The exploratory questions were divided into five components: normative/ historical questions, policy questions, partisanship questions, identification of Black elites, and identification of

Black media sources. These five factors were chosen on the assumption these are the most and least recognizable aspects of Black political engagement in America -the historical political, social and economic marginalization of the racial group, the group’s relationship with the two major political parties over the last 175 years, the economic and social legacy of US programs and initiatives on the Black community, and the identification of the outlets for racial cues and its messengers.

Historical Questions - The purpose of the historical and normative questions is to measure the amount of knowledge that people (especially ingroup members) knows about the history and social standards of the racial group as a whole. Because group norms are the result of socialization, and learning morals, ethics, and group cultural traditions, the best way to measure common group knowledge would be by asking questions about the

55 group history and group culture (Terry and Hogg 2000; White 2005). My goal with these historical and normative questions is to identify general facts that I believe most Blacks should know about the African American experience while identifying potential areas of

“advanced” Black history that highly knowledgeable group members may know. The purpose of the advanced questions is to potentially identify the boundaries of Black group historical and normative knowledge. Likewise, because these questions will also be given to non-Blacks during the pilot test study to measure the amount of Black group knowledge non-Blacks may have. Although my primary focus is measuring in-group knowledge it will be interesting to compare ingroup knowledge levels with non-Black knowledge about the ingroup because it will provide data from which a later project could examine said differences and postulate about the boundaries or implications of race-based linked fate and group knowledge.

Policy Questions - The purpose of the policy questions is to measure the amount of policy knowledge Black people (and outgroup members) know about the policy initiatives that have affected the social, political, and economic position of the racial group in America. Because conceptualizing specialized political knowledge should require a dimension that encompasses “understanding” of the laws and programs that affect the social, political, and economic existence of African Americans as a whole and to a lesser extent all Americans, This section would include questions about prominent legislation in the last 50 years that have affected African Americans regardless of said legislation and its affect being known within the racial group. Since the Social Security programs created as a result of the Great Depression and FDR’s New Deal, the federal

56 government has assumed responsibility to assure economic growth and employment.

Since the Civil Rights Movement, Black leaders have expressed interest in eradicating

Black unemployment, reducing poverty, and insuring equal access to educational opportunities (Walton and Smith 2012). Because these goals can only be achieved through policy changes, Black knowledge on policies is something that should be identified and quantified.

Partisanship Questions - The purpose of the partisan questions is to measure the amount of political party history and race relations knowledge Black people would know.

The racial group has a long interesting relationship with both the democrats and

Republicans (Walton and Smith 2012; Dawson 1994; Swain 1993). Likewise, majority of Black people identify themselves as Democrats and vote for Democrat candidates

(Dawson 1994; White 2004; Tate 2010). However, it can be possible that some African

Americans may be unaware of the racial group’s history with both parties that explains why Black people are a Democrat voting bloc. Their adherence to the group norm could be to maintain good standing within the racial group (White et. al 2014). These partisan questions would allow me to explore the breadth and depth of racial-partisan group knowledge.

Black Elite Matching and Black Media Source Identification – The purpose of the

Black Elite and Media identification sections is to measure concepts White discussed in his dissertation Alternative Spheres of Influence where he argued Blacks’ exposure to political messages from in-group elites through Black institutions, and Whites’ lack of exposure to this alternative information, causes the two groups to interpret political

57 phenomena differently. Black elite discourse encourages regular Black people to refer and respond to a set of cues about the meaning and importance of political issues and events and as a result, Black and White positions on issues differ (White 2005). These

Black elite discourses could take place within institutions such as a church, social event but also through Black media sources which are news, entertainment, education, data and promotional messages targeted towards the racial group over the internet, radio, print, or television (Walton and Smith 2012). In his Black Political Awareness Battery, White included questions about certain Black elites such as a famous radio host and the founder of Black Entertainment Television along with questions about Black media such as the name of the official publication of a civil rights organization and the name of a hip-hop and political awareness collective. These questions aimed to identify these alternative spheres that Black people received political information from. With this in mind, the questions I included in the Black Elite and Media identification attempted to do the same thing in order to get a clearer understanding of the sources of information that ultimately creates the knowledge that I attempt to measure in the aforementioned sections. With the

Elite identification section, I tried to include a cross-section of Black elites who appear on mainstream and Black media – political pundits, activists, educators, politicians, journalists, and celebrities with attention to identifying widely-known and lesser-known individuals. The elite identification section does more than ask participants if they recognize the name and photo of said elite, the participant must select the elite’s correct occupation or title from a set of options. The example question I provided in the questionnaire included a photo of Barack Obama along with his name and participants

58 had to choose his occupation out of a list – former President of the United States, Vice

President of the United States, Mayor of Chicago, or Football Analyst. Obviously, the correct answer is former President. With this additional step, I wanted to be able to gauge if Black participants knew exactly who these elites were beyond being recognizable faces on the media they frequent. For the Black media identification section, participants were tasked with the goal of identifying the names of actual Black media sources from a list that included fictional Black media sources and mainstream media sources. Because Black media is news, entertainment, education, data and promotional messages targeted towards the racial group over the internet, radio, print, or television, I decided to focus on such sources that do that and were also was created by a

Black people. However, there are a few recognizable sources that I could not include in the list, like Jet Magazine, because these sources folded as a result of drops in subscriptions from the Great Recession and increased popularity of internet media sources (McIntyre 2009). As a result, the list includes more online Black media sources which I anticipate will cause younger Black participants to correctly identify more sources than the older Black participants.

Political Interest Measures - The purpose of the political interest measure is to gauge overall participants interest in political matters. There are other types of political participation that goes beyond registering to vote or voting (Wayne 2009) including attending a rally, participating in a protest, donating to a campaign, volunteering for a party, campaign or office, talking about politics with others, and consuming media about politics. Because Verba et. al (1993) argue that the racial gap in political knowledge

59 could be attributed to lower levels of political interest among Blacks and Latinos, analyzing the participants’’ performance on the batteries alongside their reports of political interest could either strengthen or weaken their argument.

Need for Cognition Scale - The purpose of the Need for Cognition Scale is to measure the participants’ need to engage in and enjoy thinking (Cacioppo and Petty

1986). The participants’ responses to the six-question version of their scale will be used to determine if there is a relationship between preference for cognition and performance on the knowledge batteries. One could expect to see a link between higher affinities for thinking and higher performance on the entire questionnaire or even with the Mainstream

Political Knowledge battery, the Black Political Awareness battery, or the subsections of the pilot battery. One also anticipates a negative relationship between need for cognition and belief in linked fate because use of the Black Utility Heuristic is more likely used in the peripheral route of ELM for messages with politicized racial cues.

This questionnaire also included the Delli Carpini and Keeter Mainstream

Political Knowledge Battery and White’s Black Political Awareness Battery in order to compare performance on the pilot with these batteries. Linked fate questions were also included in addition to standard demographic questions. Normally, linked fate question appears in surveys as “Do you think that what happens generally to (respondent’s race) people in this country will have something to do with what happens in your life?” however in the pilot study, it was presented as “Black people” and later as “White people” for a measurement of Black linked fate and White linked fate regardless of the respondent’s racial identity. The purpose of presenting the linked fate questions in this

60 manner will allow for easier comparison of belief in linked fate among Black respondents and determine if linked fate and political knowledge are in fact independent entities.

Likewise, the follow-up question which asks the respondent to indicate the extent of their belief in linked fate “If yes, to what extent will it have an effect on your life?” and the answer options are “a little”, “some”, and “a lot” are is also presented differently. Instead the follow up question utilizes a scale from 1 to 10 and asks the respondent to indicate how much of an effect it will have with 1 indicating very little effect and 10 indicating a large effect. Implicitly, median scores indicate a medium effect. The linked fate scale questions will allow for easier quantitative analysis of the linked fate variables. For more information about the questions used in the pilot study, refer to the questionnaire in the appendix.

There are caveats and limitations to this pilot questionnaire. Personal bias (as a

Black woman and as a Black politics scholar) greatly influenced the selection of the categories and items included in the pilot battery and as a result, the pilot battery may not accessible for all of the Black respondents. It is likely that the personal bias in the selection of items in the Black elite and Black media source identification sections could influence performance on those sections as giving college educated respondents an advantage.

Table 3.1 – Demographic Characteristics of Pilot Study Sample Variable N Race White 66 Black 97 Other (Latino, Asian, etc.) 23 Gender Male 95 Female 91 Age Distribution Co-Ed (18-24) 116 Real World (25-34) 20 Generation X (35-50) 20 Baby Boomer (51-69) 15 Silent (70+) 15 Education High School Graduate 37 Some College 81 Associates 10 Bachelors 30 Advanced Degree 26

Table 3.2 – Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables among Black Sub-sample Variable Mean SD Range Age 39.3 20.4 18-87 Black Linked Fate Scale 7.2 2.3 3-10 White Linked Fate Scale 6.7 2.61 1-10 Need for Cognition Score 3.52 5.49 -13-15 Delli Carpini and Keeter Battery Score 3.46 .80 1-5 Black Political Awareness Battery Score 10.5 3.21 2-15 Pilot Black Political Knowledge Battery 34.06 6.96 20-47 Score History 4.60 1.18 2-7 Policy 3.08 1.28 0-5 Partisan 4.29 1.02 2-6 Elite Identification 15.11 4.27 5-22 Media Identification 6.90 2.37 2-11

With this in mind, I surveyed a group of undergraduate university students and staff and a group of older African Americans between November 2016 and February

2017. While the non-random nature of the sample prevents me from making claims of generalizability, this pilot study does allow for exploratory investigation into the contours of Black political knowledge and comparing levels of that knowledge as defined by my comprehensive questionnaire, with levels of mainstream political knowledge as defined by the Delli Carpini and Keeter battery, and levels of Black political awareness as defined by White’s battery within and across racial groups. Table 1 describes the demographics of the respondents who participated in the pilot study. The 186 sample with complete observations – 66 White, 97 Black, 23 Other – was drawn by convenience at one university in the Midwestern United States and at one Black church in the southern

United States. Age is broken down into five categories – Co-eds are between the ages of

18 and 24, Real Word are between the ages of 25 and 34, Generation X are between the ages of 35 and 50, Baby Boomers are between the ages of 51 and 69, and the Silent

Generation are aged 70 and up (The Center for Generational Kinetics 2016). Combined, the Co-ed and Real-World age categories comprise the age bracket for the Millennial generation however they are separate in this analysis in order to compare performance on the batteries and attitudes between the older and younger people in this generation.

Participants were asked to complete a survey that included a range of social and political questions along with a substantial number of political knowledge questions. The exploratory questions in the study were chosen in effort to identify retention of that factual information in the minds of Black people and whether that question should be considered a component of group-specific political knowledge.

Table 2 describes the descriptive statistics for the Black respondents’ age, scores on the various political knowledge batteries, and strength of linked fate as indicated on the Black Linked Fate Scale and on the White Linked Fate Scale. The descriptive statistics for the entire sample is included in the appendix. Unless otherwise mentioned, analyses from this point onward will focus solely on the Black subsample. As mentioned previously, the linked fate scale goes from 1 to 10 with 1 indicating very little effect and

10 indicating a large effect. There are five questions in the Delli Carpini and Keeter battery for mainstream political knowledge. There are 15 questions in White’s (2005)

Black Political Awareness battery. There are 52 questions in the exploratory Black

Political Knowledge Battery. The mean age of the Black participants was 39 years of age. The average score on the Delli Carpini and Keeter battery was 3 points out of 5 points while the average score on the White’s Black Political Awareness battery was 10 points out of 15 points. Meanwhile, the average score on the pilot battery was 34 points out of a possible 52 points. This indicates that the sample performed similarly on the

Mainstream Political Knowledge battery (69 percent correct) and Black Political

Awareness battery (70 percent correct). The sample performed slightly worse on the pilot Black Political Knowledge battery (65 percent correct) than on the Black Political

Awareness battery which is impressive because the pilot contained a large and diverse number of items. Interestingly, there is less than a point difference between the average

Black Linked Fate score and the White Linked Fate score even though the lowest score

Black respondents gave for the Black scale was 3 while the lowest score for the White scale was 1. Of note in the entire sample’s descriptive statistics, the average scores given

64 on the White Linked Fate Scale and the Black Linked Fate Scale are similar, with White

Linked Fate being .4 points higher than Black Linked Fate. Because White interconnectedness or a politicized racial identity for Whites has yet to, and theoretically cannot, be conceptualized in the same manner used in the conceptualization of linked fate, I cannot make any arguments about the significance of the differences between the strength of (Black) linked fate and White linked fate. While the difference is an interesting discovery, analyzing or theorizing about its meaning is beyond the scope of this study and larger dissertation.

Creating a Final Black Political Knowledge Battery from the Pilot Battery

Table 3.3 – Correlation Between Scores on Sections of Pilot Knowledge Battery Among Black Respondents History Policy Partisanship Elite ID Media ID History 1.00 (p-value) Policy 0.34 1.00 (p-value) (.00)

Partisanship 0.49 0.19 1.00 (p-value) (.00) (.04) Elite ID 0.36 0.35 0.20 1.00 (p-value) (.00) (.00) (.12) Media ID 0.15 0.18 0.10 0.35 1.00 (p-value) (.12) (.07) (.33) (.00)

Each section or type of knowledge question in the final battery should complement each other and best measure Black political knowledge. As such it was necessary to assess the relationship between the five sections of the pilot battery. If the sections of the pilot are not related to each other, then those sections are essentially

65 separate knowledge batteries. Table 3 lists the correlations between scores on each section of the pilot knowledge battery. The scores are computed as the total number of questions correctly answered in each section. All five sections are positively correlated with each other. The history and partisanship sections had the strongest positive correlation of .49. The Black media identification section had its highest correlation with the Black elite identification section of .35. On the other hand, the Black elite identification section had comparable correlations with the History and Policy sections, of.36 and.35 respectively. The correlation values indicate that it is appropriate to treat these sections as components of a Black political knowledge measure within the analysis of this pilot study. Discussion about the limitations of the knowledge categories and particular question items used in the pilot study are continued in the conclusion.

Table 3.4 – Cronbach Alpha Analyses for Each Subsection of Pilot Battery History Subsection Item N Sign Item-Test Item-Rest Average Alpha If Correlation Correlation Interitem Deleted Covariance Question 2 97 + .532 .365 .006 .176 Question 3 97 + .141 -.060 .014 .340 Question 4 97 - .513 .136 .008 .259 Question 5 97 - .529 .134 .008 .261 Question 6 97 - .571 .340 .004 .145 Question 7 97 + .374 .071 .010 .297 Question 8 97 - .394 .007 .012 .354 Test Scale .009 .30

Policy Subsection Item N Sign Item-Test Item-Rest Average Alpha if Correlation Correlation Interitem Deleted Covariance Question 9 97 + .464 .201 .033 .388 Question 10 97 + .645 .322 .019 .287 Question 11 97 + .674 .381 .016 .241 Question 12 97 - .400 .007 .046 .530 Question 13 97 + .574 .231 .026 .363 Test Scale .028 .425

Partisan Subsection Item N Sign Item-Test Item-Rest Average Alpha if Correlation Correlation Interitem Deleted Covariance Question 14 97 + .360 .086 .020 .387 Question 15 97 + .360 .155 .019 .356 Question 16 97 - .555 .172 .015 .346 Question 17 97 - .472 .070 .020 .426 Question 18 97 + .612 .295 .010 .250 Question 19 97 + .594 .346 .011 .239 Test Scale .016 .380

Table 4 lists the Cronbach Analyses results for the History, Policy, and Partisan subsections of the pilot battery. The Cronbach analysis for the Black Elite Identification subsection is listed in the appendix. It is not included within the body of this chapter 67 because it is my intention to only focus on the effectiveness of the selected factual knowledge in a final battery. Cronbach’s alpha analysis was not conducted on the Black

Media Identification section because the way the section was presented prevents accurate testing of the usefulness of the subsection and options within it. Likewise, the purpose of this final battery focuses on measuring the range of factual information about Black racial group’s role in and relationship with the American political system that is stored in one’s memory and not the amount or extent to which Black participants can accurately identify

Black elites or Black media sources.

The scale reliability scores for all three subsections are less than .6 which indicates that these subsections are not strongly reliable. The subsection with the lowest alpha value is the history subsection (α=.3) while the subsection with the highest alpha value is the policy subsection (α=.43). For the history subsection, the weakest item is

Question 8, which is asks about the One Drop Rule, a decree that declares any person with 1 or more Black ancestors to be classified as a Black person too (Gates Jr. 2009). In the appendix, there is a table listing the percent correct for each individual question and organized by subscale along with the complete pilot instrument with the question numbers for each item. Sixty-eight percent of Black respondents correctly answered question 8. Yet once this item is dropped, the history’s alpha will increase to .355. For the policy subsection, the weakest item is Question 12, which asks respondents to identify Fisher v. University of Texas as the most recent US Supreme Court case whose ruling addressed Affirmative Action; specifically that “strict scrutiny should be applied to determine the constitutionality of race-sensitive admission policies” at colleges and

68 universities (Chicago-Kent College of Law at Illinois Tech 2012) . More White respondents correctly answered this question (69 percent) than Black respondents (55 percent). However, once dropped, the policy subsection’s reliability score would increase to .53. Finally, for the partisan subsection, the weakest item is Question 17, which asks about the War on Poverty, which is the name of a set of legislation introduced by Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson that intended to decrease the national poverty rate (Walton and Smith 2012). Majority of Black and White respondents answered this question correctly (85 percent and 80 percent respectively). Once this item is dropped, the partisan subsection’s scale reliability would increase to .43. Going into the factor analysis of these three subscales, there are now 6 items in the History subsection, 4 items in the Policy subsection, and 5 items in the Partisan subsection

Table 3.5 – Factor Analysis Results for Pilot Battery Factor Eigenvalue Difference Proportion Cumulative Factor 1 1.49 .563 .500 .500 Factor 2 .927 .342 .309 .805 Factor 3 .584 .195 1.00 Retained Factors Parameters = 3 N = 97 =1 LR Test: independent vs. saturated: chi2(3) = 20.52 Pr > chi2 = .000

Rotated Orthogonally Variance Factor 1 1.49 . .496 .496

Rotated Factor Loadings and Unique Variances

Variable Factor 1 Uniqueness Revised History Section .827 .316 Revised Policy Section .623 .612 Revised Partisan Section .646 .583

Table 5 describes the factor analysis results in the creation of the final Black

Political Knowledge Battery using the revised History, Policy, and Partisan sections. The first factor accounts for 50 percent of the total variance. This indicates that the final battery should be composed of 1 factor. In examining the rotated factor loadings and unique variances, the revised Policy section accounts for 61 percent of the unique variance which means it is the least relevant variable in this factor model. Meanwhile, factor one is mostly defined by the revised History section, which implies the final battery should only be composed of questions from that section. This finding is especially peculiar because the revised Policy section had the highest reliability score

(α=.53) in comparison to the revised History section (α=.35). Given the nature of the results from the Cronbach’s alpha and factor analysis, I conclude that the “final” version of the Black Political Knowledge battery will be composed of all three items: the revised history section and a combination of the revised policy and partisan sections. Though this is a cautious decision, with a more risk-averse decision being to recreate a new pilot knowledge battery, it does match the argument I presented earlier in this chapter about

Black Political Knowledge being an amalgamation of factual knowledge about the racial group’s role in and relationship with the American political system. This battery will have 14 questions and has a reliability score of α=.67. The exact questions and their answers are listed in the dissertation research design chapter.

Validity

Table 3.6 – Correlation Between Black Linked Fate and Performance on the Knowledge Batteries Among Black Respondents Black Delli Carpini Black Political Pilot Black Linked and Keeter Awareness Political Fate Battery Score Battery Score Knowledge Battery Score Black Linked 1.00 Fate (p-value) Delli Carpini and 0.13 1.00 Keeter Battery (.21) Score (p-value) Black Political -0.15 0.09 1.00 Awareness (.15) (.34) Battery Score (p-value) Pilot Black -0.14 0.24 0.66 1.00 Political (.18) (.01) (.00) Knowledge Battery Score (p-value)

Table 6 lists the correlation scores for the relationship between belief in Black linked fate and performance on the three knowledge batteries among Black respondents – the Delli Carpini and Keeter Battery (later listed as the Mainstream battery), Ismail

White’s Black Political Awareness Battery (referred to as the Black Political Awareness

Battery), and the pilot Black Political Knowledge battery (referred to as the pilot Black

Political Knowledge battery or shortened label Pilot Battery). Black linked fate is weakly related to performance on all three knowledge batteries. The linked fate variable had the weakest relationship with White’s (2005) Black Political Awareness Battery. It is

71 noted that the there is a marginal difference in correlations between the scores on the pilot battery, White’s battery, and belief in linked fate among the Black respondents. The tenuous relationship between linked fate and the Black political knowledge battery is particularly interesting because it provides support for the theoretical framework that asserts Black political knowledge and linked fate are independent concepts. Though the relationship is not statistically significant, as stated in the introduction, this pilot study is exploratory in nature, trying to conceptualize Black political knowledge and attempt to sketch the contours of measuring it.

Table 3.7 – Correlation Between Performance on Pilot Battery, Other Batteries and Specified Variables Black Participants White Participants Score on Pilot Battery (p- Score on Pilot Battery (p- value) value) Score on Mainstream Battery .25 (.01) .18 (.14) Score on Black Political .66 (.00) .25 (.04) Awareness Battery Political Engagement/Interest .28 (.00) .11 (.39) Score Belief in Black Linked Fate -.13 (.18) -.05 (.68) Strength of Black Linked Fate .02 (.82) .19 (.20) Belief in White Linked Fate .22 (.03) -.14 (.28) Strength of White Linked Fate -.13 (.28) .04 (.75) Need for Cognition Score .09 (.39) .27 (.03)

N 97 66

Table 7 lists the correlations between performance on the pilot battery, the score on the mainstream political battery, the score on the Black Political Awareness battery, political engagement, belief in Black and White linked fate, and the strength of said beliefs for both Black and White participants. The column is the performance on the pilot battery while the rows are the variables’ correlates. As expected, there is a strong 72 relationship between performance on the pilot battery and performance on the Black

Political Awareness battery which implies that a Black participant that performed well on the pilot battery likely performed well on the Black Political Awareness battery. The correlation between political engagement and performance on the pilot is higher for the

Black participants than the White participants (.28 versus .11 respectively). Returning

Verba et. al’s (1993) argument that the racial gap in political knowledge could be attributed to lower levels of political interest among Blacks, the Black sample in this study not only outperformed the White sample on all three batteries, they also reported higher levels of political engagement. This finding is important because it supports the assertion made at the beginning of the chapter that Black respondents are more knowledgeable about political aspects that directly affect their daily lives or racial/ethnic identity. There are interesting implications in correlations between the linked fate variables and performance on the pilot battery for both sets of participants. For Black participants, the correlation between Black linked fate and its strength variable with performance on the pilot battery are low (-.13 and .02 respectively) which supports this larger dissertation’s assertion that this politicized racial identity (linked fate) and Black political knowledge are two separate entities. For White participants, the extent to which they believe their lives will be affected by whatever happens to the Black racial group as a whole has a stronger relationship to performance on the battery than simply stating they believe in Black linked fate (.19 versus -.05). This could be an environmental result given the White participants completed the study in the weeks leading up to and immediately after the presidential election. Returning briefly to the White linked fate

73 results, expressing belief in White linked fate has a negative relationship with performance on the pilot battery for both groups with Black participants performing worse than White participants (-.26 versus -.14 respectively). Given that the White linked fate variables have a higher absolute value than the Black linked fate variables for the Black participants, a future project would examine the relationship between these two concepts and performance on the Black Political Knowledge battery. Are Black participants who do not believe in Black linked fate or report low levels of belief also expressing belief in White linked fate and higher levels of said belief? How does White linked fate influence performance on the battery?

As it pertains to the need for cognition and the ELM’s assumptive role in Black political knowledge as a concept, it is surprising to see that among Black participants, there is no relationship between it and performance on the pilot battery however there is a slight relationship between among White participants (.09 versus .27). Potential explanations for the weak relationship for Black participants is that because Black political knowledge is specialized knowledge developed as a result of lived experiences as a member of that racial group, as opposed to Whites who would be more likely to learn said group specific information in educational settings on the topic, it is possible that it resides in areas of the psyche that cannot be explained under the ELM or measured through the Need for Cognition Scale. Alternatively, the weak relationship could be the result of bad selection of questions for the Need for Cognition Scale. Petty and

Cacioppo’s original Need for Cognition Scale has 36 questions, of which 18 questions are widely used as a condensed scale in the social sciences. Given the length of the entire

74 pilot study, 6 questions from that 18 were used as a smaller measurement for need for cognition. It is possible there were alternative questions from the larger scale that would have had stronger relationships, positive or negative, with Black performance on the pilot battery.

Table 3.8 – Mean Scores on the Three Political Knowledge Batteries Among Black and White Respondents Black Respondents White Respondents Difference Score on 3.46 3.60 -.14 Mainstream Battery Score on Black 10.55 6.98 3.57 Political Awareness Battery Score on Pilot 34.06 24.41 8.65 Battery N 97 65

Table 8 lists the mean scores on the three political batteries included in the pilot study separated for Black and White participants. The average White respondent score on the mainstream political knowledge battery was marginally higher than the average

Black respondent score - both groups answered 3 of the 5 questions correctly. The racial group differences in scores on the Black political knowledge items are larger and substantively significant. Black respondents answered more questions correctly than

White respondents on the pilot battery and on White’s (2005) Black Political Awareness battery. The difference between the average Black score and the average White score on the Black Political Awareness is almost 4 points while the differences between the Black and White scores on the pilot study is almost 9 points. Both racial differences in performance on the pilot battery and Black Political Awareness Battery are statistically significant at p=.02. The racial differences in performance on the Black political 75 knowledge items mirror the results found in White’s 2005 exploratory measurement of the types of Black political information possessed by White and Black respondents.

Table 3.9 – Multivariate Regression of Performance on Pilot Black Political Knowledge Battery Variable Coefficient Standard Error P-Value Real World -1.44 1.76 .52 Generation X .713 1.88 .71 Baby Boomer -1.85 2.22 .41 Silent -5.83 2.00 .00 Black 2.52 1.37 .06 White -2.77 1.26 .03 Black Linked Fate -1.79 1.20 .14 White Linked Fate 3.42 1.11 .00 Male .254 .782 .75 Vote Score .514 .409 .21 Political .162 .135 .24 Engagement Score Score on 1.15 .477 .02 Mainstream Battery Score on Black .917 .154 .00 Political Awareness Battery Education .095 .407 .82 Income -.420 .264 .11 Constant 15.8 3.07 .00

N = 181 R-squared = .59

Table 9 describes the multivariate regression estimates for specified variables on performance on the pilot battery. The vote score variable represents whether the participant is a regular voter. It is composed of their indication of whether they are a registered voter and if so, whether they voted in the 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014 federal elections for a maximum score of 5. It is an operationalization of consistent vote behavior, which numerous scholars in American political behavior argue is the expected outcome of those who are politically knowledgeable. The constant is the score a non- 76

Black or non-White Co-ed (18-24) woman would have scored on the pilot battery. The statistically significant variables are the Silent generation (70+), Black and White race variables, White linked fate, performance on the Mainstream battery, performance on the

Black Political Awareness Battery, and the constant. It is not surprising that performance on the two batteries have smaller effects on performance on the pilot battery, each only increasing pilot battery scores by 1 point. Of the statistically significant variables, the

Silent generation has the largest negative effect on the pilot battery score. This is not surprising given the Black participants in the Silent Generation group had the lowest average scores on the policy questions and Black media identification section. However, the statistically significant variable with the largest positive effect on pilot battery score is

White linked fate. This is an interesting finding because this conflicts with the negative correlational relationship found in the previous table. This serves as additional evidence supporting the exploration of conceptualizing “White linked fate” as a potential research project. An alternative version of this regression is listed in the appendix where the linked fate variables are replaced with the strength of linked fate variables.

Table 3.10 – Multivariate Regression of White Participants’ Performance on Pilot Black Political Knowledge Battery Variable Coefficient Standard Error P-Value Real World 0 Omitted Generation X 0 Omitted Baby Boomer 0 Omitted Silent 0 Omitted Black Linked Fate .64 .61 .30 White Linked Fate .17 .46 .72 Male .82 1.74 .64 Vote Score .61 1.45 .67 Political -.06 .36 .87 Engagement Score Score on -.09 1.10 .93 Mainstream Battery Score on Black .67 .34 .93 Political Awareness Battery Education -1.87 2.17 .39 Income -.09 1.10 .93 Constant 27.37 13.20 .04

N = 47 R-squared = .21

Table 3.11 – Multivariate Regression of Black Participants’ Performance on Pilot Black Political Knowledge Battery Variable Coefficient Standard Error P-Value Real World -1.68 2.10 .43 Generation X -.96 2.40 .69 Baby Boomer -2.28 2.65 .39 Silent -4.24 2.67 .12 Black Linked Fate .19 .39 .63 White Linked Fate .04 .35 .90 Male -.86 1.41 .54 Vote Score .59 .56 .29 Political .07 .25 .78 Engagement Score Score on 2.68 .79 .00 Mainstream Battery Score on Black 1.27 .28 .00 Political Awareness Battery Education -.41 .51 .42 Income .75 .69 .28 Constant 11.18 5.25 .04

N = 67 R-squared = .60

Tables 10 and 11 describe the multivariate regression estimates for specified variables on performance on the pilot battery for White participants (table 10) and Black participants (table 11). There are no generational cohort coefficients because all the

White participants are college-aged, and thus captured in the baseline. The statistically significant variable for the White model is the constant. None of the specified variables have a significant effect on White performance on the pilot battery. For the Black model, the statistically significant variables are the constant, performance on the Mainstream battery, and performance on the Black Political Awareness battery. These two models differ from table 8 in multiple ways. The constant in the White model is higher than the

79 constant in the Black model. Likewise, the generational cohort variables all have a negative impact on Black performance on the pilot battery which contrasts with the findings in the correlation tables about the relationship between age and performance on the pilot battery.

Conclusion

This chapter chronicles the study of political knowledge, conceptualizes Black political knowledge as a phenomenon, and explores the contours of Black political knowledge using a pilot comprehensive survey. By chronicling notable work on political knowledge and Black political behavior, the proposed definition of Black political knowledge uses White’s (2005) conceptualization of Black political awareness as an underlying assumption; draws on Carpini and Keeter’s (1996) definition of political knowledge as memorized correct factual information; and extends McGraw and Pinney’s

(1990) argument that specific knowledge is unique because it draws from direct behavioral experience by applying it to the study of the Black experience as a political phenomenon. The results of the comprehensive pilot study reiterate White’s argument that the racial gap in performance on unique knowledge questions about Black politics,

Black history, Black culture etc. is the result of Black people’s exposure to in-group sources that disseminate this information. Likewise, the correlation values demonstrate that there is no strong/viable relationship between linked fate and political knowledge which supports this project’s theoretical framework asserting that linked fate and political knowledge are independent each other. Through additional analyses, the final proposed

Black Political Knowledge battery is composed of questions from the History, Policy, and Partisan subsections of the pilot battery.

Although the results of the pilot study indicate the creation and usefulness of a

Black Political Knowledge Battery as viable and necessary, there are caveats and limitations in using the final battery in projects outside of this dissertation.

Unfortunately, personal bias (as a Black woman and as a Black politics scholar) greatly influenced the selection of the categories and items included in the pilot battery and as a result, the pilot battery may not have been too academic and not accessible for all of the

Black respondents. It is likely that the personal bias in the selection of items in the Black elite and Black media source identification sections effected the Black respondent’s performance on those sections. For example, older Black respondents identified O

Magazine as a Black media source while I treated the magazine as a mainstream source.

Presumably, those respondents identified that magazine as a Black media source because the owner of the magazine, Oprah Winfrey, is a Black woman and was one of the Black elite identification questions. However, O Magazine is marketed towards “middle-aged women from middle class backgrounds” i.e. mainstream audiences. This differs substantially from Essence magazine whose founder is also a Black person but its explicitly market itself to Black women (Quantcast 2017). An explanation for the issue with the correct categorization of O Magazine is that the academic definition of a Black media source is not the same as the practical or common definition of a Black media source used by most Black people on a daily or casual basis. A follow-up study will use

81 a revised pilot battery using categories and questions identified in focus groups so that the final instrument will be based on qualitative research as opposed to bias.

However, the next chapter will discuss the design of the survey experiment that will incorporate the final pilot battery and varying levels of racial salience in the article treatments.

Chapter 4. Research Design

This research design seeks to examine the relationship between issue salience, the characteristics of the message source, and characteristics of the recipient – namely the strength of his/her group identity (linked fate) and his/her level of Black political knowledge. Using a survey experiment, featuring a measurement for Black political knowledge, I will determine how Black participants respond to group messages where the source of the message, tone of the message, and salience of the subject matter are manipulated.

To that end, the design was broken down into two stages – a pilot study and an online survey experiment. The first stage was a pilot study in which a measurement for

Black political knowledge battery was created. The second stage was an online survey experiment in which participants read treatment articles, answered questions about political attitudes related to the subject matter, and completed the knowledge battery.

The first stage took place towards the October 2016 into February 2017. In-depth discussion on the theoretical framework motivating the pilot study and overarching findings on the dynamics on Black political knowledge are found in the chapter titled

“Measuring Black Political Knowledge”. The 14-question Black political knowledge battery created from the results of the first stage was then applied to the second stage.

The second stage took place March 2018. The rest of this chapter will detail the nature of

83 the survey experiment including the article treatment design, political attitude questions, measurement of Black political knowledge and measurement linked fate. Afterwards, summary statistics for the participant sample will be discussed in addition to their performance on the Black political knowledge battery. Finally, results of the manipulation checks will be discussed. All of these pre-analyses will set the stage for the upcoming chapter detailing the analysis of the data.

Table 4.1- Experimental Treatment Cells (3 x 2 x 3) Source of Information Tone Issue Salience Black Elite Positive High – Crime Control and Effective Policing Black Non-Elite Negative Medium – Government/Bureaucratic Involvement in Environmental Issues Collective Group Low – American Foreign Policy

Table 1 lists the treatment cells for the survey experiment. There are 18 treatment cells as a result of the three types of messenger, tone of message, and topic of the message. Participants read three articles – one of high racial salience, one of medium or moderate racial salience, and one of low racial salience. In each article, the source and tone were varied. The sources of information – Black elite, Black non-elite, and collective group – were identified based on the previously discussed theoretical framework in which characteristics of the in-group messenger will have an impact on the participant’s responsiveness to the information said messenger will provide. The tone of the article - positive or negative – were identified based on previous research in which the nature of the message can influence how participants respond to it. It refers to whether the messenger supports or opposes the policy in question in the article. By having 84 contrasting options in tone, I will be able to measure differences, if any, in responsiveness as a result of tone of an issue and treatment specified stance being good

(positive) or bad (negative) for the racial group.

The actual topics for each issue salience level were identified through a pilot survey. The pilot survey used a convenient sample of OSU students from August to

October 2017. Participants were told to indicate how important each issue listed is important for Black people, for White people, and for themselves. A list of potential political issues of significance to the racial group were identified using Katherine Tate’s

2010 work in which she details Black public opinion from the 1950s through the present day. It is from this list pilot participants ranked issues that have been measured at one point or another in Black public opinion. The issue categories are as follows: healthcare policies and initiatives, LGBTQ rights, crime control and effective policing, campaign finance laws, immigration and refugee entry and removal, American foreign policy, government assistance programs for needy individuals and families, government involvement in environmental issues, taxation, educational excellence, and gun control.

Topics with average salience scores corresponding with each level of salience – high salience referring to very or extremely important, medium salience referring to somewhat important or simply important, and low salience referring to not at all important. As such, the chosen high salience topic was solutions for effective policing (Crime Control and Effective Policing) while the medium salience topic was regulations and toxic emissions limits for businesses whose sites in residential areas cause pollution

(Government/Bureaucratic Involvement in Environmental Issues). The low salience

85 topic was reevaluation of the Diversity Visa Program and usage of no-fly lists in light of threats to American safety (American Foreign Policy).

There were concerns that participants would recognize the articles were in fact fake if the sources remained the same across all three articles. If that happened, it would contaminate the results and negatively impact the analysis. To combat the issue, a Latin square design was implemented so that each issue had its own unique set of message cues. Six versions of the survey experiment were created so that participants randomly assigned to each group would have 3 articles - 1 article from each salience level and 1 source. Based on their group assignment, some participants read 2 positive and 1 negative article, while others had 1 positive and 2 negative articles. The order of articles and tone were predetermined so that each combination of factors (source X tone X issue salience) would appear in the 18 treatment cells. However, I did not take into account the order in which the articles were read in the statistical analysis. The New York Times was chosen as the framing article because it is an easily recognized and widely respected news source that as a history of reporting news that affects multiple groups in the nation and larger world.

In the low salience article, the source of information options would have been

Michael Steele (somewhat recognizable Black elite - former chair of the Republican

Party and pundit on MSNBC), Darius Greene (fictitious Black non-elite), or results from a Black public opinion study conducted by the Bayard Rustin Center (collective group message from a fictitious socio-political study and center) The positive tone in the low salience article indicated support for ending the Diversity Visa Program as well as

86 support for the usage of no-fly lists. The negative tone in the low salience article indicated opposition towards ending the Diversity Visa and opposition towards the use of no-fly lists. This creates six Visa articles – one positive and one negative article with

Steele, Bayard Rustin Center, and Greene.

In the medium salience article, the sources of information were TJ Holmes

(somewhat recognizable Black elite - ABC News Anchor), results from the Pew Research

Center’s American Living Study (collective group message from a fictitious socio- political study), and DeAndre Huntsworth (fictitious Black non-elite). The positive tone in the medium salience article indicated support for ending toxic emission limits and decreasing regulations on business that leak pollution into residential areas. The negative tone in the medium salience article indicated opposition against the new environmental policies that end toxic emission limits and policies that decrease regulations on business sites that emit pollution in residential areas. This creates six pollution articles – one positive and one negative article with Holmes, Pew Research Center, and Huntsworth.

Finally, in the high salience article, the sources of information are Harold Ford Jr.

(somewhat recognizable Black elite – former politician and pundit on MSNBC), results from the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition’s Black Life Survey (collective group message from a fictitious socio-political study), and Tony Westbrook (fictitious Black non-elite). The positive tone in the high salience article indicated a demand for more solutions to policing issues in the Black community. Meanwhile, the negative tone in the high salience article indicated a respite or break in the calls for solutions to policing issues in the Black community. The reason for directional change in tone for the high salience

87 issue, where positive is calls for more solutions and negative is hold off on calls, is because police brutality and policing issues in the Black community is a current issue (i.e.

#BlackLivesMatter Movement) in America and the known racial group stance which calls for police reform. This creates six policing articles – one positive and one negative article with Ford Jr., Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, and Westbrook. All 18 article treatments are included in the appendix.

To measure Black participant’s responsiveness to each issue of varying salience, corresponding political attitude and importance questions were asked after participants read each of their three assigned articles. Their answers to these corresponding attitude and importance questions are the dependent variables.

Low Issue Salience DVs • How important is resolving the issue of the Diversity Visa Program for foreign policy and public safety in the US? Answers are on a five-point scale with one corresponding to not at all important and five corresponding to extremely important. • Do you support or oppose ending the Diversity Visa Program? Answers are on a five- point scale with one corresponding to strongly oppose, three corresponding to neutral, and five corresponding to strongly support. • How important is resolving the issue of no-fly list for foreign policy and public safety in the US? Answers are on a five-point scale one corresponding to not at all important and five corresponding to extremely important • Do you support or oppose the use of no-fly lists? Answers are on a five-point scale one corresponding to strongly oppose, three corresponding to neutral, and five corresponding to strongly support. Medium Issue Salience DVs • How important resolving the issue of toxic air and water admissions in the US? Answers are on a five-point scale where one corresponds to not at all important and five corresponding with extremely important. • Do you support or oppose limiting toxic air and water emissions? Answers are on a five-point scale where one corresponds with strongly oppose, three corresponds with neutral, and five corresponds with strongly support. • How important is resolving the issue of residential regulations on chemical plants and factories? Answers are on a five-point scale where one corresponds with not at all important and five meaning extremely important. 88

• Do you support or oppose residential regulations on chemical plants and factories? Answers are on a five-point scale where one strongly opposed, three means neutral, and five means strongly support. High Issue Salience DVs • How important is resolving the issue of effective policing in the US? Answers are on a five-point scale where one means not at all important and five means extremely important. • Do you support or oppose police officers use of body cameras and dashboard cameras when interacting with the public? Answers are on a five-point scale where one means strongly opposed, three means neutral, and five means strongly support. • Do you support or oppose the creation of independent oversight boards for local police departments? Answers are on a five-point scale where one strongly opposed, three means neutral, and five means strongly support. Across all three issue salience levels, the dependent variables that measure political importance or salience are the questions with the five-point scale corresponding with level of importance while the dependent variables that measure the participants’ attitudes towards these issues are the questions with the five-point scale corresponding with extent of opposition or support.

Table 4.2 - Questions in the Black Political Knowledge and Mainstream Batteries Black Political Knowledge Battery What Supreme Court cases ruling declared that segregated public schools are unconstitutional? What executive order did Abraham Lincoln write freed the slaves in the South? True or false - towards the end of the 19th century newly freed slaves campaign for public office and were elected to state offices across the South. How many Black people have been appointed to the US Supreme Court? What civil rights leader organize the freedom rides in the 1963 March on Washington? Which practices were used to prevent Blacks from voting in the South from 1890 through 1965? The 1996 personal responsibility and work opportunity reconciliation act change the name organizational guidelines and eligibility requirements which public assistance program? What time describes the practice of transporting students from their locally zoned school to a different school in order to remedy historical racial segregation of schools in a given district? When is the name of the practice of denying services and housing potential residents in certain areas based on the racial and ethnic composition of those areas? True or false - Abraham Lincoln was a Democrat Today most Blacks support one political party. Which party is that? Who was the first Black major party nominated candidate to run for president? Who was the first woman to ever campaign for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination? The acronym CBC is the abbreviated name of which minority political interest in legislative group?

Mainstream Political Knowledge Battery Do you happen to know what job or political office is now held by Mike Pence? Whose responsibility is it to determine if a law is constitutional or not? How much of the majority is required for the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives to override a presidential veto? Which party currently has the most members in the House of Representatives in Washington DC? Which political party is more conservative?

Table 2 lists the 14 questions in the Black political knowledge battery as well as the five questions in the Mainstream battery. As previously discussed in the chapter on measuring Black political knowledge, the Mainstream battery refers to the five-question

90 general American political knowledge battery created by Delli Carpini and Keeter. The

Black political knowledge battery was broken into three sections so that the participants answer a few questions between each article and accompanying dependent variables.

This was done to prevent participants from getting too fatigued and rushing through the survey. The dichotomized Black political knowledge variable (low knowledge or high knowledge) used in analyses in the next chapter were based on the performance on these questions, namely how many questions participants answered correctly. If the participant answered 8 or less questions correctly, that is low Black political knowledge. If the participant answered 9 or more questions correctly, that is high Black political knowledge. The Mainstream battery questions appeared towards the end of the survey with the demographic questions such as age, party identification, household income etc.

Participants score on the Mainstream battery is also determined by how many questions they answered correctly. The Mainstream battery appeared in the survey experiment order to compare participants performance on both batteries as well as measure the relationship said batteries demographic characteristics sample and with linked fate in order to determine once again if political knowledge and linked fate are of each other.

Like Black political knowledge, linked fate is an important aspect of the participant that I argue will have an effect on the way he or she will respond to the messages about each issue. As such, questions measuring the concept were included in the survey experiment. Normally, the linked fate question appears in surveys as “Do you think what happens generally to (respondent’s race) people in this country will have something to do with what happens in your life?” However, in this survey experiment,

91 respondents race was replaced with “Black people” and later with “White people” for a measurement of Black linked fate and White linked fate. By presenting the linked fate question in this manner, I would be able to compare reports of belief in linked fate with the traditional measurement (Black linked fate) with a measurement of interconnectedness with Whites (White linked fate) in a future project, even though

White linked fate is not fully conceptualized at this moment. Linked fate’s follow-up question is traditionally presented as “If yes, to what extent will it have an effect on your life?” and the answer options are a little, some, and a lot. In this survey experiment, the follow-up option requires use of a scale from 1 to 10 and asks the participant to indicate how much of an effect it would have on their life with 1 indicating very little effect and

10 indicating a large effect. Implicitly median scores indicate a medium effect.

Presentation of the linked fate questions in this way allows for easier quantitative analysis of the concept and creating the trichotomized linked fate variable (low/weakly linked, moderately linked, highly linked) used in ANOVAs in the next chapter. Participants who said they do not believe in linked fate or gave values less than 3 are considered low linked fate. Participants who gave values of 4 to 7 are considered moderate linked fate.

Participants with values 8 and above are considered high linked fate. For more information about the linked fate questions use in the survey experiment referred to the survey included in the appendix.

Table 4.3 -Summary Statistics for Variables of Interest Mean SD Min Max Vote Interest Score 3.77 1.76 0 5 Black Political Knowledge 8.06 2.61 0 14 Battery Score Black Linked Fate Score 7.61 2.04 1 10 White Linked Fate Score 7.06 2.09 1 10 Age 43.3 15.71 18 92 Mainstream Knowledge 3.51 1.41 0 5 Score Importance of Resolving Visa 3.88 1.06 1 5 Program Attitude Towards Visa 3.07 1.25 1 5 Program Importance of Resolving No- 3.91 1.02 1 5 Fly Lists Attitude Towards No-Fly 3.36 1.19 1 5 Lists Importance of Resolving 4.37 .93 1 5 Toxic Emissions Attitude Towards Toxic 4.26 1.13 1 5 Emissions Importance of Regulating 4.30 .92 1 5 Chemical Plants Attitude Towards Regulating 4.2 1.14 1 5 Chemical Plants Importance of Resolving 4.36 .90 1 5 Policing Attitude Towards Use of 4.42 .99 1 5 Body Cameras Attitude Towards Use of 3.97 1.20 1 5 Police Oversight Boards

Table 3 describes the summary statistics for the survey experiment. The experiment was conducted using a Black panel through Qualtrics in March 2018.

Participants were paid five dollars for their time upon completion of the survey through

Qualtrics. There were 1051 participants – 508 males and 543 females. Almost half of the participants indicated they lived in the South and attended college. Likewise, most participants identified themselves as Democrats with moderate to liberal leaning ideologies. The average score on the Black Political Knowledge Battery was 8 of 14 questions correct while the average score on the Mainstream Political Knowledge Battery was 3 of 5 questions correct. The average strength of Black Linked Fate, among those who indicated they believed in it, is 7.6 which translates into moderate or “some effect”.

Vote interest score is a cumulative variable based their voter registration status and previous voting history. In the survey experiment, there are five questions whose answers calculate the vote interest score and it is predicated on the participants response to the following question - Are you registered to vote? If the participant says yes then they are asked if they voted in the 2008 election, in the 2010 midterm election, in the

2012 presidential election, in the 2014 midterm election, and in the 2016 presidential election. With an average vote score of 3.7 that indicates that the average participant is a registered voter who has voted in almost four of the last five federal elections. The remaining descriptive statistics pertain to the mean values of the dependent variables for each set of article treatments.

Concerning the low issue treatment, Diversity Visa Program Issues, participants indicated that the importance of resolving the program of almost 4 points indicating resolving the issue is “Very Important”. However, the average attitude towards ending the Diversity Visa Program was 3 points indicating a “Neutral” position. When asked

94 about the importance of resolving the issue of using No-Fly lists, the average value given was also almost 4 points indicating “Very Important”. The average attitude towards use of No-Fly lists was 3 points indicating a “Neutral” position. In the moderate issue treatment, mean importance ranking of toxic emissions guidelines for factories and plants was 4.37 which translates into “Very Important”. The average attitude towards changing the guidelines was slightly lower at 4.26, indicating they “Somewhat Support” the changing guidelines. In the high issue treatment, effective policing, participants indicated that the importance of resolving the issue an average of 4.36 which translates into “Very

Important”. Of the attitude related policing questions, the item with the lowest average was towards use of police oversight boards, 3.97.

Table 4.4 - Cronbach Alpha Analyses for Black Political Battery Item N Sign Item-Test Item-Rest Average Alpha if Correlation Correlation Interitem deleted Covariance TANF 1051 + .343 .187 .027 .667 Busing 1051 + .515 .361 .024 .641 Redlining 1051 + .549 .400 .023 .634 Brown v. BOE 1051 + .475 .365 .025 .645 Emancipation 1051 + .547 .426 .024 .634 Proclamation Reconstruction 1051 - .251 .071 .028 .686 Blacks in 1051 + .459 .296 .024 .651 Supreme Court Bayard Rustin 1051 + .102 .011 .029 .678 Jim Crow 1051 + .448 .291 .025 .652 Lincoln’s PID 1051 + .567 .427 .022 .630 Blacks’ PID 1051 + .525 .430 .025 .639 First Black 1051 - .215 .032 .029 .692 DNC Nominee First Black 1051 + .559 .417 .023 .632 DNC Candidate CBC 1051 + .503 .368 .024 .641 Test Scale .025 .669

Table 4 lists the Cronbach Analyses for the Black Political Knowledge battery.

This 14-item battery is the final battery that was created from the pilot study discussed in the measuring Black political knowledge chapter. The overall alpha is almost .67 which is above the minimum threshold of .6 for an acceptable index variable measuring a concept. In other words, the results of the Cronbach Analyses indicate that this battery adequately measures the range of factual information about Black people’s role in and relationship with the American political system. When examining which of these 14 items are the strongest items, it seems the weakest item is the question concerning the election of newly freed Black people during the Reconstruction era; dropping this item 96 will increase the alpha to almost .69. The strongest item is the question concerning

Lincoln’s party identification; dropping this item will decrease the alpha to .63.

Table 4.5 - Cronbach's Alpha Analyses for Mainstream Battery Item N Sign Item-Test Item-Rest Average Alpha if Correlation Correlation Interitem Deleted Covariance VP 1051 + .597 .369 .053 .577 Supreme 1051 + .662 .390 .046 .565 Court Fraction for 1051 + .664 .383 .046 .571 Veto Override Majority Party 1051 + .599 .387 .053 .572 in Congress Conservative 1051 + .645 .379 .048 .571 Party Test Scale .049 .625

Table 5 lists the Cronbach Analyses for the Mainstream political knowledge battery.

This discussion will not imply this battery is weaker or less adequate in measuring political knowledge in comparison to the Black Political Knowledge battery because the

Mainstream battery is canonized in American political behavior literature. However, the differences in Cronbach Alpha coefficients are interesting, but they can be explained in the difference in the composition of each battery i.e. the Black Political Knowledge battery has a higher Cronbach Alpha coefficient because it has nine more items in it in comparison to the five-item Mainstream battery.

Table 4.6 - Percentage of Mainstream and Black Political Knowledge Battery Questions Answered Correctly Among Participants Questions Percent Correct Black Political Knowledge Battery Identified Brown V. Board of Education as the Supreme Court Case 85.4 that Declared Racially Segregated Public Schools Unconstitutional Identified the Emancipation Proclamation as the name of Lincoln’s 77.6 Executive Order that Freed Slaves in the South Identified Newly Freed Slaves were Elected to Public Offices across 56.2 the South after the Civil War Identified Two Blacks that Have Been Appointed to The Supreme 51.4 Court Identified Bayard Rustin as The Civil Rights Leader Who Organized 6.6 the Freedom Rides and the March on Washington Identified Poll Taxes, Comprehension Tests, and Grandfather 63.8 Clauses as Practices used to Prevent Blacks from Voting in the South During Jim Crow Identified AFDC as the Public Assistance Program Changed by the 27.5 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act Identified Busing as The Practice of Transporting Students from 53.3 Their Zoned School to another School in Order to Remedy Historical Racial Segregation in a Given Area Identified Redlining as the Practice of Denying Services and Housing 49.0 to residents in Certain Areas Based on The Racial and Ethnic Composition of Those Areas Identified Abraham Lincoln was not A Democrat 62.9 Identified the Democratic Party as the Party Most Blacks Support 87.8 Identified Barack Obama as the first Black Major-Party Nominee to 49.1 run for President Identified Shirley Chisolm as the First Woman to Run for The 61.9 Democratic Party’s Presidential Nomination Identified the acronym CBC as the Congressional Black Caucus 73.9

Mainstream Battery Identified Mike Pence as Vice President 81.2 Identified the Republican Party as the Most Conservative Major US 67.8 Party Identified 2/3 as the Share of Votes Required to Override a 55.8 Presidential Veto Continued

Table 4.6 Continued

Identified the US Supreme Court as the Governmental Body that 62.7 Decides if a Law is Constitutional Identified the Republican Party as Having the Majority in the House 83.6 of Representatives

Table 6 lists the percentage of participants who correctly answered each item in the Black political knowledge battery and each item in the Mainstream battery. The

Mainstream battery item with the highest correct percentage is the one identifying the

Republican Party as being the majority party in the House while the Mainstream battery item with the lowest percent correct is the one identifying two-thirds as the required congressional majority to override a presidential veto. The Black political knowledge battery item with the highest correct percentage is the one identifying the Democratic

Party as the party most Black people support while the Black political knowledge battery item with the lowest percent correct is the one identifying Bayard Rustin as a Civil Rights leader who organized the freedom rides in the 1963 March on Washington. In comparing the reliability scores for the knowledge batteries with percentage correct breakdown, the knowledge items with the highest reliability scores are different from those items with the highest percent correct. In the Black political knowledge battery, the item with the highest Alpha is Lincoln’s party identification and 63% of participants answered that question correctly. Meanwhile, the item with the lowest Alpha is the one concerning the election of newly freed slaves during the reconstruction era and 56% of participants answered that question correctly.

Table 4.7 - Correlation Between Battery Scores and Participant Characteristics Black Mainstream Black Vote Age Gender Education Income Political Battery Linked Interest Knowledge Fate Score Battery Scale Black 1.00 Political Knowledg e Battery (p-value) Mainstrea .59 1.00 m Battery (.00) (p-value) Black -.02 .01 1.00 Linked (.50) (.65) Fate Scale (p-value) Vote .14 .14 .15 1.00 Interest (.00) (.00) (.00) Score (p-value) Age .47 .38 .01 .37 1.0 (p-value) (.00) (.00) (.65) (.00) Gender -.09 .03 .05 -.01 .04 1.00 (p-value) (.01) (.16) (.12) (.67) (.21) Education .34 .32 .00 .22 .13 -.07 1.00 (p-value) (.00) (.00) (.89) (.00) (.00) (.03) Income .16 .18 .10 .24 .10 .07 .45 1.00 (p-value) (.00) (.00) (.00) (.00) (.00) (.04) (.00)

100

Table 7 lists the correlational values for the relationship between performance on the Black Political Knowledge Battery and characteristics of the participant. The Black political knowledge battery score is the total number of Black political knowledge battery items a participant correctly answered. The Mainstream battery score is the total number

Mainstream political knowledge battery questions a participant correctly answered.

The weakest relationship exists between gender and the battery (-.088). This could imply that men are less likely to have high Black Political Knowledge battery. However, the relationships between the battery and gender and the battery and belief in linked fate are close to zero which indicates that there is no relationship between performance on the

Black Political Knowledge Battery and the aforementioned characteristics. The null relationship between Black political knowledge and linked fate scale is important because it supports the theoretical argument that political knowledge, in particular specialized political knowledge, and linked fate are in fact two separate phenomena that have independent effects on the ways in which a Black person respond to political messages about the racial group. Likewise, this null relationship finding indicates that our understanding of linked fate as a concept could be updated to reflect the fact that knowledge is not a built-in component of said concept. The strongest relationship exists between performance on the Black Political Knowledge battery and the Mainstream battery (.59) which supports the argument that specialized political knowledge can encourage retainment of general political knowledge i.e. participants with high Black

Political Knowledge battery scores also performed well on the Mainstream battery.

Performance on the Mainstream battery had the highest correlation value with age and

101 then with education. These same variables had the second and third highest correlation values with performance on the Black Political Knowledge battery which implies that older participants and educated participants are more likely to perform well on the battery. Also of note, are the null relationships between vote score and linked fate and vote score with the knowledge batteries. These results are in contrast with previous research that indicates that individuals with high levels of political knowledge are more likely to be politically engaged. These results also contrast differ from Black political behavior literature that asserts Black people who believe in linked fate are also likely to be politically engaged. After calculating participants’ self-reported turnout via the vote interest score items, it is concluded that most likely, these null relationships are atypical phenomena that does not mean anything – 78% of participants voted in 2008, 66% voted in 2010, 81% voted in 2012, 68% voted in 2014, and 83% voted in 2016. These self- reported voter turnout figures mirror general trends in voter turnout in presidential and congressional midterm elections. With all of these aforementioned correlational values in mind, I anticipate older participants, female participants, and educated participants to have higher Black political knowledge scores.

102

Table 4.8 - Means of Attitudinal and Importance Dependent Variables Mean SD Min Max Low Salience Issue Importance of Resolving Visa 3.88 1.06 1 5 Program Attitude Towards Visa 3.07 1.25 1 5 Program Importance of Resolving No- 3.91 1.02 1 5 Fly Lists Attitude Towards No-Fly 3.36 1.19 1 5 Lists Medium Salience Issue Importance of Resolving 4.37 .93 1 5 Toxic Emissions Attitude Towards Toxic 4.26 1.13 1 5 Emissions Importance of Regulating 4.30 .92 1 5 Chemical Plants Attitude Towards Regulating 4.2 1.14 1 5 Chemical Plants High Salience Issue Importance of Resolving 4.36 .90 1 5 Policing Attitude Towards Use of 4.42 .99 1 5 Body Cameras Attitude Towards Use of 3.97 1.20 1 5 Police Oversight Boards

Table 8 lists the mean attitudinal values and mean importance rankings for the political attitude questions related to each issue of varying salience. As mentioned earlier in the chapter, the specific topic’s level of salience was identified through a pilot survey, where foreign-policy was of lowest salience, government involvement in environmental issues was of medium salience, and crime control and effective policing was of high salience. Likewise, the political salience/importance questions used a five-point scale 103 where one meant not at all important and five meant extremely important. There is a marked difference in the importance values of the low salience political questions and in the importance values of the medium and high salience political questions. However, importance values for the medium salience and high salience political questions are similar in nature, all around 4.30. In comparison, the attitudinal values for the low salience issue and the high salience are noticeably lower than the attitudinal values for the. These mean values reflect the fact that issues that are important to Black people one day may not be as important weeks later. With that in mind, these results validate the attempt in my theoretical framework to focus on the characteristics of issues of low racial salience, of medium racial salience, and of high racial statements so that the framework would be applicable independent of the selected issue topics for the research design. A future project would examine the strength of the theoretical framework by using a different set of issues of varying racial salience.

Table 4.9- Descriptive Statistics for Believability of Low Salience Issue Article by Source Source Mean SD Range Elite 3.76 .06 1-5 Non-Elite 3.72 .06 1-5 Poll 3.72 .05 1-5 Overall 3.73 .03 1-5

Table 4.10 – Descriptive Statistics for Credibility of Low Salience Issue Article By Source Source Mean SD Range Elite 3.64 .06 1-5 Non-Elite 3.70 .06 1-5 Poll 3.56 .06 1-5 Overall 3.63 .03 1-5

104

Tables 9 and 10 list the descriptive statistics for participant indications of source believability and source credibility for the low salience issue article treatment. In the survey experiment, after participants read the article and the answered its corresponding political questions, they completed a set of source credibility questions, in which they indicated the extent to which they thought the article on the Diversity Visa Program and no-fly lists was believable, credible, relevant to their, life easy to read, interesting, and biased. Across all three sources, participants indications were somewhere between

“neutral” and “somewhat agree”. Concerning credibility, participants across all three sources indicated the article was almost “somewhat credible”. The non-elite source was considered the most credible while the considered the most believable.

Table 4.11- Descriptive Statistics for Believability of Medium Salience Issue Article by Source Source Mean SD Range Elite 3.90 .06 1-5 Non-Elite 3.84 .06 1-5 Poll 3.84 .06 1-5 Overall 3.86 .03 1-5

Table 4.12- Descriptive Statistics for Credibility of Medium Salience Issue Article by Source Source Mean SD Range Elite 3.88 .06 1-5 Non-Elite 3.81 .06 1-5 Poll 3.74 .06 1-5 Overall 3.81 .03 1-5

Tables 11 and 12 list the descriptive statistics for participant indications of source believability and source credibility for the medium salience issue article they read based on which source they had in said article. After answering the corresponding political questions, participants indicated the extent to which they thought the article on changing 105 toxic emission limits and chemical plant regulations was believable, credible, relevant to their, life easy to read, interesting, and biased. Across all three sources for believability, participants indications were close to “somewhat agree”. Concerning credibility, participants across all three sources indicated the article was almost “somewhat credible”.

Participants considered the elite source to be the most believable and the most credible.

Table 4.13 - Descriptive Statistics for Believability of High Salience Issue Article by Source Source Mean SD Range Elite 3.96 .05 1-5 Non-Elite 3.92 .06 1-5 Poll 3.96 .05 1-5 Overall 3.95 .03 1-5

Table 4.14 - Descriptive Statistics for Credibility of High Salience Issue Article by Source Source Mean SD Range Elite 3.89 .05 1-5 Non-Elite 3.82 .06 1-5 Poll 3.84 .05 1-5 Overall 3.85 .03 1-5

Tables 13 and 14 list cross tab results for participant marks of source believability and source credibility for the high salience issue article they read based on which source they had in said article. After answering the corresponding political questions, participants indicated the extent to which they thought the article discussing the merits of demanding more solutions or waiting on the results of current solutions to be credible, relevant to their, life easy to read, interesting, and biased. Across all three sources for believability, participants indications were close to “somewhat agree”. Concerning credibility, participants across all three sources indicated the article was almost

“somewhat credible”. Participants considered the non-elite source to be the least 106 believable and the least credible. This supports source cues research that indicates that non-elite messengers are not considered to be credible sources of group information.

Table 4.15- Breakdown of Reading Check Questions Answered Correctly

Percent Correct For Visa Issue Article Correctly Identified the Location of Michael Steele’s Talk as a 65.14 Panel Sponsored by the Bipartisan Policy Center Correctly Identified Darius Greene’s Occupation as Mailman 47.43 Correctly Identified the Bayard Rustin Center as the 64.67 Organization that Conducted the Study Total 59.09 For Pollution Issue article Correctly Identified the Location of T.J. Holmes’s Talk as a 68.0 Roundtable Hosted by the Associated Press Correctly Identified DeAndre Huntsworth’s Occupation as 57.26 Truck Driver Correctly Identified the Pew Research Center as the 76.0 Organization that Conducted the Study Total 67.08 For Policing Issue Article Correctly Identified the Location of Harold Ford Jr.’s Talk as a 44.16 Symposium Sponsored by Working America Correctly Identified Tony Westbrook’s Occupation as Plumber 79.71 Correctly Identified the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition as the 46.57 Organization that Conducted the Study Total 56.80

Table 15 lists the participants performance on the reading check questions. The purpose of these reading check questions is to make sure that participants read the assigned articles and their political attitudes were influenced by their exposure to said experimental treatment. These reading check questions asked participants to identify where the elite gave his opinion listed in the article (elite), which socio-political center conducted the study whose results were discussed in the article, and what is the occupation of the non-Elite whose opinions were discussed at length in the article. In the

107

Visa article 65% of participants in the elite treatment correctly indicated Steele talked about his beliefs panel hosted by the bipartisan policy Center, which is the highest percentage of correct answers in the street. The portion of participants who correctly answered their specified reading check question is comparable to the percentage of participants who indicated the article was believable and credible (65% answered correctly and 63% indicated they somewhat agree strongly agree article was credible and/or believable). Less than half of participants in the mining treatment could identify

Darius Greene occupation as a post office worker. In the pollution issue article, 76 % of participants in the poll treatment of correctly identified the pew research Center as the organization that conducted the study discussed in their article. Meanwhile 57% of participants in the non-Elite treatment were able to correctly identify DeAndre

Huntsworth’s occupation as a truck driver. Finally, in the policing issue article, almost

78% of participants in the non-elite treatment were able to correctly identify Tony

Westbrook’s occupation as a plumber. Only 46% of participants in the poll treatment correctly identified the Rainbow/PUSH coalition as the organization that conducted the study in their assigned article. This change from the elite treatment having the highest reading check score in the low salience and medium salience article to the non-Elite treatment having the highest reading check score in the high article is particularly interesting because it serves as additional support for the presence of motivated reasoning in the participants in the high salience article treatment. It is plausible that those in the non-elite treatment spent additional time processing the article, trying to discount the information from the non-elite, and formulating their political thoughts as a result.

108

This chapter detailed the two-stage research design used to explore the following facets of the theoretical framework: message cues, issue salience, linked fate, and Black political knowledge. After describing the process for identifying the low salience article topic, the medium salience article topic, and a high salience article topic, the implementation of the Latin square design was discussed. Thirteen dependent variables were then detailed. After the descriptive statistics for the sample were presented, analysis of the group’s performance on the Black political knowledge battery was assessed in an effort to indicate performance on battery and its viability in measuring the concept.

Finally, results of manipulation checks for the article treatments were discussed. Now with the discussion of the research design completed, the next chapter will focus on the results of this survey experiment as well as a discussion of these results indicating support for or against my hypotheses.

109

Chapter 5. Data Analyses

Now with research design detailed in the previous chapter, this chapter will report the results from the survey experiment as they pertain to the set of hypotheses based on my theoretical framework exploring the relationship between issue salience Black local knowledge and linked and how that relationship influences Black people’s responses to political messages about the racial group. To reiterate, the summarized argument is that a

Black person can be highly linked and not know what the group’s interests are especially when the issues are not racialized, and as a result, use the Black utility touristic to express an attitude that is not in line with the racial groups interests. The independent variables are the source of information in each article, of the article, and the three issues of varying salience. The dependent variables are the participants responses to the political attitude questions and political salience/importance questions that correspond each of issue article of varying salience. The moderating variables are the participant’s belief in linked fate as well as the strength of the said belief. The other moderating variable is the participants amount of Black political knowledge. As stated in the research design chapter the fate scale was transformed into a trichotomized variable – low linked fate, moderate/medium linked fate, and high linked fate. The thresholds for each level of linked fate was calculated by looking at the distribution of participants’ linked fate values on the 10-point scale. Linked fate scale values from 0 to 3 are classified as low linked fate. Scale values

110 from 4 to 7 are classified as medium linked fate and values from 8 to 10 are high rate.

The Black political knowledge score also transformed into a dichotomized variable – low

Black political knowledge and high Black political knowledge. Scores from 0 to 8 are classified as low knowledge while scores 9 to 14 are high knowledge.

As it pertains to source effects, I anticipate participants in the poll treatment being the most responsive to their assigned message with participants in the non-elite treatment being least responsive to their assigned message. Within the analyses of variance for each set of articles, acceptance or rejection of the source effects hypotheses will depend on their significance in the ANOVA and/or their significant main effects. With issue salience, I anticipate participants reading the highest salience issue article with negative tone to be least responsive to said information while participants reading the low salience with negative tone article to be most responsive to said information. Within the analysis of variance for each level of salience’s article, acceptance or rejection of the salience hypotheses will depend on statistically significant differences in the average predicted attitudinal values and importance values for each article type. I anticipate responsiveness to source cues will be moderated by the participants strength of their linked fate. Acceptance or rejection of the linked fate hypotheses will depend on the variables significance in the ANOVAs and/or their significant main effects. I also anticipate responsiveness to source cues will be moderated by the participants amount of

Black political knowledge; where those with little knowledge will be more receptive to the information and those with high knowledge will be least responsive to information regardless of the source cues. Acceptance or rejection of the Black political knowledge

111 hypotheses will depend on the variables significance in the ANOVAs and/or their significant main effects.

With these expectations in mind , the order of analysis and discussion of each issue’s results are as follows: analyses of variance for source and tone effects; analyses of variance for source effects, tone effects, and Black political knowledge; analyses of variance for source, tone, and linked fate effects; analyses of variance for source, tone, linked fate, and Black political knowledge effects; and analysis of linear regressions modeling the relationship between source, tone, linked fate, Black political knowledge and controls on the dependent variables. The following pages will report the full set of results for each issue starting with the low salience issue.

Low Salience Issue

Table 5.1 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Importance of Resolving Diversity Visa Program Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 12.89 5 2.57 2.32 .04 Treatment Source 5.29 2 2.64 2.38 .09 Treatment Tone 6.88 1 6.88 6.19 .01 Treatment Source X .72 2 .36 .32 .72 Treatment Tone Residual 1159.70 1044 1.11 Total 1172.59 1049 1.12

N 1050 R-squared .01

Table 5.2 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 1 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Tone Negative 3.96 .04 Positive 3.80 .04

112

Table 5.3 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Attitudes on Diversity Visa Program Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 26.86 5 5.37 3.43 .00 Treatment Source 14.14 2 7.06 4.51 .01 Treatment Tone 11.94 1 11.94 7.62 .01 Treatment Source X .78 2 .39 .25 .78 Treatment Tone Residual 1637.63 1044 1.56 Total 1664.50 1049 1.59

N 1050 R-squared .02

Table 5.4 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 3 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Source Elite 3.16 .06 Non-Elite 3.14 .06 Poll 2.91 .06 Treatment Tone Negative 2.96 .05 Positive 3.18 .05

Table 5.5 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Attitudes Towards Use No-Fly Lists Factor Partial Degrees of MS F p-value SS Freedom Model 38.04 5 7.61 5.47 .00 Treatment Source 8.25 2 4.12 2.96 .05 Treatment Tone 28.50 1 28.50 20.48 .00 Treatment Source 1.29 2 .64 .46 .63 X Treatment Tone Residual 1452.71 1044 1.39 Total 1490.75 1049 1.42

N 1050 R-squared .00

113

Table 5.6 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 5 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Tone Negative 3.20 .05 Positive 3.53 .05

Table 5.7 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Importance of Use of No-Fly Lists Factor Partial Degrees of MS F p-value SS Freedom Model 4.97 5 .99 .95 .45 Treatment Source .97 2 .48 .47 .63 Treatment Tone .08 1 .08 .07 .78 Treatment Source X 3.92 2 1.96 1.88 .15 Treatment Tone Residual 1092.48 1044 1.04 Total 1097.45 1049 1.04

N 1050 R-squared .00

Tables 1 through 7 lists the analysis of variance results for source and tone effects on participants’ importance rankings and attitude towards the topic of the low issue salience treatment: ending the Diversity Visa Program and using no-fly lists. In the analysis of message effects on importance of resolving the Diversity Visa Program (table

1), tone effects are significant. Participants in the positive treatment gave lower importance values (table 2 p=.01). In the analysis of message cues effects on attitude towards ending the Diversity Visa Program (table 3), source and tone are significant.

Simple effects analysis (table 4) determined that participants in the poll treatment were the most opposed to ending the program (p=.01). In the analysis of attitude towards use of no-fly lists (table 5), tone is significant. Participants in the positive treatment were the most supportive of using no-fly lists (table 6 p=.00) The interaction between source and

114 tone are not significant in any of the aforementioned tables. The preliminary findings here provide support against the source hypothesis (H1) because participants were the most responsive to the poll treatment, which contrasts with the prediction of the elite source being the most responsive.

Table 5.8– 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Importance of Resolving Diversity Visa Program Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 21.40 11 1.94 1.75 .06 Treatment Source 5.75 2 2.87 2.59 .07 Treatment Tone 6.56 1 6.56 5.92 .01 Treatment Source X .78 2 .38 .35 .70 Treatment Tone Black Political .07 1 .07 .07 .80 Knowledge Level Treatment Source X .19 2 .09 .09 .92 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X .238 1 .238 .21 .64 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X 8.00 2 4.00 3.61 .03 Treatment Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1151.19 1038 1.10 Total 1172.59 1049 1.11

N 1050 R-squared .02

115

Table 5.9 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 8 Treatment Source X Treatment Tone X Margin Delta-Method Standard Black Political Knowledge Level Error Elite X Negative X Low 4.09 .11 Elite X Negative X High 3.95 .11 Elite X Positive X Low 3.77 .10 Elite X Positive X High 3.95 .12 Non-Elite X Negative X Low 3.98 .11 Non-Elite X Negative X High 3.95 .11 Non-Elite X Positive X Low 3.89 .10 Non-Elite X Positive X High 3.87 .12 Poll X Negative X Low 3.78 .11 Poll X Negative X High 4 .11 Poll X Positive X Low 3.82 .11 Poll X Positive X High 3.51 .12

Table 5.10 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitude towards Visa Program Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 99.66 11 9.06 6.01 .00 Treatment Source 13.93 2 6.96 4.62 .01 Treatment Tone 9.18 1 9.18 6.09 .01 Treatment Source X .84 2 .42 .28 .75 Treatment Tone Black Political 62.84 1 62.84 41.68 .00 Knowledge Level Treatment Source X 9.19 2 4.59 3.05 .05 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X .29 1 .29 .19 .66 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X .14 2 .07 .05 .95 Treatment Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1564.84 1038 1.51 Total 1664.50 1049 1.59

N 1050 R-squared .06

116

Table 5.11 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 10 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Source Elite 3.15 .06 Non-Elite 3.15 .06 Poll 2.92 .06 Treatment Tone Negative 2.98 .05 Positive 3.16 .05 Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 3.30 .05 High 2.81 .05 Source X Level of Black Political Knowledge Elite X Low 3.26 .09 Elite X High 3.03 .10 Non-Elite X Low 3.41 .09 Non-Elite X High 2.85 .09 Poll X Low 3.24 .09 Poll X High 2.55 .09

117

Table 5.12 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Importance of Resolving Use of No-Fly Lists Factor Partial Degrees of MS F p-value SS Freedom Model 21.95 11 1.99 1.93 .03 Treatment Source .92 2 .46 .44 .64 Treatment Tone .02 1 .02 .02 .88 Treatment Source X 4.26 2 2.13 2.06 .13 Treatment Tone Black Political 6.25 1 6.25 6.04 .01 Knowledge Level Treatment Source X 4.58 2 2.29 2.21 .11 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X 3.28 1 3.28 3.17 .07 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X 2.70 2 1.35 1.30 .27 Treatment Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1075.50 1038 1.03 Total 1097.45 1049 1.04

N 1050 R-squared .02

Table 5.13– Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 12 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 3.83 .04 High 3.99 .04

118

Table 5.14 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitudes Towards Use of No-Fly Lists Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 43.83 11 3.98 2.86 .00 Treatment Source 8.66 2 4.33 3.11 .04 Treatment Tone 29.51 1 29.51 21.17 .00 Treatment Source X .94 2 .47 .34 .71 Treatment Tone Black Political .83 1 .83 .60 .44 Knowledge Level Treatment Source X 1.11 2 .55 .40 .67 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X 3.04 1 3.04 2.19 .14 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X .80 2 .40 .29 .75 Treatment Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1446.92 1038 1.39 Total 1490.75 1049 1.42

N 1050 R-squared .03

Table 5.15 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 14 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Source Elite 3.39 .06 Non-Elite 3.45 .06 Poll 3.24 .06 Treatment Tone Negative 3.20 .05 Positive 3.53 .05

Tables 8 through 15 list the results of the analysis of variance for source tone and level of Black political knowledge effects on participants’ importance rankings and attitude towards the Diversity Visa Program and use of no-fly list. In Table 8, source and

119 tone are significant as independent variables on importance rankings of resolving the visa program. Likewise, the interaction between knowledge source and tone is significant and table 9 lists the average importance values given by participants each combination of the treatments with the amount of knowledge. Simple main effects analysis shows the positive tone treatment had a greater effect on salience values for participants with low

Black political knowledge in the elite treatment source (p=.03). In table 10, source tone and Black political knowledge are significant variables influencing participants attitude towards the Diversity Visa Program. Of note, high knowledge moderates attitude values, which means those with high knowledge indicate opposition to ending the Diversity Visa

Program while those with low knowledge indicate support for ending the program. These findings provide support for the Black political knowledge hypothesis (H6) in that participants with low knowledge’s attitude matched the nature of the article i.e. they support ending the Diversity Visa Program as described. In the same table the difference in attitudes given in the non-elite treatment and in the poll treatment is significant p=.01.

Moving onward source tone and knowledge effects on importance and attitude towards of no-fly lists, tables 12 through 15, Black political knowledge is a significant factor in influencing importance rankings (table 12). The difference in importance rankings based on knowledge are significant in table 13 at p=.01.

120

Table 5.16 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Importance of Resolving No-Fly Lists Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 101.23 17 5.95 6.17 .00 Treatment Source .39 2 .19 .20 .82 Treatment Tone .04 1 .04 .05 .83 Treatment Source X 3.23 2 1.61 1.67 .19 Treatment Tone Strength of Linked 68.76 2 34.38 35.61 .00 Fate Treatment Source X 9.54 4 2.38 2.47 .04 Strength of Linked Fate Treatment Tone X 7.08 2 3.54 3.67 .02 Strength of Linked Fate Treatment Source X 6.39 4 1.60 1.66 .16 Treatment Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 996.21 1032 .96 Total 1097.46 1049 1.04

N 1050 R-squared .09

121

Table 5.17 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 16 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 3.66 .05 Moderate 3.70 .07 High 4.19 .04 Source X Strength of Linked Fate Elite X Low 3.87 .10 Elite X Moderate 3.55 .10 Elite X High 4.20 .08 Non-Elite X Low 3.53 .09 Non-Elite X Moderate 3.73 .13 Non-Elite X High 4.22 .07 Poll X Low 3.57 .09 Poll X Moderate 3.80 .11 Poll X High 4.14 .08 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Negative X Low 3.54 .08 Negative X Moderate 3.79 .10 Negative X High 4.23 .06 Positive X Low 3.77 .08 Positive X Moderate 3.60 .09 Positive X High 4.14 .06

122

Table 5.18 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitudes Towards No-Fly Lists Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 48.05 17 2.82 2.02 .01 Treatment Source 5.72 2 2.86 2.05 .13 Treatment Tone 23.30 1 23.30 16.67 .00 Treatment Source X 1.42 2 .71 .51 .60 Treatment Tone Strength of Linked .80 2 .40 .29 .75 Fate Treatment Source X 3.00 4 .75 .54 .71 Strength of Linked Fate Treatment Tone X 2.19 2 1.09 .78 .46 Strength of Linked Fate Treatment Source X 3.96 4 1.00 .71 .58 Treatment Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 1442.70 1032 1.40 Total 1490.75 1049 1.42

N 1050 R-squared .03

Table 5.19 – Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 18 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Tone Negative 3.19 .05 Positive 3.52 .05

123

Table 5.20 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Importance of Resolving Diversity Visa Program Factor Partial Degrees of MS F p-value SS Freedom Model 91.60 17 5.39 5.14 .00 Treatment Source 2.69 2 1.35 1.29 .28 Treatment Tone 4.85 1 4.85 4.64 .03 Treatment Source X 2.11 2 1.05 1.01 .36 Treatment Tone Strength of Linked Fate 54.41 2 27.20 25.97 .00 Treatment Source X 13.17 4 3.29 3.14 .01 Strength of Linked Fate Treatment Tone X 1.06 2 .53 .51 .60 Strength of Linked Fate Treatment Source X 6.25 4 1.56 1.49 .20 Treatment Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 1080.99 1032 1.04 Total 1172.59 1049 1.12

N 1050 R-squared .08

124

Table 5.21 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 20 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Tone Negative 3.96 .04 Positive 3.79 .04 Strength of Linked Fate Low 3.63 .06 Moderate 3.73 .07 High 4.12 .04 Source X Strength of Linked Fate Elite X Low 3.86 .10 Elite X Moderate 3.52 .11 Elite X High 4.20 .08 Non-Elite X Low 3.60 .09 Non-Elite X Moderate 3.88 .13 Non-Elite X High 4.14 .08 Poll X Low 3.43 .09 Poll X Moderate 3.79 .12 Poll X High 4.03 .08

125

Table 5.22 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitude Towards Diversity Visa Program Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 46.43 17 2.73 1.74 .03 Treatment Source 12.49 2 6.25 3.98 .02 Treatment Tone 11.32 1 11.32 7.22 .01 Treatment Source X .95 2 .48 .30 .74 Treatment Tone Strength of Linked 6.30 2 3.15 2.01 .13 Fate Treatment Source X 4.19 4 1.04 .67 .61 Strength of Linked Fate Treatment Tone X 7.16 2 3.58 2.28 .10 Strength of Linked Fate Treatment Source X 1.81 4 .45 .29 .88 Treatment Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 1618.07 1032 1.57 Total 1664.50 1049 1.59

N 1050 R-squared .03

Table 5.23 – Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 22 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Source Elite 3.17 .07 Non-Elite 3.13 .07 Poll 2.91 .07 Treatment Tone Negative 2.96 .05 Positive 3.17 .05

Tables 16 - 23 lists the analysis of variance results for source, tone, and strength of linked effects on participants’ importance rankings and attitude towards resolving the

Diversity Visa Program and the use of no-fly lists. In table 16, the strength of linked fate

126 as well as its interaction with source and tone are statistically significant variables and table 17 details the predicted importance values for these variables on importance values for resolving the use of no-fly lists. Simple main effects analysis shows those with higher levels of linked fate indicate that resolving the use of no-fly list is very important at p=.00. When examining the interaction between source and linked fate, analysis shows that in the elite treatment, participants with higher levels linked fate also gave higher importance values for resolving the use of said lists (at p=.03 for low linked fate versus moderate linked fate and p=.00 for moderate linked fate versus high linked fate). These results do not support the linked fate hypothesis where Black people with high levels of linked fate will be most receptive to the collective group message as opposed to the individual’s group message regardless of status (H3). In the non-elite treatment, those with higher levels of linked fate also gave higher importance values, p=.00 for moderate and high levels of linked fate. These results do not support the linked fate hypothesis where Black people with moderate levels of linked fate will be more responsive to the collective group message (H4) since the moderately linked participants in the Non-elite treatment were most responsive. In the poll treatment, only participants with high levels of linked fate gave higher importance values p=.01, providing some support for H3. In examining tone effects, the negative tone encouraged participants across all levels of linked fate to give higher importance values, p=.05 for low versus moderate linked fate and p=.00 for moderate versus high linked fate. In positive article treatments, participants with high levels of linked fate give higher importance values p=.00. In examining source, tone, and linked fate effects on attitude towards no-fly lists (table 18),

127 only tone is significant and the difference in tone effects as such that participants in the positive treatment gave higher attitudinal values (table 19 p=.00).

Returning to attitudes and importance of resolving the Diversity Visa Program

(tables 20-23), tone, linked fate, and the interaction between source and linked fate are considered significant factors on importance of resolving the Visa Program (table 20). In examining main effects of these variables on importance rankings (table 21), participants in the positive article treatments gave lower importance rankings p=.01. Likewise, the difference in between moderately linked importance values and highly linked values are significant at p=.00, where moderately linked values are higher than lowly linked values and highly linked values are higher than moderately linked values. The results do not support for H4 because moderately linked participants were least responsive to the elite message, as indicated by importance rankings. The results also do not support H3 because highly linked participants were most responsive to the elite message, as indicated by importance rankings. In examining predicted values based on the interaction of source and linked fate, the difference between low linked values and moderately linked values in the elite treatment is significant at p=.03, where moderately linked values are lower than the values of the low linked fate participants p=.03. The difference between high linked values and moderate linked values are also significant in the same elite treatment p=.00. In the non-elite treatment, the differences in importance values by linked fate level are not statistically significant. In the poll treatment, the difference in importance values between low linked and moderately linked participants are significant,

128 p=.02, where moderate linked values are higher. However, the difference in values for moderate linked and high linked participants are not significant.

Finally, source and tone are significant factors on attitude towards ending the

Diversity Visa Program (table 22). Simple effects analysis (table 23) shows the difference between attitudes in the elite treatment and the non-elite treatment are not significant. However, the difference in attitudes in the non-elite treatment and in the poll treatment is significant at p=.02, where attitudes are lower, which indicates that participants the poll treatment are more likely oppose ending the Diversity Visa Program.

Attitudes expressed in the positive article treatments were higher than attitudes given in the negative toned treatments, p=.01, indicating participants in the positive treatments expressing more support for ending the Diversity Visa Program. These results do not provide support for the source hypothesis (H1) because participants were most responsive in the poll treatment and indicated opposition to ending the Diversity Visa Program.

129

Table 5.24 – 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Importance of Resolving No-Fly Lists Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 121.08 35 3.45 3.59 .00 Treatment Source .206 2 .10 .11 .90 Treatment Tone .01 1 .01 .01 .90 Treatment Source X Treatment 3.26 2 1.63 1.69 .18 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 62.65 2 1.63 1.69 .18 Treatment Source X Strength of 8.53 4 2.13 2.22 .06 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 5.33 2 2.66 2.77 .06 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 6.85 4 1.71 1.78 .13 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge 3.09 1 3.09 3.21 .07 Level Treatment Source X Black 4.58 2 2.29 2.38 .09 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black 1.45 1 1.45 1.51 .22 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 2.11 2 1.06 1.10 .33 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X 3.16 2 1.58 1.64 .19 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of 3.40 4 .85 .88 .47 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of .70 2 .35 .36 .69 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment .80 4 .20 .21 .93 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 976.38 1014 .92 Total 1097.46 1049 1.05

N 1050 R-squared .11 130

Table 5.25 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 24 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 3.68 .05 Moderate 3.69 .06 High 4.19 .04 Source X Strength of Linked Fate Elite X Low 3.88 .10 Elite X Moderate 3.54 .11 Elite X High 4.20 .07 Non-Elite X Low 3.55 .09 Non-Elite X Moderate 3.73 .13 Non-Elite X High 4.21 .07 Poll X Low 3.59 .09 Poll X Moderate 3.79 .11 Poll X High 4.15 .08 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Negative X Low 3.57 .08 Negative X Moderate 3.78 .10 Negative X High 4.22 .06 Positive X Low 3.78 .08 Positive X Moderate 3.62 .09 Positive X High 4.15 .06 Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 3.87 .04 High 3.96 .04 Source X Level of Black Political Knowledge Elite X Low 4.00 .07 Elite X High 3.91 .08 Non-Elite X Low 3.80 .07 Non-Elite X High 4.01 .07 Poll X Low 3.82 .07 Poll X High 3.97 .07

131

Table 5.26 – 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on Attitude Towards Use of No-Fly Lists Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 87.00 35 2.48 1.80 .00 Treatment Source 5.25 2 2.63 1.90 .15 Treatment Tone 21.85 1 21.85 15.79 .00 Treatment Source X Treatment 1.71 2 .85 .62 .54 Tone Strength of Linked Fate .69 2 .34 .25 .78 Treatment Source X Strength of 3.26 4 .82 .59 .67 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 1.92 2 .96 .69 .50 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 3.71 4 .93 .67 .61 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge .00 1 .00 .00 .98 Level Treatment Source X Black 1.12 2 .56 .41 .67 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black 2.50 1 2.50 1.80 .18 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment .08 2 .04 .03 .97 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X 19.80 2 9.90 7.15 .00 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of 1.97 4 .49 .36 .84 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of 1.83 2 .92 .66 .51 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 10.11 4 2.53 1.83 .12 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1403.75 1014 1.38 Total 1490.75 1049 1.42

N 1050 R-squared .06 132

Table 5.27 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 26 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Tone Negative 3,20 .05 Positive 3.52 .05 Strength of Linked Fate X Level of Black Political Knowledge Low X Low 3.25 .08 Low X High 3.55 .10 Moderate X Low 3.31 .11 Moderate X High 3.35 .12 High X Low 3.55 .07 High X High 3.22 .07

133

Table 5.28 – 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Importance of Resolving Diversity Visa Program Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 109.21 35 3.12 2.98 .00 Treatment Source 3.10 2 1.55 1.48 .23 Treatment Tone 4.45 1 4.45 4.25 .04 Treatment Source X Treatment 2.76 2 1.38 1.32 .27 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 54.24 2 27.12 25.86 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 11.62 4 2.90 2.77 .02 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 1.23 2 .61 .59 .55 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 6.99 4 1.75 1.67 .15 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge Level .42 1 .42 .40 .53 Treatment Source X Black .99 2 .49 .47 .62 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .13 1 .13 .13 .72 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 8.17 2 4.08 3.90 .02 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X Black 3.78 2 1.89 1.80 .16 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of 3.11 4 .77 .74 .56 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of .32 2 .16 .15 .56 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment .67 4 .17 .16 .96 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1063.38 1014 1.05 Total 1172.59 1049 1.12

N 1050 R-squared .09

134

Table 5.29 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 28 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Tone Negative 3.97 .04 Positive 3.79 .04 Strength of Linked Fate Low 3.64 .06 Moderate 3.72 .07 High 4.13 .04 Source X Strength of Linked Fate Elite X Low 3.85 .10 Elite X Moderate 3.52 .11 Elite X High 4.20 .08 Non-Elite X Low 3.61 .10 Non-Elite X Moderate 3.87 .13 Non-Elite X High 4.16 .08 Poll X Low 3.45 .09 Poll X Moderate 3.78 .12 Poll X High 4.05 .08 Source X Tone X Level of Black Political Knowledge Elite X Negative X Low 4.12 .11 Elite X Negative X High 3.90 .12 Elite X Positive X Low 3.83 .10 Elite X Positive X High 3.95 .12 Non-Elite X Negative X Low 4.00 .12 Non-Elite X Negative X High 3.93 .11 Non-Elite X Positive X Low 3.90 .10 Non-Elite X Positive X High 3.88 .12 Poll X Negative X Low 3.87 .11 Poll X Negative X High 3.99 .11 Poll X Positive X Low 3.85 .11 Poll X Positive X High 3.48 .11

135

Table 5.30 – 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Attitude Towards Diversity Visa Program Factor Partial Degrees of MS F p-value SS Freedom Model 152.11 35 4.34 2.91 .00. Treatment Source 10.89 2 5.44 3.65 .02 Treatment Tone 7.45 1 7.45 5.00 .02 Treatment Source X Treatment .87 2 .43 .29 .74 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 9.95 2 4.98 3.34 .03 Treatment Source X Strength of 5.23 4 1.31 .88 .48 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 5.09 2 2.54 1.71 .18 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 1.83 4 .46 .31 .87 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge Level 42.58 1 42.58 28.55 .00 Treatment Source X Black 6.70 2 3.35 2.25 .10 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .03 1 .03 .02 .88 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment .18 2 .09 .06 .94 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X Black 20.80 2 10.40 6.97 .00 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of 5.01 4 1.25 .84 .50 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of .95 2 .47 .32 .72 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 1.29 4 .32 .22 .92 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1512.39 1014 1.49 Total 1664.50 1049 1.59

N 1050 R-squared .09

136

Table 5.31 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 30 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Source Elite 3.17 .06 Non-Elite 3.14 .06 Poll 2.93 .06 Treatment Tone Negative 2.98 .05 Positive 3.16 .05 Strength of Linked Fate Low 3.01 .07 Moderate 2.96 .08 High 3.20 .05 Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 3.33 .05 High 2.82 .05 Strength of Linked Fate X Level of Black Political Knowledge Low X Low 3.10 .09 Low X High 2.90 .11 Moderate X Low 3.10 .11 Moderate X High 2.80 .12 High X Low 3.58 .08 High X High 2.77 .07

Tables 24 through 31, lists the analysis of variance results for source, tone, strength of linked fate, and amount of Black political knowledge effects on importance rankings attitude towards resolving the Diversity Visa Program and usage of no-fly lists.

Table 24 lists the results for the factors influence on importance rankings towards resolving the Diversity Visa Program. The strength of linked fate, level of Black political knowledge, the interaction between linked fate and source, interaction between tone in linked fate, and the interaction between source and knowledge are statistically significant factors. When analyzing simple main effects on the predicted estimates of importance

137 rankings from these significant factors (table 25), participants with high levels of linked fate gave high importance rankings in comparison to those with lower levels, p=.00.

Differences in importance values based on level of Black political knowledge not significant, p=.14. When examining the interaction between source and strength of linked fate, the differences in rankings in the elite treatment are statistically significant.

Those with low linked fate gave higher importance rankings in comparison to those moderately linked, p=.02, however highly linked participants gave higher importance values comparison to those moderately linked, p=.00. A similar relationship exists within the poll treatment, with participants with high levels of linked fate providing the highest importance rankings for resolving the use of no-fly list p=.01. This provides support for

H3, where highly linked participants are responsive to the collective group message.

When examining the interaction between tone and strength of linked fate, the negative article tone encouraged participants with high levels of linked fate to give high importance rankings p=.00. The same thing occurs for highly linked participants in the positive tone treatment, p=.00, so one can conclude the strength of linked fate is the most influential factor in determining participants importance rankings use of no-fly lists in this model.

In the effects of source, tone, strength of linked fate, and level of Black political knowledge on attitudes towards use of no-fly lists (table 26), significant factors include tone, strength of linked fate, and the interaction between linked fate and knowledge.

Analysis of effects based on the predicted values (table 27) shows that attitudes given in the positive article treatments are more supportive of using no-fly lists p=.00. The

138 difference in attitudes given by participants with low linked fate and low knowledge and participants with low linked fate and high knowledge is statistically significant, with those having low linked fate and high knowledge indicating higher level of support for using no-fly lists. There are no attitudinal differences for participants with moderate levels of linked fate across both levels of political knowledge. There are attitudinal differences between participants with high linked fate and low levels of knowledge and participants with high linked fate and high knowledge, with those with high linked fate and low knowledge indicating greater support for using no-fly lists (higher attitudinal values p=.00). This finding provides support for the Black political knowledge hypothesis (H6) because the high linked low knowledge participants being more supportive of using no-fly lists (as indicated in the article).

When examining the experimental factors’ effects on importance rankings for resolving the Diversity Visa Program (table 28), significant factors are tone, strength of linked fate, and the interaction between linked fate and source. In examining predicted importance values for these factors (table 29) participants in the negative tone treatments give higher importance values p=.00. There are also differences in importance values based on linked fate level with highly linked participants giving higher importance values p=.00. Differences in values in the source treatment based on participants’ strength of linked fate are such that highly linked individuals in the elite treatment gave higher values p=.00. This provides support for the source hypothesis (H1). There are no significant differences in importance values in the non-elite treatment based on linked fate levels. There are significant differences in importance values in the poll treatment

139 between lowly linked and moderately linked individuals, where we see a change in the values of moderately linked individuals as being higher than those of the lowly linked, p=.03. This indicates there are differences in moderately linked people’s importance rankings based on the source of the message. When examining the interaction between source, tone and knowledge, it is determined that participants low knowledge that read the positive poll treatment gave higher importance values p=.02.

When examining the experimental factors’ effects on attitude towards ending the

Diversity Visa Program (table 30), significant factors are source, tone, strength of linked fate, level of Black political knowledge and the interaction between linked fate and knowledge. In examining predicted importance values for these factors (table 31), participants in the poll treatment indicated greater opposition to ending the program in comparison to participants in the non-elite treatment p=.00. Participants in the positive tone treatments indicated greater support for ending the program than those in the negative article treatments did, p=.02. The interaction between linked fate and level of political knowledge are such that participants with high linked fate and high knowledge were more opposed to ending the program than individuals high linked fate and low

Black political knowledge p=.00.

140

Table 5.32– Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between the Importance of Resolving Diversity Programs, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source .12 .08 .12 Non-Elite Source .12 .08 .11 Positive Tone -.15 .06 .01 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score -.02 .01 .11 Strength of Linked Fate .23 .03 .00 Age .01 .00 .00 Male -.10 .06 .12 Education -.01 .02 .58 Income -.02 .01 .11 Party ID .00 .02 .84 Constant 3.32 .18 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .07

Table 5.33 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitude Towards Diversity Visa Program, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source .22 .09 .02 Non-Elite Source .24 .09 .01 Positive Tone .20 .07 .01 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score -.11 .02 .00 Strength of Linked Fate .08 .04 .06 Age .01 .00 .03 Male .01 .07 .84 Education -.06 .03 .03 Income .01 .01 .59 Party ID .03 .02 .17 Constant 3.40 .21 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .07

141

Table 5.34 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Importance of Resolving Use of No-Fly Lists, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source .05 .07 .51 Non-Elite Source .02 .07 .75 Positive Tone .00 .06 1.00 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score -.01 .01 .31 Strength of Linked Fate .30 .03 .00 Age .01 .00 .00 Male -.11 .06 .07 Education -.01 .02 .65 Income -.01 .01 .49 Party ID .01 .02 .59 Constant 3.05 .17 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .08

Table 5.35 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitudes on Use of No-Fly Lists, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source .15 .09 .08 Non-Elite Source .24 .09 .00 Positive Tone .34 .07 .00 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score -.05 .01 .00 Strength of Linked Fate -.01 .04 .87 Age .01 .00 .00 Male .13 .07 .08 Education -.00 .03 .94 Income .03 .01 .01 Party ID .09 .02 .00 Constant 2.61 .20 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .07

Tables 32 – 35 list the regression results for the relationship between attitudes and importance rankings of Diversity Visa Program issues and no-fly list issues, message

142 characteristics and participant characteristics. The baseline characteristics in each model are for female participants in the negative poll article treatment. In examining the relationship for importance of resolving Diversity Visa Program (table 32), the baseline importance ranking is 3.32 and the statistically significant variables are strength of linked fate and age. In examining the model for attitudes towards ending the Diversity Visa

Program (table 33), the baseline value is 3.45 while the statistically significant variables are the non-elite treatment, the positive tone treatment, score on the Black political knowledge battery, and education. In the model for importance of resolving use of no-fly lists (table 34), the baseline importance value is 3.05 while the statistically significant variable are strength of linked fate and age. Finally, in the model for attitude towards use of no-fly lists (table 35), the baseline attitudinal value is 2.61 and the statistically significant variables are the non-elite treatment, the positive treatment, score on the Black political knowledge battery, age, income, and political party identification.

Results from the low issue treatment had significant source effects, tone effects, linked fate effects and Black political knowledge effects. In the ANOVAs with all of the experimental factors on the importance of resolving the Diversity Visa Program, tone, linked fate, and interaction with source and knowledge are statistically significant.

Analysis of the predicted values provided support for source hypothesis H1, where participants are most responsive to the elite message. In the linear regression model for the experimental factors’ influence on importance rankings on resolving the Diversity

Visa Program, tone and strength of linked fate are the most influential factors in determining a person’s importance value on resolving the Diversity Visa Program issue.

143

In the ANOVAs for all experimental factors’ effect on attitudes towards ending the

Diversity Visa Program, source, tone, strength of linked fate, level of Black political knowledge, and the interaction between linked fate and knowledge are statistically significant. However, in the linear regression model, linked fate is not a significant predictor of attitudinal values. In examining the analysis of variance for the experimental factors’ effect on attitudes towards use of no-fly lists, tone, and the interaction between linked fate and Black political knowledge are significant. In the regression predicting attitudinal values, Black political knowledge remains as the only statistically significant variable from the ANOVA results. Overall these results provide support for the issue salience hypothesis H2 because the significant message cues effects in the ANOVAs indicate the participants are using said cues to formulate their opinions on the Diversity

Visa Program because they are looking to emulate what they perceive to be the racial group’s opinion on the issue based on the information in their assigned article.

144

Medium Salience Issue

Table 5.36 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Importance of Resolving Toxic Emissions Limits Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 3.59 5 .72 .84 .52 Treatment Source 1.57 2 .78 .91 .40 Treatment Tone .03 1 .03 .04 .84 Treatment Source X 1.99 2 1.00 1.16 .31 Treatment Tone Residual 896.50 1044 .86 Total 901.00 1049 .86

N 1050 R-squared .00

Table 5.37 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Attitudes on Toxic Emission Limits Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 8.51 5 1.70 1.32 .25 Treatment Source 1.96 2 .98 .76 .47 Treatment Tone 3.43 1 3.43 2.65 .10 Treatment Source X 3.12 2 1.56 1.21 .30 Treatment Tone Residual 1348.94 1044 1.29 Total 1357.45 1049 1.29

N 1050 R-squared .00

145

Table 5.38 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Importance of Resolving Chemical Plant Regulations Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 1.87 5 .37 .44 .60 Treatment Source .52 2 .26 .30 .74 Treatment Tone .01 1 .01 .02 .90 Treatment Source X 1.34 2 .67 .78 .45 Treatment Tone Residual 892.60 1044 .85 Total 894.47 1049 .85

N 1050 R-squared .00

Table 5.39 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects on Attitudes Towards Chemical Plant Regulations Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 4.78 5 .96 .73 .60 Treatment Source .74 2 .37 .28 .75 Treatment Tone 2.38 1 2.38 1.83 .17 Treatment Source X 1.66 2 .83 .64 .53 Treatment Tone Residual 1359.23 1044 1.30 Total 1364 1049 1.30

N 1050 R-squared .00

Tables 36 through 39 lists the analysis of variance results for source and tone effects on participants’ importance rankings and attitude towards the topic of the medium issue salience treatment: revision of toxic emission limits and revision of regulations for chemical plants in residential levels. Source, tone, and the interaction between source and tone are not significant in any of the aforementioned tables.

146

Table 5.40 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Importance of Resolving Toxic Emissions Limits Factor Partial Degrees of MS F p-value SS Freedom Model 34.85 11 3.17 3.80 .00 Treatment Source 1.43 2 .72 .86 .42 Treatment Tone .04 1 .04 .05 .82 Treatment Source X Treatment 1.37 2 .68 .82 .44 Tone Black Political Knowledge 29.18 1 29.18 35.00 .00 Level Treatment Source X Black .26 2 .13 .16 .85 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .00 1 .00 .00 .94 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 1.74 2 .87 1.05 .35 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 865.24 1038 .83 Total 900.10 1049 .85

N 1050 R-squared .04

Table 5.41– Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 40 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 4.21 .04 High 4.54 .04

147

Table 5.42 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitudes on Toxic Emission Limits Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 61.80 11 5.61 4.50 .00 Treatment Source 2.17 2 1.36 1.09 .34 Treatment Tone 3.49 1 3.49 2.80 .09 Treatment Source X 2.48 2 1.24 1.00 .37 Treatment Tone Black Political Knowledge 49.07 1 49.07 39.42 .00 Level Treatment Source X Black 2.60 2 1.30 1.04 .35 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .08 1 .08 .07 .79 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X 1.33 2 .67 .53 .58 Treatment Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1295.65 1038 1.25 Total 1357.45 1049 1.29

N 1050 R-squared .04

Table 5.43– Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 42 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 4.05 .05 High 4.49 .05

148

Table 5.44 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Importance of Resolving Chemical Plant Regulations Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 32.32 11 2.93 3.54 .00 Treatment Source .55 2 .27 .33 .72 Treatment Tone .04 1 .04 .05 .82 Treatment Source X Treatment .71 2 .35 .43 .65 Tone Black Political Knowledge Level 29.21 1 29.21 35.17 .00 Treatment Source X Black .78 2 .39 .47 .62 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .29 1 .29 .35 .55 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment .08 2 .04 .05 .95 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 862.16 1038 .83 Total 894.47 1049 .85

N 1050 R-squared .03

Table 5.45– Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 44 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 4.14 .04 High 4.48 .04

149

Table 5.46– 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitudes Towards Chemical Plant Regulations Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 86.26 11 7.84 6.37 .00 Treatment Source 1.35 2 .67 .55 .58 Treatment Tone 2.38 1 2.38 1.94 .16 Treatment Source X Treatment 2.48 2 1.24 1.01 .36 Tone Black Political Knowledge 79.83 1 79.83 64.86 .00 Level Treatment Source X Black .00 2 .00 .00 1.00 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .47 1 .47 .38 .53 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 1.23 2 .61 .50 .61 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1277.73 1038 1.23 Total 1364 1049 1.30

N 1050 R-squared .06

Table 5.47– Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 46 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 3.94 .05 High 4.49 .05

Tables 40 through 47 list the analysis of variance results for source, tone, and level of Black political knowledge effects on importance rankings in attitude towards revisions and toxic emission limits and revisions and regulations for chemical plants in residential areas. As it pertains to importance of resolving toxic emission limits (table

40) and attitudes towards said limits (table 42) and importance of resolving regulations for chemical plants in residential areas (table 44) and attitudes towards it (table 46), level

150 of Black political knowledge is the only statistically significant factor. Sample main effects analysis of predicted attitudes and importance of resolving issues related to pollution determined that participants with higher levels of knowledge indicated resolving the issue surrounding toxic emission limits as very important (table 41 p=.00).

They also indicate greater support for toxic emission limits (table 43 p=.00). Higher knowledge participants indicate greater support for resolving the issue surrounding regulations for chemical plants in residential areas (table 45) and greater support for such regulations (table 47). These results do provide support for the Black political knowledge hypothesis (H6) because low knowledge participants’ attitudes (tables 45 and 47) reflect the message in the article.

Table 5.48– 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Importance of Resolving Toxic Emissions Limits Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 71.09 17 4.18 5.21 .00 Treatment Source 1.14 2 .57 .71 .49 Treatment Tone .08 1 .08 .11 .74 Treatment Source X Treatment 1.77 2 .88 1.10 .33 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 52.17 2 26.08 32.47 .00 Treatment Source X Strength 8.15 4 2.04 2.54 .04 of Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 1.46 2 .73 .91 .40 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 2.27 4 .57 .91 .59 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 829.01 1032 .80 Total 900.10 1049 .86

N 1050 R-squared .03

151

Table 5.49- Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 48 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.17 .05 Moderate 4.14 .06 High 4.60 .04 Source X Strength of Linked Fate Elite X Low 4.07 .08 Elite X Moderate 4.31 .11 Elite X High 4.67 .07 Non-Elite X Low 4.23 .08 Non-Elite X Moderate 4.12 .10 Non-Elite X High 4.49 .07 Poll X Low 4.20 .09 Poll X Moderate 3.98 .09 Poll X High 4.65 .07

Table 5.50 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitudes on Toxic Emission Limits Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 55.96 17 3.29 2.61 .00 Treatment Source 4.44 2 2.22 1.76 .17 Treatment Tone 2.94 1 2.94 2.33 .13 Treatment Source X 2.55 2 1.27 1.01 .36 Treatment Tone Strength of Linked Fate 27.50 2 13.75 10.90 .00 Treatment Source X Strength 11.46 4 2.86 2.27 .06 of Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 1.95 2 .97 .77 .46 Linked Fate Treatment Source X 4.60 4 1.15 .91 .45 Treatment Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 1301.49 1032 1.26 Total 1357.45 1049 1.29

N 1050 R-squared .04

152

Table 5.51- Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 50 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.11 .06 Moderate 4.10 .07 High 4.43 .05

Table 5.52 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Importance of Resolving Chemical Plant Regulations Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 73.99 17 4.35 5.47 .00 Treatment Source .04 2 .02 .02 .97 Treatment Tone .03 1 .03 .04 .84 Treatment Source X Treatment 1.81 2 .90 1.14 .32 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 57.71 2 28.85 36.29 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 8.63 4 2.16 2.72 .03 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of .35 2 .17 .22 .80 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 2.02 4 .50 .63 .64 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 820.48 1032 .79 Total 894.47 1049 .79

N 1050 R-squared .08

153

Table 5.53- Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 52 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.11 .05 Moderate 4.04 .06 High 4.55 .04 Source X Strength of Linked Fate Elite X Low 3.97 .08 Elite X Moderate 4.11 .11 Elite X High 4.64 .07 Non-Elite X Low 4.14 .08 Non-Elite X Moderate 4.13 .10 Non-Elite X High 4.45 .07 Poll X Low 4.21 .09 Poll X Moderate 3.90 .09 Poll X High 4.57 .07

Table 5.54 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitudes Towards Chemical Plant Regulations Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 70.44 17 4.14 3.31 .00 Treatment Source .17 2 .08 .07 .93 Treatment Tone 2.28 1 2.28 1.82 .18 Treatment Source X Treatment .59 2 .30 .24 .79 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 49.25 2 24.62 19.65 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 8.51 4 2.12 1.70 .15 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 1.00 2 .50 .40 .67 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 3.41 4 .85 .68 .60 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 1293.56 1032 1.25 Total 1364 1049 1.30

N 1050 R-squared .05

154

Table 5.55 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 54 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 3.98 .06 Moderate 4.02 .07 High 4.43 .05

Tables 48 through 55 lists the analysis of variance results are source tone and strength of linked fate effects on importance rankings of and attitude towards toxic emissions limits and importance rankings and attitude towards regulations for chemical plants in residential areas. In the models for attitudinal values (table 50 for attitude on emission limits and table 54 for attitude on plant regulations), only the strength of linked fate is the significant factor. Main analysis of the attitudinal values (table 41 for predicted attitude on emission limits and table 55 for attitude on chemical plant regulations) shows that those with high linked fate indicate higher levels of support for said limits and regulations at p=.00.

155

Table 5.56– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Importance of Resolving Toxic Emissions Limits Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 101.95 35 2.91 3.70 .00. Treatment Source .78 2 .39 .50 .61 Treatment Tone .24 1 .24 .31 .58 Treatment Source X Treatment 1.06 2 .53 .67 .51 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 42.69 2 21.34 27.12 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 7.52 4 1.87 2.39 .05 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 1.12 2 .56 .71 .49 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 1.42 4 .35 .45 .77 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge 24.40 1 24.40 31.00 .00 Level Treatment Source X Black .26 2 .13 .17 .84 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .09 1 .09 .12 .73 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment .65 2 .33 .42 .66 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X 4.50 2 2.25 2.86 .06 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of .47 4 .12 .15 .96 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of 2.74 2 1.37 1.74 .17 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment .39 4 .10 .12 .97 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 798.14 1014 .79 Total 900.10 1049 .86

N 1050 R-squared .11 156

Table 5.57 - Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 56 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.20 .05 Moderate 4.15 .06 High 4.60 .04 Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 4.24 .04 High 4.52 .04

157

Table 5.58– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Attitudes on Toxic Emission Limits Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 115.63 35 3.30 2.70 .00. Treatment Source 6.64 2 3.32 2.71 .07 Treatment Tone 3.04 1 3.04 2.49 .11 Treatment Source X Treatment 2.13 2 1.06 .87 .42 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 20.15 2 10.10 8.23 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 12.47 4 3.11 2.55 .04 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 1.61 2 .80 .66 .51 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 2.16 4 .54 .44 .78 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge 44.53 1 44.53 36.36 .00 Level Treatment Source X Black 2.89 2 1.40 1.15 .32 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .19 1 .19 .15 .69 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment .92 2 .46 .38 .69 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X 4.57 2 2.29 1.87 .15 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of 4.46 4 1.11 .91 .45 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of .70 2 .35 .29 .75 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 5.08 4 1.27 1.04 .38 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1241.82 1014 1.22 Total 1357.45 1049 1.22

N 1050 R-squared .08 158

Table 5.59 - Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 58 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.14 .06 Moderate 4.12 .07 High 4.42 .05 Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 4.08 .05 High 4.48 .05 Source X Strength of Linked Fate Elite X Low 3.95 .10 Elite X Moderate 3.89 .14 Elite X High 4.50 .08 Non-Elite X Low 4.16 .10 Non-Elite X Moderate 4.26 .13 Non-Elite X High 4.31 .09 Poll X Low 4.29 .11 Poll X Moderate 4.22 .12 Poll X High 4.42 .08

159

Table 5.60– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Importance of Resolving Chemical Plant Regulations Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 110.36 35 3.15 4.08 .00 Treatment Source .01 2 .00 .01 .99 Treatment Tone .28 1 .28 .37 .54 Treatment Source X Treatment 1.29 2 .64 .83 .43 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 49.86 2 24.93 32.24 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 8.16 4 2.04 2.64 .03 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of .21 2 .11 .14 .88 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 2.19 4 .55 .71 .58 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge Level 25.81 1 25.81 33.38 .00 Treatment Source X Black .88 2 .44 .57 .57 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .58 1 .58 .75 .39 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment .45 2 .22 .29 .74 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X Black 6.50 2 3.24 4.20 .01 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of .94 4 .23 .31 .87 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of 3.52 2 1.76 2.28 .10 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 3.33 4 .82 1.08 .36 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 784.11 1014 .77 Total 894.47 1049 .85

N 1050 R-squared .12

160

Table 5.61- Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 60 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 4.17 .04 High 4.46 .04 Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.14 .04 Moderate 4.05 .06 High 4.54 .04 Source X Strength of Linked Fate Elite X Low 4.00 .08 Elite X Moderate 4.08 .11 Elite X High 4.64 .07 Non-Elite X Low 4.17 .08 Non-Elite X Moderate 4.12 .10 Non-Elite X High 4.44 .07 Poll X Low 4.24 .09 Poll X Moderate 3.92 .09 Poll X High 4.57 .07 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Level of Black Political Knowledge Negative X Low X Low 4.03 .09 Negative X Low X High 4.28 .11 Negative X Moderate X Low 3.80 .13 Negative X Moderate X High 4.23 .13 Negative X High X Low 4.44 .08 Negative X High X High 4.63 .07 Positive X Low X Low 3.82 .09 Positive X Low X High 4.48 .11 Positive X Moderate X Low 3.87 .11 Positive X Moderate X High 4.32 .13 Positive X High X Low 4.53 .08 Positive X High X High 4.60 .08

161

Table 5.62– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on for Attitudes Towards Chemical Plant Regulations Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 157.67 35 4.50 3.79 .00 Treatment Source .43 2 .21 .18 .83 Treatment Tone 3.21 1 3.21 2.70 .10 Treatment Source X Treatment 2.41 2 1.20 1.01 .36 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 37.23 2 18.62 15.65 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 5.76 4 1.44 1.21 .30 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of .80 2 .40 .34 .71 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 2.79 4 .70 .59 .67 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge Level 65.83 1 65.83 55.34 .00 Treatment Source X Black .26 2 .13 .11 .89 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .11 1 .11 .09 .76 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment .15 2 .07 .06 .94 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X Black 2.63 2 1.31 1.10 .33 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of 4.28 4 1.07 .90 .46 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of 5.02 2 2.51 2.11 .12 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 7.46 4 1.86 1.57 .18 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1206.33 1014 1.18 Total 1364 1049 1.30

N 1050 R-squared .11

162

Table 5.63- Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 62 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.00 .06 Moderate 4.04 .07 High 4.41 .05 Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 3.96 .04 High 4.47 .05

Tables 56 – 63 lists the analysis of variance results of source, tone, strength of linked fate, and level of Black political knowledge effects on importance rankings of and attitude towards toxic emissions limits and importance rankings and attitude towards regulations for chemical plants in residential areas. In the analysis for importance of resolving toxic emission limits (table 56), the significant factors are strength of linked fate and level of Black political knowledge. Analysis of the main effects based on the predicted values (table 57), shows significant difference in values based on linked fate levels, where those with high linked fate indicate resolving the issue is very important, p=.00. We see a similar trend among Black political knowledge level, where those with higher levels also give higher importance rankings p=.00. In the analysis for attitude towards toxic emission limits (table 58), the significant factors are strength of linked fate, the interaction between linked fate and source, and level of Black political knowledge.

Analysis of the main effects based on the predicted attitudinal values (table 59) shows that participants with high linked fate indicate greater support for the emissions limits p=.00. Likewise, participants with high knowledge give higher attitudinal values p=.00.

When examined with source, high linked fate participants in the elite treatment indicate higher levels of support in comparison to less linked participants p=.00. This provides 163 support for the source hypothesis (H1) but does not support the linked fate hypothesis

(H4). Highly linked participants in the elite treatment being responsive to that message supports the source hypothesis but in doing so challenges the linked fate hypothesis because highly linked individuals were predicted to be the least responsive to the elites.

As such the interaction did not work as predicted.

In the analysis for importance of resolving regulations for chemical plants in residential areas (table 60), the significant factors are linked fate levels, the interaction between source and linked fate, level of Black political knowledge, and the interaction between linked fate and knowledge. Analysis of the main effects based on predicted importance values (table 61) shows that participants with high levels of knowledge indicated resolving the use of regulations to be very important p=.00. Likewise, participants with high linked fate also gave higher importance values p=.00. When examined with source, those with high linked fate in the elite and non-elite treatment give higher importance values, p=.00 in elite treatment and p=.01 in the non-elite treatment.

Participants with moderate linked fate in the poll treatment indicated weaker support than low linked participants p=.02. When treatment tone is examined with linked fate strength and amount of knowledge, in the negative treatments, there is a significant difference in values of participants with moderate linked fate and low knowledge and the importance values given by participants with moderate linked fate and high knowledge. Participants with moderate linked fate and high knowledge indicated greater support for resolving chemical plant regulations p=.00. In the positive treatment, participants with low linked fate and high knowledge give higher values p=.00. Finally, in the analysis for attitude

164 towards regulations for chemical plants in residential areas (table 62), the significant factors are strength of linked fate and level of Black political knowledge. Analysis of the main effects based on predicted attitudinal values (table 63) shows significant differences in attitudes given based on linked fate; where highly linked participants indicate stronger support for said regulations p=.00. In the interaction between knowledge and linked fate, highly linked and knowledgeable participants give higher attitudinal values than highly linked but low knowledge participants p=.00.

Table 5.64– Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Importance of Resolving Toxic Emission Limits, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source .05 .06 .42 Non-Elite Source -.04 .06 .49 Positive Tone .02 .05 .70 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score .05 .01 .00 Strength of Linked Fate .23 .03 .00 Age .01 .00 .00 Male -.13 .05 .02 Education -.02 .02 .43 Income .01 .01 .12 Party ID .01 .02 .41 Constant 3.04 .15 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .12

165

Table 5.65 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitudes on Toxic Emission Limits, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source -.11 .08 .20 Non-Elite Source -.08 .08 .31 Positive Tone .13 .07 .06 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score .06 .01 .00 Strength of Linked Fate .17 .04 .00 Age .00 .00 .05 Male -.02 .07 .75 Education .01 .03 .63 Income .01 .01 .23 Party ID .02 .02 .48 Constant 3.02 .19 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .06

Table 5.66– Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between the Importance of Resolving Regulations for Chemical Plants in Residential Areas, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source .03 .06 .65 Non-Elite Source -.02 .06 .70 Positive Tone .02 .05 .71 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score .04 .01 .00 Strength of Linked Fate .24 .03 .00 Age .01 .00 .00 Male -.20 .05 .00 Education -.03 .02 .19 Income .01 .01 .11 Party ID .01 .02 .60 Constant 3.06 .15 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .13

166

Table 5.67 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitudes on Regulations for Chemical Plants in Residential Areas, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source -.02 .08 .78 Non-Elite Source -.08 .08 .30 Positive Tone .11 .06 .11 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score .09 .01 .00 Strength of Linked Fate .23 .04 .00 Age .01 .00 .00 Male .01 .07 .88 Education .03 .02 .21 Income .01 .01 .49 Party ID .02 .02 .25 Constant 2.30 .18 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .13

Tables 64 – 67 list the regression results for the relationship between attitudes and importance rankings of toxic emission limits and regulations for chemical plants in residential areas, message characteristics and participant characteristics. The baseline characteristics in each model are for female participants in the negative poll article treatment. In the model for importance of resolving issues surrounding toxic emission limits (table 64), the baseline importance ranking is 3.04 while the statistically significant variables are score on the Black political knowledge battery, strength of linked fate, age, and being a male. In the model for attitudes towards toxic emission limits (table 65), the baseline attitudinal value is 3.02 while the statistically significant variables are the score on the Black political knowledge battery, and strength of linked fate. In the model for importance of resolving issues surrounding regulations for chemical plants in residential areas (table 66), the baseline importance value is 3.06 and the statistically significant

167 variables are performance on the knowledge battery, strength of linked fate, age, and being male. Finally, in the model for attitudes towards regulations for chemical plants in residential areas (table 67), the baseline attitudinal value is 2.30 and the statistically significant variables are performance on the Black political knowledge battery, strength of linked fate, age, and being male.

In the medium salience treatment message cues were oftentimes insignificant. In the analysis for all factors on the importance of resolving toxic emission limits, strength of linked fate and level of political knowledge were statistically significant. These two factors continued to be significant in the linear regression model. In the analysis for factors on the attitude towards toxic emission limits linked fate and political knowledge are statistically significant and remain that way in the linear regression model. These findings do not support the linked fate hypothesis H4. In the analysis for importance of resolving issues related to regulations on chemical plants in residential areas, significant variables are strength of linked fate, the interaction between source and linked fate, level of Black political knowledge, and the interaction between linked fate and knowledge.

However, in the linear regression predicting importance values on said issue, seems only linked fate and Black political knowledge continues to be statistically significant. In the analysis for attitudes towards these regulations, length of linked fate and level of Black political knowledge are the only statistically significant variables. They continue to remain significant in the linear regression model estimates. It is unclear if these results provide support for any of the other hypotheses besides the issue salience hypothesis H1 because while we see fewer message cues effects in the analysis of the pollution

168 treatment, we only see support for the proposed changes to the environmental policy that persist regardless of level of knowledge and strength of linked fate. This means that overall, participants were less responsive to the moderately salient treatments because the racial group’s stance on governmental involvement in environmental issues is more known, or easier to figure out, than the low issue treatment.

169

High Salience Issue

Table 5.68– 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects for Importance of Resolving Policing Issues Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 6.46 5 1.29 1.61 .15 Treatment Source 2.78 2 1.39 1.73 .18 Treatment Tone 1.04 1 1.04 1.29 .26 Treatment Source X 2.64 2 1.32 1.65 .19 Treatment Tone Residual 837.89 1044 .80 Total 844.36 1049 .80

N 1050 R-squared .01

Table 5.69– 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects for Attitudes Toward Use of Body Cams and Dashboard Cams Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 4.83 5 .96 .98 .43 Treatment Source 1.84 2 .92 .93 .39 Treatment Tone .34 1 .34 .35 .55 Treatment Source X 2.64 2 1.32 1.34 .26 Treatment Tone Residual 1030.46 1044 .99 Total 1035.28 1049 .99

N 1050 R-squared .00

170

Table 5.70 – 2x3 ANOVA Results for Source and Tone Effects for Attitudes Toward Use of Police Oversight Boards Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 19.27 5 3.86 2.67 .02 Treatment Source .07 2 .04 .02 .98 Treatment Tone 11.11 1 11.11 7.69 .00 Treatment Source X 8.10 2 4.05 2.80 .06 Treatment Tone Residual 1508.08 1044 1.44 Total 1527.36 1049 1.46

N 1050 R-squared .01

Table 5.71– Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 70 Treatment Source X Treatment Tone Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Elite X Negative 3.82 .09 Elite X Positive 4.11 .09 Non-Elite X Negative 3.99 .09 Non-Elite X Positive 3.95 .09 Poll X Negative 3.80 .09 Poll X Positive 4.16 .09

Tables 68-71 list the analysis of variance results for source and tone effects on participants’ importance rankings and attitude towards the topic of high issue salience: discussion for more police reform, use of body cameras and dashboard cameras, and the use of police oversight boards. Source and tone effects were not present in the analysis of importance of resolving policing issues (table 68) nor in the analysis of attitudes towards the use of police cameras (table 69). The results from tables 68 and 69 provide support for the issue salience hypothesis (H2) because participants are unresponsive to the high racial salience treatment. However, in the analysis of attitudes towards oversight

171 boards (table 70), tone and its interaction with source were significant. In the main effects analysis of predicted attitudinal values (table 71), the positive treatment (“more should be done to address police violence”) had a greater effect on attitudes in the elite treatment (p=.02) however the positive treatment had an even larger effect on attitudes in the poll treatment (p=.00). These findings do not support the source hypothesis (H1) because participants were in fact most responsive to the collective group message as opposed to the elite message.

Table 5.72– 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Importance of Resolving Policing Issues Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 40.05 11 3.64 4.70 .00 Treatment Source 3.19 2 1.60 2.06 .13 Treatment Tone .86 1 .86 1.11 .29 Treatment Source X Treatment 1.82 2 .91 1.17 .31 Tone Black Political Knowledge 29.71 1 29.71 38.35 .00 Level Treatment Source X Black .59 2 .30 .38 .68 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black 1.95 1 1.96 2.53 .11 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 1.16 2 .58 .75 .47 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 804.31 1038 .77 Total 844.36 1049 .80

N 1050 R-squared .05

172

Table 5.73 – Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 72 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 4.20 .04 High 4.54 .04

Table 5.74 – 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitudes Toward Use of Body Cams and Dashboard Cams Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 97.41 11 8.85 9.80 .00 Treatment Source 2.90 2 1.45 1.61 .20 Treatment Tone .05 1 .05 .05 .81 Treatment Source X Treatment 1.74 2 .87 .96 .38 Tone Black Political Knowledge 90.82 1 90.82 100.52 .00 Level Treatment Source X Black .49 2 .24 .27 .76 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .00 1 .00 .00 .94 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 1.22 2 .61 .68 .51 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 937.86 1038 .90 Total 1035.28 1049 .98

N 1050 R-squared .09

Table 5.75– Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 74 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 4.15 .04 High 4.74 .04

173

Table 5.76– 3x2x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitude Towards Use of Police Oversight Boards Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 117.05 11 10.64 7.83 .00 Treatment Source .33 2 .17 .12 .88 Treatment Tone 8.78 1 8.78 6.46 .01 Treatment Source X Treatment 10.00 2 5.00 3.68 .03 Tone Black Political Knowledge 87.63 1 87.63 64.50 .00 Level Treatment Source X Black 4.13 2 2.07 1.52 .22 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .11 1 .11 .08 .77 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 5.57 2 2.78 2.05 .13 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1410.30 1038 1.36 Total 1527.35 1049 1.46

N 1050 R-squared .08

Table 5.77– Adjusted Prediction of Significant Factors from Table 76 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Treatment Tone Negative 3.88 .05 Positive 4.06 .05 Source X Tone Elite X Negative 3.79 .09 Elite X Positive 4.11 .09 Non-Elite X Negative 4.01 .09 Non-Elite X Positive 3.90 .09 Poll X Negative 4.17 .09 Poll X Positive .09 Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 3.70 .05 High 4.28 .05

174

Tables 72-77 lists the analysis of variance results for source, tone, and level of

Black political knowledge effects on importance of resolving police issue (table 72), police use of cameras (table 74), and use of police oversight boards (table 76). In the analysis for importance of resolving policing issue, statistically significant factor is level of knowledge. Based on analysis of the predicted importance values (table 73), participants with high knowledge give higher importance values p=.00. In the analysis for attitudes towards use of police body cameras and dashboard cameras, Black political knowledge is the only significant factor. In the effect analysis of predicted attitudinal values (table 75), participants with high knowledge indicate stronger support for use of body cameras and dashboard cameras by police officers p=.00. Table 76 lists the analyses of variance results for source, tone, and level of Black political knowledge effects on participants’ attitude towards use of police oversight boards. Of note, treatment tone, level of Black political knowledge and the interaction between source and tone are statistically significant. Simple main effects analyses of the predicted attitudinal values (table 77). determined that participants’ in the positive treatment gave higher attitudinal values (p=.01). Likewise, participants with higher levels of knowledge indicated higher levels of support for use of police oversight boards (p=.00). Finally, additional simple main effects analysis determined the positive tone treatment made participants express higher attitudinal values in the with the elite source (p=.01) and in the poll treatment (p=.01). Results from tables 72-77 provide support for the issue salience hypothesis (H2) in that participants’ attitudes and importance rankings of the policing article are not influenced by the message cues because the policing subject is a

175 highly salient issue. Support for more solutions, as well as support for use of cameras and boards was high regardless of tone, source, and knowledge.

Table 5.78 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Importance of Resolving Policing Issues Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 77.37 17 4.55 6.12 .00 Treatment Source 1.72 2 .86 1.16 .32 Treatment Tone 1.11 1 1.11 1.50 .22 Treatment Source X Treatment 3.38 2 1.69 2.27 .10 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 56.03 2 28.02 37.70 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 7.22 4 1.80 2.43 .05 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 1.75 2 .88 1.18 .31 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 2.70 4 .67 .91 .45 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 766.98 1032 .74 Total 844.36 1049 .80

N 1050 R-squared .07

Table 5.79 - Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 78 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.15 .04 Moderate 4.15 .06 High 4.62 .04

176

Table 5.80– 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitudes Toward Use of Body Cams and Dashboard Cams Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 52.06 17 3.06 3.21 .00 Treatment Source 1.31 2 .66 .69 .50 Treatment Tone .92 1 .92 .97 .32 Treatment Source X Treatment 3.47 2 1.73 1.82 .16 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 22.82 2 11.41 11.98 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 8.66 4 2.16 2.27 .06 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 2.85 2 1.42 1.50 .22 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 9.50 4 2.38 2.50 .04 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 983.22 1032 .95 Total 1035.28 1049 .99

N 1050 R-squared .05

177

Table 5.81- Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 80 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.37 .05 Moderate 4.21 .07 High 4.58 .04 Treatment Source X Treatment Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Elite X Negative X Low 4.26 .12 Elite X Negative X Moderate 4.44 .16 Elite X Negative X High 4.69 .11 Elite X Positive X Low 4.37 .13 Elite X Positive X Moderate 4.18 .15 Elite X Positive X High 4.53 .11 Non-Elite X Negative X Low 4.07 .13 Non-Elite X Negative X Moderate 4.03 .17 Non-Elite X Negative X High 4.66 .10 Non-Elite X Positive X Low 4.37 .13 Non-Elite X Positive X Moderate 4.52 .19 Non-Elite X Positive High 4.35 .10 Poll X Negative X Low 4.55 .14 Poll X Negative X Moderate 4.00 .15 Poll X Negative X High 4.50 .11 Poll X Positive X Low 4.60 .14 Poll X Positive X Moderate 4.11 .15 Poll X Positive X High 4.74 .10

178

Table 5.82 – 3x2x3 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, and Strength of Linked Fate Effects for Attitude Towards Use of Police Oversight Boards Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 118.83 17 6.99 5.12 .00 Treatment Source .19 2 .09 .07 93 Treatment Tone 9.30 1 9.29 6.81 .01 Treatment Source X Treatment 5.42 2 2.71 1.99 .14 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 75.56 2 37.78 27.68 .00 Treatment Source X Strength 3.14 4 .79 .58 .68 of Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 11.92 2 5.96 4.37 .01 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 4.95 4 1.24 .91 .45 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Residual 987.40 1032 .96 Total 1044.26 1049 .99

N 1050 R-squared .08

Table 5.83- Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 82 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 3.67 .06 Moderate 3.80 .08 High 4.26 .05 Treatment Tone Negative 3.88 .05 Positive 4.08 .05 Treatment Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Negative X Low 3.42 .09 Negative X Moderate 3.80 .11 Negative X High 4.22 .07 Positive X Low 3.93 .09 Positive X Moderate 3.80 .11 Positive X High 4.30 .07

179

Tables 78 – 83 list the analysis of variance results for source, tone, and strength of linked fate effects on participants’ importance ranking of resolving the policing issue and their attitudes towards police usage of camera and use of police oversight boards. The significant factor in the analysis of importance of resolving the policing issue (table 78) is strength of linked fate. Analysis of predicted importance values (table 79) show that participants with higher levels of linked fate indicated higher importance values meaning they consider resolving the issue of effective policing to be very important p=.00. The significant factors in analysis of attitudes toward police usage of cameras (table 80) are linked fate and the interaction between source, tone, and linked fate. Analysis of the predicted attitudinal values (table 81) shows that highly linked participants in the negative toned non-elite treatment indicated higher levels of support p=.00. Moderately linked participants in the negative toned poll treatment were less supportive of police usage of camera p=.01. The significant factors in analysis of attitudes towards use of police oversight boards (table 82) are tone, strength of linked fate, and the interaction between tone, and linked fate. Analysis of the predicted attitudinal values (table 83) indicates the positive toned treatments elicited greater support for use of oversight boards p=.01. Likewise, highly linked participants had higher attitudinal values p=.00. When tone and linked fate are interacted, moderately linked participants in the “wait on demanding more police reform” (negative) treatment indicated higher support for use of oversight boards in comparison to lowly linked participants p=.01. However highly linked participants in the same treatments indicated higher levels of support in comparison to moderately linked participants p=.00. In the “demand more police reform 180 now” treatment (positive), highly linked individuals had the highest attitudinal values p=.00. These results provide additional support for the issue salience hypothesis (H2) because participants are unresponsive to the high racial salience treatment and the expressed attitudes and importance values are positive/high regardless of tone.

181

Table 5.84– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects on Importance of Resolving Policing Issues. Factor Partial Degrees of MS F p-value SS Freedom Model 110.09 35 3.14 4.34 .00 Treatment Source 2.06 2 1.03 1.43 .24 Treatment Tone 1.53 1 1.53 2.11 .15 Treatment Source X Treatment 2.65 2 1.32 1.83 .16 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 46.54 2 23.27 32.14 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 6.20 4 1.55 2.14 .07 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 2.67 2 1.33 1.84 .16 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 1.65 4 .41 .57 .68 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge Level 20.46 1 20.46 28.26 .00 Treatment Source X Black Political .54 2 .27 .38 .68 Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black Political 2.00 1 2.00 2.76 .09 Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 1.07 2 .53 .74 .48 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X Black 1.39 2 .69 .96 .38 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of 1.93 4 .48 .67 .61 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of .77 2 .38 .53 .59 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 3.81 4 .95 1.32 .26 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 734.27 1014 .72 Total 844.36 1049 .80

N 1050 R-squared .13

182

Table 5.85- Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 84 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.18 .05 Moderate 4.16 .05 High 4.60 .04 Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 4.23 .04 High 4.52 .04

183

Table 5.86 – 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate, and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitude Towards Use of Body Cameras in Policing Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 156.42 35 4.47 5.16 .00 Treatment Source 2.21 2 1.11 1.28 .28 Treatment Tone .37 1 .37 .42 .51 Treatment Source X Treatment 1.75 2 .87 1.01 .36 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 12.79 2 6.40 7.38 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 4.86 4 1.21 1.40 .23 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 3.14 2 1.57 1.81 .16 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 9.22 4 2.30 2.66 .03 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge 72.14 1 72.14 83.23 .00 Level Treatment Source X Black .98 2 .49 .56 .57 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .08 1 .08 .09 .76 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 1.05 2 .53 .61 .54 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X Black 2.02 2 1.01 1.17 .31 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of 7.83 4 1.96 2.26 .06 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of 2.43 2 1.21 1.40 .25 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 8.01 4 2.00 2.31 .05 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 878.87 1014 .87 Total 1035.28 1049 .98

N 1050 R-squared .15 184

Table 5.87 - Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 86 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 4.41 .05 Moderate 4.25 .06 High 4.56 .04 Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 4.17 .04 High 4.74 .04

185

Table 5.88– 3x2x3x2 ANOVA Results for Source, Tone, Strength of Linked Fate and Black Political Knowledge Level Effects for Attitude Towards Use of Police Oversight Boards Factor Partial SS Degrees of MS F p-value Freedom Model 210.44 35 6.01 4.63 .00 Treatment Source .53 2 .26 .20 .81 Treatment Tone 8.01 1 8.01 6.17 .01 Treatment Source X Treatment 6.56 2 3.28 2.53 .08 Tone Strength of Linked Fate 60.56 2 30.28 23.31 .00 Treatment Source X Strength of 2.18 4 .54 .42 .79 Linked Fate Treatment Tone X Strength of 12.12 2 6.06 4.67 .01 Linked Fate Treatment Source X Treatment 2.79 4 .70 .54 .71 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate Black Political Knowledge 65.85 1 65.85 50.71 .00 Level Treatment Source X Black 5.46 2 2.73 2.10 .12 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Black .18 1 .18 .14 .71 Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 3.70 2 1.85 1.42 .24 Tone X Black Political Knowledge Level Strength of Linked Fate X 1.48 2 .74 .57 .56 Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Strength of 7.78 4 1.94 1.50 .20 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Tone X Strength of .13 2 .06 .05 .95 Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Treatment Source X Treatment 1.92 4 .48 .37 .83 Tone X Strength of Linked Fate X Black Political Knowledge Level Residual 1316.92 1014 1.30 Total 1527.35 1049 1.45

N 1050 R-squared .14 186

Table 5.89- Adjusted Predictions of Significant Factors from Table 88 Factor Margin Delta-Method Standard Error Strength of Linked Fate Low 3.71 .05 Moderate 3.81 .08 High 4.23 .05 Level of Black Political Knowledge Low 3.73 .05 High 4.25 .05

Tables 84 – 89 lists the analysis of variance results for all experimental factors on participants importance ranking and attitude towards policing related issues. In the analysis of importance of resolving the issue of effective policing (table 84), the significant factors are strength of linked fate and level of Black political knowledge. In analysis of the predicted importance rankings (table 85) participants with higher levels of linked fate gave higher importance values p=.0. Likewise, participants with high knowledge also gave higher importance values p=.00. In analysis of attitudes towards police use of cameras (table 86), the significant factors are strength of linked fate, level of

Black political knowledge, and the interaction between source, tone, and linked fate.

Simple main effects analysis of the predicted attitudinal values (table 87) shows participants with higher knowledge gave higher attitudinal values p=.00. Meanwhile, low linked participants indicated weakest support for using the cameras values, p=.04 in comparison to moderate linked fate and p=.00 with high linked fate. This is an interesting finding beyond the narrow scope of the linked fate hypotheses that only focused on the interaction between source and strength of linked fate. The differences in attitudes based on the interaction between source, tone, and treatment were not 187 significant. In analysis of attitudes towards use of oversight boards (table 88), significant factors are tone, strength of linked fate, level of Black political knowledge, and the interaction between tone and linked fate.

Table 5.90 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Importance of Resolving Policing Issue, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source -.13 .06 .04 Non-Elite Source -.07 .06 .28 Positive Tone .03 .05 .49 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score .04 .01 .00 Strength of Linked Fate .24 .03 .00 Age .01 .00 .00 Male -.14 .05 .01 Education .01 .02 .63 Income .01 .01 .19 Party ID .01 .48 .63 Constant 3.03 .14 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .13

Table 5.91– Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitude Towards Use of Body Cameras and Dashboard Cameras, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source -.04 .07 .58 Non-Elite Source -.12 .07 .07 Positive Tone .00 .05 .95 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score .10 .01 .00 Strength of Linked Fate .12 .03 .00 Age .01 .00 .00 Male -.03 .06 .53 Education .00 .02 .93 Income .00 .01 .96 Party ID -.02 .02 .19 Constant 3.01 .15 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .17

188

Table 5.92 – Linear Regression Results Exploring the Relationship between Attitudes on Use of Police Oversight Boards, Message Characteristics, and Participant Characteristics Variable Coefficient Standard Error p-value Elite Source -.03 .08 .69 Non-Elite Source -.03 .08 .73 Positive Tone .17 .07 .01 Black Political Knowledge Battery Score .09 .01 .00 Strength of Linked Fate .28 .04 .00 Age .01 .00 .00 Male .17 .07 .02 Education .03 .03 .24 Income .01 .01 .27 Party ID -.02 .02 .30 Constant 1.96 .19 .00

N 1048 R-Squared .15

Tables 90 – 92 list the regression results for the relationship between importance rankings of resolving the issue of effective policing, attitudes towards police use of body cameras and dashboard cameras, and attitudes towards use of police oversight boards.

The baseline characteristics in each model are for female participants in the negative poll article treatment. In the model for importance of resolving the policing issue (table 90), the baseline importance value is 3.03 and the significant variables are the elite treatment, performance on the Black political knowledge battery, strength of linked fate, age, and being male. In the model for attitudes towards police use of body cameras and dashboard cameras (table 91), the baseline attitudinal value is 3.01 and the statistically significant variables are performance on the Black political knowledge battery, strength of linked fate, and age. In the model for attitudes towards use of police oversight boards (table 92), the baseline attitudinal value is 1.96 and the statistically significant variables are the 189 positive treatment, performance on the Black political knowledge battery, strength of linked fate, age, and being male.

In the high article treatments, source, level of linked fate, and level of Black political knowledge were significant variables in the multiple ANOVAs. In the analysis of variance results for importance of resolving the issue of effective policing, the significant variables were strength of linked fate and level of Black political knowledge.

Those factors continue to be statistically significant in the linear model predicting importance values of the issue. In the analysis results for attitude towards use of body cameras and dashboard cameras, the significant variables were strength of linked fate and

Black political knowledge levels in those variables continue to be significant in the linear regression. Those results are interesting because they exist outside of the scope of the linked fate and Black political knowledge hypotheses that only focused on how individuals would respond to the source or information based on the strength of linked fate or the level of knowledge and not on the interaction between the two factors. In the analysis results for attitude towards use of police oversight boards, significant variables are tone, strength of linked fate, interaction between tone and linked fate, and level of

Black political knowledge. Tone, knowledge, and linked fate continue to be significant in the linear regression model.

Discussion of Results

This chapter presented the results of the survey experiment. Participant response was sorted by issue article salience. Results from the low salience issue was first, then the moderate salience issue, and lastly the high salience issue.

190

In the predicted importance and attitudinal values in the low salience analysis, there are multiple occasions in which there was a two-way significant interaction between

Black political knowledge and linked fate. In the attitudinal models for the Diversity

Visa Program and use of no-fly lists there is a difference in the attitudes for individuals with high linked fate and low knowledge and individuals with high linked fate and high knowledge, where participants with high linked fate and high knowledge expressed opposition to ending the Diversity Visa Program. The same thing takes place for the attitudinal values for the no-fly lists. This finding supports the theoretical assertion that there is a difference between linked fate and Black political knowledge, such that those who are highly linked but have low knowledge will be more likely to agree with the message described.

Also, in the low salience results, there were instances in which the predicted values of moderately linked individuals would be lower in comparison to the values of other linked fate levels. These results cannot be explained by this projects framework however the lower values given by the moderately linked participants support research stating that without a specific cue in a politicized racial message, Black participants will provide responses based on the general perception of the racial group on that issue (White

2007; Laird 2014). Perhaps these moderately linked individuals did not feel a special connection with the source cues, despite the presence of a real Black elite and an

“everyday” Black man giving their opinions, in the low’s salience article as a result defaulted to their general understanding of the status on the policy.

191

Finally, throughout the analysis of the low, medium, and high salience issue results strength of linked fate and level of Black political knowledge persisted insignificance throughout. This provides strong support, or better yet validation, in undertaking this research topic. The also seems to be a difference in which factor is used in which circumstances. In the models of importance rankings linked fate and its interaction variables are more likely to be statistically significant then level of Black political knowledge’s interaction terms. Meanwhile in the attitudinal models, Black political knowledge’s interaction with linked fate is such that it can make similarly linked individuals but with varying levels of knowledge give opposite responses. Returning to the role of the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion, it seems the preference for linked fate in the importance rankings and knowledge in attitudinal values hints at the possibility of these concepts being used like central and peripheral routes. When the required response is an importance ranking on an issue, a participant does not have to seek out additional information or think too long on the topic if they can readily identify the racial group’s stance. In cases where the issue is not a racially salient he or she could rely on tone affects or whatever the elite collective group message is for that issue.

However, when the required response is an attitudinal value on an issue and the participant does not have much knowledge on the group’s stance, he or she is far more likely to default to the message cues because they are the quickest way to estimate the group stance and because reliance on this activated linked fate is usually useful.

192

Chapter 6. Conclusion

This dissertation sought to explore the relationship between linked fate, political knowledge and message cues. Identifying the very nature of the relationship between these factors that American political behavior literature by providing discourse on political knowledge namely the role of specialized knowledge. And in Black politics literature, the definition of this relationship would contribute via the conceptualization of a race-based specialized political knowledge, measurement of said concept, and the exploration of how this concept interacts with linked fate. This project covered a lot of moving parts in this affirmation exploration and so it is best to provide a recap of all that was done in this dissertation.

In the theoretical framework chapter, I argue there is a relationship between Black political knowledge, linked fate, and attitudes that varies based on the salience of the issue in question, the source of the message, tone of the message and the recipient’s strength of linked fate and amount of Black political knowledge they possessed.

Afterwards, the framework detailed how each factor: issue salience, source, tone, linked fate, and Black political knowledge would influence a person’s responses to said messages. This framework primarily drew on previous research on the expression of political attitudes, conceptualization of political knowledge, and psycho-political behavior within the Black community.

193

In the Black political knowledge chapter, I explored the feasibility of conceptualizing Black political knowledge as well as creating a measurement for it.

Black political knowledge is the range of factual information about Black racial group’s role in and relationship with the American political system that is stored in one’s memory. The Black political knowledge battery is a 14-item measurement of said concept with questions about the historical, policy, and partisanship aspects of the racial group’s political behavior. The results of the pilot study also provided preliminary evidence for the weak/null relationship between linked fate and political knowledge in support of the theory’s assertion that linked fate and Black political knowledge are independent phenomena.

The research design chapter details the survey experiment used to examine the relationship between issue salience, message cues, linked fate and Black political knowledge. Through variance of source, issue salience, and tone, 18 article treatments were created; of which each participant read 3, one of high racial salience, one of medium racial salience, and one of low racial salience. The topic of the low racial salience article treatment were issues related to the Diversity Visa Program. The topic of the medium racial salience article treatment were issues related to revisions to toxic emission limits and regulations for chemical plants in residential areas. The topic of the high racial salience article treatment were issues related to police reform. In addition to the experimental factors as independent variables, strength of linked fate and level of

Black political knowledge were also independent variables. Dependent variables were the participant’s importance rankings and attitude towards questions related each issue

194 salience topic. The Black political knowledge battery was also assessed for validity, namely comparing performance on it with the five-question American political knowledge battery famously made by Delli Carpini and Keeter.

The data analysis chapter determined support for as well as rejection of the theoretical framework, albeit aspects of the model. There is no clear-cut answer for the relationship between Black political knowledge, linked fate, issue salience, message cues and Black political attitudes. The varied results between the five factors provided validation in undertaking this research project for the dissertation. Results determined linked fate and Black political knowledge have profound influence on Black responses to group messages regardless of the salience of the issue in the message. However, that influence can be affected by message cues in less racially salient treatments. Likewise, a two-way significant interaction between Black political knowledge and linked fate was discovered, where highly linked and knowledgeable individuals give vastly different responses than highly linked but lowly knowledgeable individuals. This finding supports the theoretical assertion that there is a difference between linked fate and Black political knowledge, such that those who are highly linked but have low knowledge will be more likely to agree with the message described.

Revisiting the Republican party’s brief Black voter recruitment initiative in 2004 that was used to introduce the research questions, the findings from this study suggest that in these few areas where recruitment took place, these Black individuals who did engage with the party did so in response to the cues provided by Black clergymen. These

Black religious leaders provided information, that could be considered the group’s stance

195 or should be the stance, on issues that were not racially salient – namely LGBTQ rights and the War on Terrorism, and those converted individuals did not know enough about the group’s stances on those issues nor did they know enough related knowledge to ignore the Republican party’s invitation. However once more Black clergymen began talking about the 2004 presidential election and encouraging support for the Democratic

Party for multiple reasons, an overwhelming majority of Black people went on to vote for

John Kerry. Support for the Democratic party is far more racially salient than support for the Republican party. Revisiting the disclosure of Clinton’s and Sander’s involvement in the 1994 Crime Bill as the introduction to the Black political knowledge chapter, the findings from this study posit the purpose of the disclosure was to encourage Black people to update their racially salient information they use in considering supporting

Democratic candidates, namely Clinton. However, the disclosure would not affect the activation of linked fate and subsequent responses given to racially salient messages.

Instead the disclosure would be added to a person’s political knowledge of the racial group and would be accessed in response to prompts of less racial salience that Sanders or Clinton are involved in.

There are caveats and limitations to the applicability of the findings of this research. This project had a lot of moving parts - Issue salience, political knowledge, source cues, framing, linked fate, etc. and that is excluding the control characteristics of the participant. To define how each part influences responses to group messages, prior literature was relied upon and nonracial political concepts were applied to racialized political behavior. Because the results are illuminative understanding the relationship

196 between these aforementioned parts, the true relationship between all these factors may not necessarily operate exactly as identified in the findings of this study. It is possible that the hypothesized results are more evident for the first article the participants read and responded it; it is undoubtedly the case the participants’ attention levels dropped as the study progressed. The creation of a new measure for a new concept was also filled with some challenges namely the realization that the battery would not be accessible less educated people. Although White participants were used in the pilot study for the Black political knowledge battery, this study does not assert nor imply that the mainstream battery is a measurement of “White political knowledge”. While there are scholars who assert that the general “American” history is by default White history, this study does not seek to engage in that conversation. Likewise, the Black political knowledge battery should not be used to measure specialized racial knowledge for non-Blacks. It is plausible for other racial groups to have specialized political knowledge for their racial or ethnic group. The process of creating said batteries would require a similar theoretical framework for the conceptualization of said racial group’s political knowledge as well as an identification of the contours of said measurement of it. It is possible that the sub sections of the pilot battery could be used as categories in other groups’ pilot studies.

Finally, as it pertains to topic selection for articles of each level of salience, I would not recommend using the same issues used in this project at the same racial salience. Least racially salient issues today can become highly salient overnight, even if it is just temporary.

197

There are multiple avenues future research can take from the results of this dissertation. One option would be the replication and optimization of this entire study, which I will do. A solo book project based on the pilot study would examine the identification process of Black political knowledge through multiple rounds of questionnaires and discussions with Black people across the country. Another future project would explore the differences in the ranking of political issues for each group by other groups. For example, how Whites ranked issues of importance for Black people and vice versa. For the replication of this project’s survey experiment, I will optimize the design by dropping the tone and non-elite message cues. Trying to ascertain message cues effects on Black political attitudes while trying to understand the relationship between attitudes, linked fate, and political knowledge was too tedious and likely distracting. Likewise, results from the medium salience issue did not provide any support for or against the hypotheses. One can only conclude that either the topic choice was bad or that the medium salience issue treatment was unnecessary for the study as well.

One thing is for certain, our previous understanding of linked fate as this intrinsic political connection to the group as a result of a Black person’s understanding of the racial group’s past present and future treatment and status in this country, has been transformed by the findings of this dissertation. Black political knowledge tempers political attitudes that would be prompted when linked fate is activated in the message.

The racial group’s political future will be limitless once everyone realizes the power in this innate specialized knowledge and use it for the greater good.

198

Bibliography

Abrajano, Marisa. 2015. Reexamining the “Racial Gap” in Political Knowledge. Journal of Politics. 77 (1) Arceneaux, Kevin and Robin Kolodny. 2009. Educating the Least Informed: Group Endorsements in a Grassroots Campaign. American Journal of Political Science 53(4). Asuncion, Arelene. 1990. Processing of Persuasive In-Group Messages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 58 (5). Barbaro, Michael. 2012. “In Largely Symbolic Move, NAACP Votes to Endorse Same- Sex Marriage” published in The New York Times 10 May 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/20/us/politics/naacp-endorses-same-sex- marriage.html Accessed 20 March 2014. Barabas, Jason, Jennifer Jerit, William Pollock, and Carlisle Rainey. 2014. The Question(s) of Political Knowledge. American Political Science Review 108(4) Bartels, Larry. 2002. Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions. Political Behavior. 24(2). Bicchieri, Cristina, Richard Jeffery, and Brian Skyrms. 1997. The Dynamics of Norms. New York: University of Cambridge Press. Breslow, Jason. 2014. “76 of 79 Deceased NFL Players Found to Have Brain Disease”. Public Broadcasting Service. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/76-of-79- deceased-nfl-players-found-to-have-brain-disease/ Accessed June 20, 2016. Brown, Rupert and Lynne Wooten-Millward. Perceptions of Group Homogeneity During Group Formation and Change. Social Cognition. 11 (1). Calmes, Jackie. 2012. “Obama Says Same-Sex Marriage Should be Legal”. Published in The New York Times 9 May 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/20/us/politics/obama-says-same-sex-marriage- should-be-legal.html?_r=0 Center for Generational Kinetics. 2016. “Generational Breakdown: Information About All of the Generations” The Center for Generational Kinetics. http://genhq.com/faq-info- about-generations/ Accessed February 25, 2017 Chaiken, Shelly and Durairaj Maheswaran. 1994. Heuristic Processing Can Bias

199

Systematic Processing: Effects of Source Credibility, Argument Ambiguity, and Task Importance on Attitude Judgement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 66(3). Chong, Dennis and Ruel Rogers. 2005. Racial Solidarity and Political Participation. Political Behavior 27 (4):27. Cobb, Michael, and Mark Nance. 2011. The Consequences of Measuring Non-Attitudes about Foreign Trade Preferences. Survey Practice. 4 (6) Cohen, Cathy J. 1999. The Boundaries of Blackness: AIDS and the Breakdown of Black Politics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Cross, William. 1991. Shades of Black: Diversity in the African-American Identity. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Dawson, Michael C. 1994. Behind The Mule: Race and Class in African-American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Dawson, Michael C. 2001. Black Visions: The Roots of Contemporary African-American Political Ideologies. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Delli Carpini, Michael, and Scott Keeter. 1993. Measuring Political Knowledge: Putting First Things First. American Journal of Political Science. 37 (4) Delli Carpini, Michael and Scott Keeter. 1996. What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven: Yale University Press Delli Carpini, Michael. 1999. In Search of the Informed Citizen: What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. Conference Paper Delli Carpini, Michael and Scott Keeter. 2002. The Internet and an Informed Citizenry. The Civic Web: Online Politics and Democratic Values. David Anderson and Michael Cornfield Eds. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. Delli Carpini, Michael. 2005. An Overview of the State of Citizens’ Knowledge about politics. Communicating Politics: Engaging the Public in Democratic Life. Mitchell McKinney, Lynda Kaid, Dianne Bystrom and Diana Carlin Eds. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Domke, David, Taso Lagos, Mark LaPointe, Melissa Meade, and Michael Xenos. 2000. Elite Messages and Source Cues: Moving Beyond Partisanship. Political Communication 17(4) Druckman, James, Donald Green, James Kuklinski, and Arthur Lupia. Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science. New York: Cambridge University Press. Fogarty, Brian and Jennifer Wolak. 2009. The Effects of Media Interpretation for Citizen Evaluations of Politicians’ Messages. American Politics Research 37(1). Friedman, Jeffrey. 2012. Beyond Cues and Political Elites: The Forgotten Zaller. Critical Review. 24 (4)

200

Gillespie, Andra, ed. 2010. Whose Black Politics? Cases in Post-Racial Black Leadership. New York City: Routledge. Gilens, Martin. 2001. Political Ignorance and Collective Policy Preferences. American Political Science Review. 95 (2). Guinote, Ana. 2004. Group Size, Outcome Dependency, and Power. Effects on Perceived and Actual Group Variability. The Psychology of Group Perception: Contributions to the Study of Homogeneity, Entitavity, and Essentialism. Vincent Yzberyt, Charles Judd and Oliver Corneille Eds. Harris-Lacewell, Melissa V. 2004. Barbershops, Bibles, and BET: Everyday Talk and Black Political Thought. New Jersey: Princeton University Press Hoffman, Lindsay. 2012. “Political Knowledge”. Oxford Bibliographies. http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199756841/obo- 9780199756841-0098.xml Accessed December 2, 2016. Hovland, Carl and Walter Weiss. 1951. The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly Winter Jones, Bryan. 1999. Bounded Rationality. Annual Review of Political Science. 2(1) Kirkpatrick, David D. 2004 “Black Pastors Backing Bush Are Rare, but Not Alone”. New York Times October 5, 2004. https://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/05/politics/campaign/black-pastors-backing- bush-are-rare-but-not-alone.html. Accessed May 25 2018. Kuklinski, James and Norman Hurley. 1994. On Hearing and Interpreting Political Messages: A Cautionary Tale of Citizen Cue-taking. The Journal of Politics 56 (3) Laird, Chryl. 2014. Black Like Me: How Political Communication Changes Racial Group Identification and Its Implications. Dissertation. Lau, Richard and David Redlawsk. 2001. Advantages and Disadvantages of Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Making. American Journal of Political Science. 45 (4) Levy, Jack. 2003. Political Psychology and Foreign Policy. Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology David Sears, Leone Huddy, and Robert Jervis ed Mack, Brianna. 2011. Where Did the Mule Go? Analyzing Linked Fated Trends Within the 40-under Black Population. Working Paper. Mackie, Diane., Arlene Asuncion, and Leila Worth. 1990. Processing of Persuasive In- Group Messages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 58(5) Mackie, Diane, and Crystal Wright. 2001. Social Influence in an Intergroup Context. Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Intergroup Processes. Rupert Brown and Sam Gaertner eds. McClain, Paula D., Jessica Johnson Carew, Eugene Walton Jr., and Candis S. Watts.

201

2009. Group Membership, Group Identity, and Group Consciousness: Evolving Racial Identity In American Politics. Annual Political Science Review 12:14. McCroskey, J. C., and J.J. Teven 1999. Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66 (1) McCrockey J.C. and V.P. Richmond. 1989. Bipolar Scales. Measurement of Communication Behavior. P. Emmert and LL Barker Eds. McDaniel, Eric L. “The Black Church in the 2004 Election” in A Matter of Faith? Religion in the 2004 Election by David E. Campbell (2007). McGraw, Kathleen. 2003. Political Impressions: Formation and Management. Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology David Sears, Leone Huddy, and Robert Jervis ed. McGraw, Kathleen, and Niel Pinney. 1990. The Effects of General and Domain- Specific Expertise on Political Memory and Judgement. Social Cognition. 8 (1). Mutz, Diana 1998. Impersonal Influence: How Perceptions of Mass Collectives Affect Political Attitudes. New York: University of Cambridge Press. Mullen, Brian and Li-tze Hu. 1989. Perceptions of Ingroup and Outgroup Variability: A Meta-Analytic Integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 10 (3) Nelson, Thomas, Zoe Oxley, and Rosalee Clawson. 1997. Toward a Psychology of Framing Effects. Political Behavior. 19 (3). New York Times. 2016. Transcript of the Democratic Presidential Debate in Flint, Mich. New York Times. March 7, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/07/us/politics/transcript-democratic- presidential-debate.html?_r=0 Accessed February 20, 2017. Nicholson, Stephen. 2011. Dominating Cues and the Limits of Elite Influence. Journal of Politics. 73(4) Niemonen, Jack. 2002. Race, Class, and the State in Contemporary Sociology: The William Julius Wilson Debates. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers. Nunnally, Shayla C. 2010. Learning Race, Socializing Blackness: A Cross-Generational Analysis of Black Americans’ Racial Socialization Experiences. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race 7 (1):32. Ostfeld, Mara and Diana Mutz. 2014. Revisiting the Effects of Case Reports in the News. Political Communication 31(1) Petty, Richard and John Cacioppo. 1986. The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 19 Pew Research Center. 2004. Transcript of the Pushing the Envelope? The Political Activities of Religious Organizations in Campaign 2004. September 28, 2004. http://www.pewforum.org/2004/09/28/pushing-the-envelope-the-political- activities-of-religious-organizations-in-campaign-2004/ . Accessed July 20, 2018.

202

Pew Research Center. 2014. “Gay Marriage: Key Data Points from Pew Research” http://www.pewresearch.org/key-data-points/gay-marriage-key-data-points-from- pew-research/ Accessed May 13 2016 Popkin, Samuel. 1991. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pornpitakpan, Chanthika. 2004. The persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades’ Evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 34 (2). Quantcast. 2017. “Oprah.com Traffic Card” Quantcast. https://www.quantcast.com/oprah.com#trafficCard Accessed March 19, 2017 Sullum, Jacob. 2015. “Why Hillary Clinton Lacks Credibility on Criminal Justice Reform”. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2015/04/30/why- hillary-clinton-lacks-credibility-on-criminal-justice-reform/#3f9c81872bac Accessed March 14, 2017 Rothschild, David and Niel Malhotra. 2014. Are Public Opinion Polls Self-fulfilling Prophecies? Research and Politics. 10. Sears, David, and Nicholas Valentino. 1997. Politics Matters: Political Events as Catalysts for Preadult Socialization. American Political Science Review. 91 (1) Seltzer, Robert C. Smith and Richard. 1992. Race, Class, and Culture: A Study in Afro- American Mass Opinion. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press. Simon, Bernd, and Thomas Pettigrew. 1990. Social Identity and Perceived Group Homogeneity: Evidence for the Ingroup Homogeneity Effect. European Journal of Social Psychology. 20 Stevenson, Richard W. 2004. New York Times “The 2004 Campaign: The President; Bush Urges Blacks to Reconsider Allegiance to Democratic Party. July 24, 2004. https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/24/us/2004-campaign-president-bush-urges- blacks-reconsider-allegiance-democratic-party.html. June 5, 2018 Taber, Charles S. and Milton Lodge. 2006. Motivated Skepticism in Political Information Processing” American Journal of Political Science 50 (3) Tate, Katherine. 1993. From Protest to Politics: The New Black Voters in American Elections. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Tate, Katherine. 2003. Black Faces In the Mirror: African Americans and Their Representatives in the US Congress. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Tate, Katherine. 2010. What's Going On? Political Incorporation and The Transformation of Black Public Opinion. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Terry, Deborah, Michael Hogg, and Katherine White. 2000. Attitude-Behavior

203

Relations: Social Identity and Group Membership. Attitudes, Behavior, and Social Context: The Role of Norms and Group Membership. Terry, Deborah and Michael Hogg. Ed. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Trafimow, David. 2000. A Theory of Attitudes, Subjective Norms, and Private Versus Collective Self-concepts. Attitudes, Behavior, and Social Context: The Role of Norms and Group Membership. Terry, Deborah and Michael Hogg. Ed. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Thomas, Tony. 2012. “Reaction Pours in over President’s Support of Gay Marriage”. WSB-TV May 10 2012. http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/president-obama- tells-abc-news-he-supports-gay-mar/nNzpW/ Accessed 20 March 2014 Verba, Sidney, Kay Schlozman, Henry Brady, and Nie. 1993. Race, Ethnicity, and Political Resources: Participation in the United States. British Journal of Political Science. 23 (4). Wallsten, Peter, Tom Hamburger, and Nicholas Riccardi. 2005. LA Times “Bush Rewarded by Black Pastors’ Faith”. January 18, 2005. http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jan/18/nation/na-faith18. Accessed May 31, 2018. Walton, Hanes and Robert Smith. 2012. American Politics and the African American Quest for Universal Freedom (6th Ed). New York City: Pearson Education Watkins-Hayes, Celeste. 2001. A tale of two classes: Socio-economic inequality among African-Americans under 35. In The State of “Black America” 2001, edited by L. A. Daniels. New York: Transaction Publishers. White, Ismail. 2007. When Race Matters and When it Doesn’t: Racial Group Differences in Response to Racial Cues. American Political Science Review. 101 (2) White, Ismail, Chryl Laird, and Troy Allen. 2013. The Politics of Navigating Conflicts Between Racial Group Interest and Self-Interest. Working Paper Under Review Whitehead Jr. Jack. 1968. Factors of Source Credibility. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 54 (1) Wilson, William J. 1980. The Declining Significance of Race: Blacks and Changing American Institutions. 2 ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press

204

Appendix A. Supplemental Materials for Measuring Black Political Knowledge

Table A.1 - Percentage of Mainstream, Black Political Awareness and Pilot Knowledge Questions Answered Correctly by Race Questions Blacks Whites Difference Mainstream Knowledge Identified Joe Biden/Mike Pence as Vice President 97 98.5 -1.5 Identified the Republican Party as the Most 89.7 90.9 -1.2 Conservative Major US Party Identified 2/3 as the Share of Votes Required 71.1 78.8 -7.7 To Override a Presidential Veto Identified the US Supreme Court as the 80.4 74.2 6.2 Governmental Body that Decides if a Law is Constitutional Identified Which Party has the Most Members in 8.2 18.2 -10 the House of Representatives Mean of Mainstream Knowledge Scale (Range 0-1) .69 .72 -.03 Black Political Awareness Identified Lift Every Voice and Sing as 74.2 24.2 50 The Black National Anthem Identified Cornell Brooks as the President of the 46.4 65.2 -18.8 NAACP Identified the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition as the name 65 13.6 13.2 of Jesse Jackson’s Activism Organization Identified Crisis Magazine as the Publication of the 26.8 13.6 51.4 NAACP Identified Spelman College or Bennett College as 63.9 62.1 1.8 Women’s Only HBCUs Identified Tom Joyner as a Radio Show Host 84.5 43.9 40.6 Identified Bob Johnson as Founder of BET 63 56.1 6.9 Identified 40 Acres of Land and a Mule as the 75.3 43.9 31.4 Proposed Restitution for Freed Black Slaves After The Civil War

Continued

205

Table A.1 Continued

Identified the Black Youth Project as the Black 55.7 60.6 -4.9 Youth Empowerment Research Effort Led by Cathy Cohen Identified Condoleezza Rice as the Former US 86.6 50 36.6 Secretary of State Identified Clarence Thomas as a US Supreme 80.4 50 30.4 Court Justice Identified the Democratic Party as the Political Party 91.6 86.4 5.2 Most Blacks Belong To Identified Colin Powell as a Retired Four Star 84.5 69.7 14.8 Army General or Former US Secretary of State Indicated Past or Current Membership in an 86 15.9 70.1 Organization with a Predominately Black Membership Mean of Black Political Awareness Scale (Range 0- .70 .47 .23 1) Pilot Black Political Knowledge Battery History Identified Brown V. Board of Education as the 93.8 93.9 -0.1 Supreme Court Case that Declared Racially Segregated Public Schools Unconstitutional Identified the Emancipation Proclamation as the 93.8 86.4 7.4 name of Lincoln’s Executive Order that Freed Slaves in the South Identified Newly Freed Slaves were Elected to 53.6 34.9 18.7 Public Offices across the South after the Civil War Identified Two Blacks that Have Been Appointed to 54.6 33.3 21.3 The US Supreme Court Identified Bayard Rustin as The Civil Rights Leader 12.4 4.6 7.8 who Organized the Freedom Rides and the March on Washington Identified Poll Taxes, Comprehension Tests, and 83.5 93.9 -10.4 Grandfather Clauses as Practices used to Prevent Blacks from Voting In the South During Jim Crow Identified the One-Drop Rule as The Hypodescent 68 18.2 49.8 Decree That Dictates Any Person with 1 or more Black Ancestors as Black Mean of History Subscale (Range 0-1) .66 .52 .14

Continued

206

Table A.1 Continued

Policy Identified the War on Drugs as the Campaign 84.5 80.3 4.2 against Drugs, Military Aid and Intervention with The Goal of Reducing Illegal Drug Trade and Consumption Identified AFDC as the Public Assistance Program 41.2 33.3 7.9 Changed by The 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act Identified Busing as The Practice of Transporting 66 34.9 31.1 Students from Their Zoned School to another School in Order to Remedy Historical Racial Segregation in a Given Area Identified Redlining as the Practice of Denying 61.9 43.9 18 Services and Housing to residents in Certain Areas Based on The Racial And Ethnic Composition of Those Areas Identified Fisher v. University of Texas as The Most 54.6 69.7 -15.1 Recent US Supreme Court Case Whose Ruling Addressed Affirmative Action Mean of Policy Subscale (Range 0-1) .61 .52 .09 Partisanship Identified Abraham Lincoln was not A Democrat 86.8 74.8 12 Identified the Democratic Party as the Party Most 92.8 97 -4.2 Blacks Support Identified Barack Obama as the first Black Major- 45.4 77.3 -31.9 Party Nominee to run for President Identified the War on Poverty as the set of 48.4 37.9 10.5 Legislation Introduced by Lyndon B Johnson intended to decrease the National Poverty Rate Identified Shirley Chisolm as the First Woman to 72.1 27.3 44.8 Run for The Democratic Party’s Presidential Nomination Identified the acronym CBC as the Congressional 84.5 60.6 23.9 Black Caucus Mean of Partisanship Subscale (Range 0-1) .72 .63 .09 Black Elite Identification Identified Van Jones as a Political Activist/CNN 59.8 40.9 18.9 Contributor

Continued

207

Table A.1 Continued

Identified Marc Lamont Hill as a Commentator/Host 35.1 31.8 3.6 of HuffPost Live Identified Melissa Harris Perry as a Political Science 34 40.9 -6.9 Professor Identified DeRay McKesson as a #BlackLivesMatter 84.5 83.3 1.2 Activist/Educator Identified Donna Brazile as Interim DNC Chair and 59.8 27.3 32.5 Strategist/Commentator Identified Cory Booker as US Senator from NJ 66 36.4 29.6 Identified Tim Scott as US Senator from SC 81.4 66.7 14.7 Identified Tavis Smiley as PBS Talk Show 73.2 30.3 42.9 Host/Author Identified Carol Swain as Law 35.1 10.6 24.5 Professor/Commentator Identified Lily Workneh as Journalist/Editor of 47.4 50 -2.6 HuffPost- Black Voices Identified Ta-Nehisi Coates as Author/Writer for 53.6 36.4 17.2 Atlantic Magazine Identified Cornel West as Public Intellectual/Social 55.7 39.4 16.3 Activist Identified Michael Eric Dyson as Sociology 58.7 31.8 26.9 Professor/Radio Host Identified Al Sharpton as Minister/MSNBC Talk 86.6 45.5 41.1 Show Host Identified Jesse Jackson as Civil Rights Movement 93.8 54.6 39.2 Activist And Politician Identified Stacy Dash as Actress/Fox News 56.7 39.4 17.3 Contributor Identified Colin Kaepernick as Professional Athlete 92.7 97 -4.3 Identified Maxine Waters as US Representative 90.7 54.6 36.1 from CA Identified John Lewis as US Representative from 79.4 50 29.4 GA Identified Oprah Winfrey as Media Mogul/Actress 90.7 92.4 -1.7 And Philanthropist Identified Hill Harper as Actor/Author 68 25.8 42.2 Identified Amandla Stenberg as Actress/Activist 70.1 83.3 -13.2

Continued

208

Table A.1 Continued

Identified Cathy Hughes as Media 55.6 47 8.6 Mogul/Entrepreneur Mean of Black Elite Identification Subscale (Range .69 .51 .18 0-1) Black Media Identification Identified Majority (highest score of 11) the 6.25 1.54 4.71 Following Sources As Black Media Sources from a List Containing Mainstream Sources, Black Sources, and Fictional Media Sources: The Grio, The Root, Blavity, Madame Noire, Bossip, Atlanta Black Star, BET, Bounce, Aspire, Essence, Ebony, and Black Spectrum Network Mean of Black Media Identification Subscale .37 .35 .22 (Range 0-1)

Table A.2 - Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables for Entire Sample Variable Mean SD Range Age 29.55 17.25 18-87 Black Linked Fate Scale 6.67 2.18 1-10 White Linked Fate Scale 7.07 2.47 1-10 Score on Mainstream Political Knowledge 2.95 1.47 0-5 Battery Score on Black Political Awareness Battery 7.40 4.54 0-15 Score on Pilot Black Political Knowledge 30.10 7.47 0-52 Battery History 3.88 1.54 0-7 Policy 2.53 1.48 0-5 Partisan 3.53 1.71 0-6 Elite ID 11.41 6.14 0-22 Media ID 5.60 2.84 0-12

209

Table A.3 – Correlation Between Black Linked Fate and Scores on the Batteries among White Respondents Black Score on Score on Score on Linked Mainstream Black Political Pilot Battery Fate Battery Awareness Battery Black Linked 1.00 Fate Score on -0.08 1.00 Mainstream Battery Score on Black 0.12 -0.01 1.00 Political Awareness Score on Pilot -0.05 0.18 0.25 1.00 Battery

Table A.4– Correlations between Strength of Black Linked Fate and Scores on the Knowledge Batteries Black Score on Score on Black Score on Linked Fate Mainstream Political Pilot Battery Scale Battery Awareness Battery Black Linked 1.00 Fate Scale Score on 0.03* 1.00 Mainstream Battery Score on 0.08* 0.10* 1.00 Black Political Awareness Battery Score on Pilot 0.23* 0.16 0.66 1.00 Battery

210

Table A.5 – Correlations Between Strength of Black Linked Fate and Scores on the Knowledge Batteries among Black Respondents Black Score on Score on Black Score on Linked Mainstream Political Pilot Battery Fate Scale Battery Awareness Battery Black Linked Fate 1.00 Scale Score Mainstream 0.03 1.00 Battery Score on Black 0.08 0.09 1.00 Political Awareness Battery Score on Pilot 0.23 0.24 0.66* 1.00 Battery

211

Table A.6 - Cronbach’s Alpha Analyses for Black Elite Identification Subsection Item N Sign Item-Test Item-Rest Average Alpha if Correlation Correlation Interitem Deleted Covariance Question 21 97 + .492 .397 .026 .776 Question 22 97 + .433 .335 .027 .780 Question 23 97 + .395 .295 .027 .782 Question 24 97 + .414 .340 .028 .780 Question 25 97 + .536 .446 .028 .773 Question 26 97 + .531 .444 .026 .774 Question 27 97 + .530 .460 .026 .774 Question 28 97 + .372 .277 .027 .783 Question 29 97 + .468 .374 .027 .778 Question 30 97 + .467 .371 .027 .778 Question 31 97 + .623 .543 .028 .767 Question 32 97 + .312 .201 .027 .789 Question 33 97 + .288 .177 .028 .790 Question 34 97 + .245 .168 .029 .788 Question 35 97 + .371 .264 .029 .785 Question 36 97 + .448 .397 .027 .780 Question 37 97 + .361 .266 .028 .784 Question 38 97 + .401 .397 .028 .781 Question 39 97 + .238 .266 .027 .787 Question 40 97 + .397 .342 .027 .781 Question 41 97 + .330 .184 .028 .786 Question 42 97 + .528 .313 .026 .774 Question 43 97 + .488 .229 .026 .777 Test Scale .027 .788

212

Table A.7– Descriptive Statistics for Proposed Subsections of Pilot Battery (after Cronbach Alpha and using Black subsample) Variable Mean SD Range Score on Pilot Black Political Knowledge Battery 10.26 2.19 5-15 History Section 3.92 1.02 1*-6 Scale .68 .15 0-1 Policy Section 2.54 1.18 0-4 Scale .63 .30 0-1 Partisan Section 3.81 .92 1*-5 Scale .76 .18 0-1 * indicates the lowest score recorded in subsample is higher than lowest possible score of 0.

Table A.8 – Multivariate Regression of Pilot Knowledge Scale With Linked Fate Scale Variables Variable Coefficient Standard Error P-Value Real World -1.62 2.12 .45 Generation X .198 2.35 .93 Baby Boomer -1.88 2.62 .48 Silent -4.99 2.41 .04* Black 2.74 1.76 .12 White -2.85 1.52 .07* Black Linked Fate .181 .28 .53 Scale White Linked Fate .175 .258 .5 Scale Male .470 .963 .63 Vote Score .552 .481 .25 Political -.055 .183 .76 Engagement Score Score on 1.39 .568 .02* Mainstream Battery Score on Black .983 .203 .00* Political Awareness Battery Education .132 .507 .79 Income -.306 .311 .33

Constant 14.4 4.20 .00* N = 131 R-squared = .61 * means significance at p-value less than .1

213

Pilot Study Questionnaire

OSU researchers seek to understand the amount of knowledge you have about American politics and history and the type of social and political attitudes that we all hold as individuals. We will ask you a number of questions that relate to politics and a number that do not. The purpose of this questionnaire is to create a new political knowledge battery for future research projects. At each point in the survey, please answer as truthfully as possible and to the best of your knowledge. Please read the questions carefully and take as much time as you need. You can skip any questions that you do not want to answer. If you do not know the answer to the question guess the answer or skip the question. Do not use or refer to outside sources for the correct answer. The survey is expected to take 15-20 minutes. Indicate your answer by circling the choice, filling in the bubble, or underlining the answer choice. Before moving on, please read the statement below. It contains important information about your rights. By proceeding with this study you acknowledge that you understand the following: • Your participation is voluntary. You may discontinue the study at any time. If you decide to stop participating in the study, there will be no penalty to you, and you will not lose any benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. • Risks and Benefits. There are no direct benefits to your participation today. Some of the material may concern controversial issues. If this makes you uncomfortable, you may stop participating without penalty. • Confidentiality. Every effort will be made to keep your study‐related information confidential. However, there may be circumstances where this information must be released. For example, personal information regarding your participation in this study may be disclosed if required by state law. Also, your records may be reviewed by the following groups (as applicable to the research): o Office for Human Research Protections or other federal, state, or international regulatory agencies; o The Ohio State University Institutional Review Board or Office of Responsible Research Practices; o The sponsor, if any, or agency (including the Food and Drug Administration for FDA‐regulated research) supporting the study. o Although every effort to protect confidentiality will be made, no guarantee of internet security can be given as, although unlikely, transmissions can be intercepted and IP addresses can be identified. • Participant Rights. You may refuse to participate in this study without penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. If you choose to participate in the study, you may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits. This study has been determined Exempt from IRB Review. For questions and concerns about the purpose of this pilot study and/or future research projects based on this study, you may contact Brianna Mack via email at [email protected]. For questions about your rights as a participant in this study or to discuss other study-related concerns or

214 complaints with someone who is not part of the research team, you may contact Ms. Sandra Meadows in the Office of Responsible Research Practices at 1-800-678-6251

215

Q2 Which Supreme Court case’s ruling declared that segregated public schools are unconstitutional?  Plessy v. Ferguson (1)  Brown v. Board of Education (2)  Dred Scott v. Sanford (3)  Smith v. Allwright (4)

Q3 Which executive order did Abraham Lincoln write which freed slaves in the South?  Emancipation Proclamation (1)  Missouri Compromise (2)  Declaration of Independence (3)  Articles of Confederation (4)

Q4 True/False – Towards the end of the 19th century, newly freed slaves campaigned for public office and were elected to state offices across the South  True (1)  False (2)

Q5 How many Black people have been appointed to the US Supreme Court?  1 (1)  2 (2)  3 (3)  4 (4)

Q6 Which Civil Rights Leader organized the Freedom Rides and the 1963 March on Washington?  John Lewis (1)  A. Philip Randolph (2)  Bayard Rustin (3)  Martin Luther King Jr. (4)

216

Q7 Which practices were used to prevent Blacks from voting in the South from 1890- 1965  Poll Taxes (1)  Literacy Tests (2)  Grandfather Clauses (3)  All of the above (4)

Q8 What is the name of the hypodescent decree that declares any person with 1 or more Black ancestors to be considered Black as well?  One Drop Rule (1)  Grandfather Clause (2)  African Descent Rule (3)  Anti-Miscegenation Clause (4)

Q9 What is the name of the federal campaign of prohibiting recreational drugs, military aid and military intervention with the goal of reducing illegal drug trade and consumption in America?  Law and Order (1)  Drug Abuse Resistance Education (2)  War on Drugs (3)  No Addict Left Behind (4)

Q10 The 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act changed the name, organizational guidelines and eligibility requirements of which public assistance program?  Food Stamps Program (1)  Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) (2)  Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) (3)  Housing Choice Voucher Program (Section 8) (4)

217

Q11 Which term describes the practice of transporting students from their local/zoned school to a different school in order to remedy historical racial segregation of schools in a given district?  Affirmative Action (1)  Chartering (2)  Busing (3)  Student Lottery (4)

Q12 What is the name of the most recent US Supreme Court Case whose ruling addressed Affirmative Action?  Gratz v. Bollinger (1)  Hopwood v. Texas (2)  Fisher v. University of Texas (3)  Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard University (4)

Q13 What is the name of the practice of denying services and housing to potential residents in certain areas based on the racial and ethnic composition of those areas?  Covenant Practice (1)  Redtaping (2)  White Flight (3)  Redlining (4)

Q14 True/False - Abraham Lincoln was a Democrat.  True (1)  False (2)

Q15 Today, most Blacks support one political party. Which political party is that?  Republican Party (1)  Green Party (2)  Democratic Party (3)

218

Q16 Who is the first Black major-party nominated candidate to run for President?  Jesse Jackson (1)  Shirley Chisolm (2)  Barack Obama (3)  Al Sharpton (4)

Q17 What is the name given to the set of legislation introduced by Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson that intended to decrease the national poverty rate?  Great Society (1)  War on Poverty (2)  New Deal (3)  Law and Order (4)

Q18 Who is the first woman to ever campaign for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination?  Margaret Smith (1)  Cynthia McKinney (2)  Shirley Chisolm (3)  Carly Fiorina (4)

Q19 The acronym CBC is the abbreviated name of which minority political interest group?  Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (1)  Congressional Black Caucus (2)  Caucus of Black Congressmen (3)  China Business Council (4)

219

Q20 In the next section, you will see the photos and names of famous Black individuals. Match the picture and name of the person below with their correct occupation/title among the list of titles/occupations. Example:

Barack Obama

 Former President of the United States (1)  Vice President of the United States (2)  Mayor of Chicago (3)  Football Analyst (4)

220

Q21 Match the picture and name of the person below with their correct occupation/title among the list of titles/occupations.

Van Jones

 Commentator/Host of HuffPost Live (1)  Political Analyst/CNN Contributor (2)  Political Science Professor (3)  #BlackLivesMatter Activist/Educator (4)

221

Q22

Marc Lamont Hill

 Political Analyst/CNN Contributor (1)  Commenator/Host of HuffPost Live (2)  Political Science Professor (3)  #BlackLivesMatter Activist/Educator (4)

Q23

Melissa Harris Perry

 #BlackLivesMatter Activist/ Educator (1)  Political Science Professor (2)  Commentator/Host of HuffPost Live (3)  Political Analyst/ CNN Contributor (4)

222

Q24

DeRay Mckesson

 Political Science Professor (1)  DNC Chair and Strategist/ Commentator (2)  #BlackLivesMatter Activist and Educator (3)  Commentator/Host of HuffPost Live (4)

223

Q25

Donna Brazile

 US Senator - New Jersey (1)  Political Science Professor (2)  Interim DNC Chair and Strategist/Commmentator (3)  PBS Talk Show Host/Author (4)

224

Q26

Cory Booker

 DNC Chair and Strategist/Commentator (1)  US Senator - New Jersey (2)  PBS Talk Show Host (3)  Law Professor/ Commentator (4)

225

Q27 Match the picture and name of the person below with their correct occupation/title among the list of titles/occupations.

Tim Scott

 US Senator - South Carolina (1)  PBS Talk Show Host/Author (2)  Law Professor/Commentator (3)  Public Intellectual/Social Activist (4)

226

Q28

Tavis Smiley

 Law Professor/Commentator (1)  US Senator - South Carolina (2)  PBS Talk Show Host/Author (3)  Football Coach (4)

Q29

Carol Swain

 PBS Talk Show Host/ Author (1)  Law Professor/Commentator (2)  Journalist/Editor of HuffPost Black Voices (3)  Sociology Professor/Radio Host (4)

227

Q30

Lily Workneh

 Law Professor/Commentator (1)  Author/Writer for Atlantic Magazine (2)  Journalist/Editor of HuffPost Black Voices (3)  Sociology Professor/Radio Host (4)

Q31

Ta-Nehisi Coates

 Sociology Professor/Radio Host (1)  Professional Dancer (2)  Author/Writer for Atlantic Magazine (3)  Journalist/Editor of HuffPost Black Faces (4)

228

Q32

Cornel West

 Sociology Professor/Radio Host (1)  Author/Writer for Atlantic Magazine (2)  MSNBC Talk Show Host (3)  Public Intellectual/Social Activist (4)

229

Q33 Match the picture and name of the person below with their correct occupation/title among the list of titles/occupations.

Michael Eric Dyson

 Minister/MSNBC Talk Show Host (1)  Sociology Professor/Radio Host (2)  US Representative - California (3)  Actor/Author (4)

230

Q34

Al Sharpton

 Minister/MSNBC Talk Show Host (1)  US Representative - Georgia (2)  PBS Talk Show Host/ Author (3)  Jazz Musician (4)

231

Q35

Stacey Dash

 Professional Athlete (1)  Actress/Activist (2)  Actress/Fox News Contributor (3)  US Representative - California (4)

232

Q36

Colin Kaepernick

 Actor/Author (1)  Professional Athlete (2)  US Representative - California (3)  Author/Writer for Atlantic Magazine (4)

233

Q37

Maxine Waters

 Media Mogul/Actress/Philanthropist (1)  US Representative - California (2)  Actress/Activist (3)  US Surgeon General (4)

234

Q38

Oprah Winfrey

 Jazz Musician (1)  Law Professor/Commentator (2)  Media Mogul/Actress/Philanthropist (3)  Entrepreneur (4)

235

Q39 Match the picture and name of the person below with their correct occupation/title among the list of titles/occupations.

Jesse Jackson

 MSNBC Talk Show Host (1)  Civil Rights Movement Activist/ Politician (2)  National President of the NAACP (3)  Actor/Author (4)

236

Q40

John Lewis

 US Ambassador to Belize (1)  Media Mogul/Philantropist (2)  US Representative - Georgia (3)  PBS Talk Show Host/ Author (4)

237

Q41

Amandla Stenberg

 Actress/Activist (1)  Entrepreneur (2)  Author/Writer for Atlantic Magazine (3)  Educator (4)

Q42

Hill Harper

 BET Talk Show Host (1)

238

 #BlackLivesMatter Activist (2)  Actor/Author (3)  Media Mogul/Entrepreneur (4)

Q43

Cathy Hughes

 Media Mogul/Entrepreneur (1)  Actress/Activist (2)  US Ambassador to Belize (3)  Law Professor/ Commentator (4)

Q44 The list below contains the names of real AND fictional media sources. The names of 12 real Black media sources are included in this list. (Note - Black media is news, entertainment, education, data, and promotional messages targeted towards Black people

239 online, radio, print, or television). Select the names of 12 media sources you recognize as real Black media sources.  The Grio (1)  The Root (2)  Blavity (3)  Madame Noire (4)  Bossip (5)  SipNTea (6)  Vixxen (7)  Mother Jenkins (8)  Atlanta Black Star (9)  BET (10)  Bounce (11)  Aspire (12)  Essence (13)  Ebony (14)  O Magazine (15)  Toki Doki (16)  Tha Docket (17)  Black Spectrum Network (18)  United Village (19)  Hallowed Habesha (20)  Buzzfeed (21)  Daily Mail (22)

240

Q45 Select the activities you have done in the past 6 months  Watch Broadcast News (ABC, CBS, NBC, etc) (1)  Watch Cable News(CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, etc) (2)  Read a Newspaper (3)  Read a News Article Online (4)  Read a Political Blog (5)  Created and/or Posted a Political Blog (6)  Started a Petition (7)  Signed a Petition (8)  Donated to a Political Campaign (9)  Contacted an Elected Official (10)  Wore Political Items - bumper sticker, t-shirt, button, etc (11)  Talked to a Family Member about Politics (12)  Talked to a Friend about Politics (13)  Talked to a Stranger about Politics (14)  Shared Political News and/or Statements on Social Media (15)  Discussed Politics with Another User on Social Media (16)

241

Q46 Are You Registered to Vote?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q47 Did you vote in the 2008 election?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q48 Did you vote in the 2010 midterm election?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q49 Did you vote in the 2012 election?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q50 Did you vote in the 2014 midterm election?  Yes (1)  No (2)

242

Q51 Do you happen to know what job or political office is now held by Mike Pence?  Vice President (1)  Speaker of the House of Representatives (2)  Attorney General (3)  Governor of New Jersey (4)

Q52 Whose responsibility is it to determine if a law is constitutional or not?  The President (1)  Congress (2)  The Supreme Court (3)  The General Public (4)

Q53 How much of a majority is required for the US Senate and House to override a presidential veto?  2/3 of Congress (1)  3/4 of Congress (2)  1/2 of Congress (3)  All of Congress (4)

Q54 Which party currently has the most members in the House of Representatives in Washington DC?  Republicans (1)  Democrats (2)  Independents (3)

Q55 Which political party is more conservative?  Independents (1)  Republicans (2)  Democrats (3)

Q56 Do you think that what happens generally to Black people in this country will have something to do with what happens in your life?  Yes (1)  No (2)

243

Q57 If yes, to what extent will it have an effect on your life? On a scale of 1-10 indicate how much of an effect it will have: 1 indicates very little and 10 indicates a large effect ______Pick a number to indicate the extent to which it will effect your life

Q86 Do you think what happens generally to White people in this country will have something to do with what happens in your life?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q87 If yes, to what extent will it have an effect on your life? On a scale of 1-10 indicate how much of an effect it will have: 1 indicates very little and 10 indicates a large effect

______Pick a number to indicate the extent to which it will effect your life

Q58 What is your race?  Caucasian/White (1)  African American/Black (2)  Hispanic/Latino (3)  Native American (4)  Asian or Pacific Islander (5)  Other (6)

Q59 If you identified yourself as a Black or African American person, Do you consider yourself to be of African descent, Hispanic or Latino descent, Caribbean/West Indian descent or of biracial/ multiracial descent?  African American/Black (1)  Hispanic/Latino (2)  Caribbean/West Indian (3)  African (4)  Biracial/Multiracial (5)

Q60 Enter your age in years.

______

244

Q61 What is your sex?  Male (1)  Female (2)

Q62 What is the highest level of education you have completed?  None (1)  Middle School/ 8th Grade (2)  Some High School (3)  High School Graduate/GED (4)  Some College (5)  Associate's Degree (6)  Bachelor's Degree (7)  Advanced Degree (Masters/PhD/JD/MD/etc.) (8)

Q63 What is your relationship status?  Single (1)  In a Relationship/ Dating (2)  Married (3)  Widowed/Divorce (4)

Q64 Which US region do you live in?  Northeast (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Jersey, New York, or Pennsylvania) (1)  Midwest (Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, or South Dakota) (2)  South (Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, or Texas) (3)  West (Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Montana, Utah, Nevada, Wyoming, Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, or Washington) (4)  Other (Puerto Rico, Guam, Samoa, or US Virgin Islands) (5)

245

Q65 Generally Speaking, do you think of yourself as a Republican, Democrat, Independent, or what?  Strong Democrat (1)  Democrat (2)  Democrat-Leaning Independent (3)  Independent (4)  Republican-Leaning Independent (5)  Republican (6)  Strong Republican (7)

Q66 What is your annual household income?  Less than $19,999 (1)  $20,000 - $29,999 (2)  $30,000 - $39,999 (3)  $40,000 - $49,999 (4)  $50,000 - $59,999 (5)  $60,000 - $69,999 (6)  $70,000 - $79,999 (7)  $80,000 - $89,999 (8)  $90,000 - $99,999 (9)  More than $100,000 (10)

Q67 When it comes to politics, do you usually think of yourself as a Liberal, Conservative, Moderate, or what?  Extremely Liberal (1)  Liberal (2)  Slightly Liberal (3)  Moderate/Middle of the Road (4)  Slightly Conservative (5)  Conservative (6)  Extremely Conservative (7)

246

Q68 What is the title of the Black National Anthem?  We Shall Overcome (1)  Lift Every Voice and Sing (2)  Alright (3)  Fire Next Time (4)

Q69 Do you happen to know what position Cornell Brooks holds?  National President of the NAACP (1)  National President of the Urban League (2)  Chief Aide of President Obama (3)  Creator of the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag and movement (4)

Q70 What is the name of Jesse Jackson's organization?  SNCC (1)  CORE (2)  Future Movement (3)  Rainbow/PUSH Coalition (4)

Q71 Do you happen to know the name of the NAACP's publication?  Crisis Magazine (1)  Black Star (2)  NAACP Monthly (3)  JET Magazine (4)

Q72 Do you happen to know the name of one of the women's only HBCUs (historically black colleges/universities)?  Spelman College (1)  Mary Baldwin College (2)  Bennett College (3)  Agnes Scott College (4)

247

Q73 Do you happen to know what position Tom Joyner holds?  TV Show Host (1)  Radio Show Host (2)  Podcast Host (3)  Vlogger (4)

Q74 Do you happen to know what accomplishment Robert "Bob" Johnson is known for?  Creator of Soul Train (1)  Founder of Aspire (2)  Founder of BET (3)  Creator of Black Twitter (4)

Q75 Do you happen to know what was the proposed restitution for the newly freed Black slaves after the Civil War?  Free Primary School Education (1)  $100 (2)  Emigration to Haiti or Liberia (3)  40 Acres of Land and a Mule (4)

Q76 Do you happen to know what is the Black Youth Project?  Black Youth Empowerment Research Effort Led by Cathy Cohen (1)  Black Youth Music Collective (2)  Black Protest Movement (3)  Online Blog targeted to Black Adolescents (4)

Q77 Do you happen to know who is Condoleezza Rice?  Olympic Athlete (1)  Former US Secretary of State (2)  Former US Senator (3)  Former Mayor of Atlanta (4)

248

Q78 Do you happen to know what is Clarence Thomas's occupation?  US Supreme Court Justice (1)  US Appellate Court Justice (2)  US Attorney General (3)  US Solicitor General (4)

Q79 Which political party is the party most Blacks belong to?  Democratic Party (1)  Evenly Split Between Both Major Parties (2)  Republican Party (3)

Q80 Do you happen to know who is Colin Powell?  Former Mayor of Washington DC (1)  Retired Four Star Army General (2)  Accomplished Photographer (3)  Former US Secretary of State (4)

Q81 Have you ever been and/or are you currently a member of an organization that has a predominately Black membership such as a church, college/university, or social/professional organization?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q82 Read each item and indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with the statement using the scale below.

249

Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Disagree Disagree Agree Agree I prefer complex problems to simple problems       I like to have the responsibility of handling a situation that        requires a lot of thinking I would rather do something that requires little thought than something that is sure to challenge my thinking        abilities I enjoy strongly liking and disliking new things        I prefer to remain neutral about complex issues        I have many more opinions than the average person       

250

Appendix B. Supplemental Materials for Research Design

Low Salience Articles

251

Figure B.1- Elite / Negative

252

Figure B.2 Elite / Positive

253

Figure B.3 - Poll / Negative

254

Figure B.4 - Poll / Positive

255

Figure B.5 - Non-Elite / Negative

256

Figure B.6 - Non-Elite / Positive

257

Medium Salience Articles

Figure B.7 - Elite / Negative

258

Figure B.8 - Elite / Positive

259

Figure B.9 - Poll / Negative

260

Figure B.10 - Poll / Positive

261

Figure B.11 - Non-Elite / Negative

262

Figure B.12 - Non-Elite / Positive

263

High Salience Articles

Figure B.13 - Elite / Positive

264

Figure B.14 - Elite / Negative

265

Figure B.15 - Poll / Positive

266

Figure B.16 - Poll / Negative

267

Figure B.17 - Non-Elite / Positive

268

Figure B.18 - Non-Elite / Negative

269

Survey Experiment Wording

Group 1

Start of Block: Default Question Block

Q61 Ohio State University researchers seek to understand the amount of knowledge you have about American politics and history and the type of social and political attitudes that we all hold as individuals. We will ask you a number of questions that relate to politics and a number that do not. At each point in the survey, please answer as truthfully as possible and to the best of your knowledge. Please read the questions carefully and take as much time as you need. You can skip any questions that you do not want to answer. When you have finished, you will see a completion page. The survey is expected to take 15-20 minutes. If you choose to stop the survey, your responses will not be counted. Before moving on, please read the statement below. It contains important information about your rights. By proceeding with this study you acknowledge that you understand the following: Your participation is voluntary. You may discontinue the study at any time. If you decide to stop participating in the study, there will be no penalty to you, and you will not lose any benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. Risks and Benefits. There are no direct benefits to your participation today. Some of the material may concern controversial issues. If this makes you uncomfortable, you may stop participating without penalty. Confidentiality. Every effort will be made to keep your study‐ related information confidential. However, there may be circumstances where this information must be released. For example, personal information regarding your participation in this study may be disclosed if required by state law. Also, your records may be reviewed by the following groups (as applicable to the research): Office for Human Research Protections or other federal, state, or international regulatory agencies; The Ohio State University Institutional Review Board or Office of Responsible Research Practices; The sponsor, if any, or agency (including the Food and Drug Administration for FDA‐ regulated research) supporting the study. Although every effort to protect confidentiality will be made, no guarantee of internet security can be given as, although unlikely, transmissions can be intercepted and IP addresses can be identified. For questions and concerns about the purpose of this study and/or future research projects based on this study, or if you feel harmed by study participation, you may contact Brianna Mack via email at [email protected]. For questions about your rights as a participant in this study (IRB #2018B0031) or to discuss other study-related concerns or complaints about the study with someone who is not part of the research

270 team, you may contact Ms. Sandra Meadows in the Office of Responsible Research Practices at 1-800-678-6251 or [email protected]  Continue (1)  No Thanks (2)

Page Break

271

Q63 Are You Registered to Vote?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q65 Did you vote in the 2008 election?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q67 Did you vote in the 2010 midterm election?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q69 Did you vote in the 2012 election?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q71 Did you vote in the 2014 midterm election?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q73 Did you vote in the 2016 election?  Yes (1)  No (3)

272

Q75 What is your race?  Caucasian/White (1)  African American/Black (2)  Hispanic/Latino (3)  Native American (4)  Asian or Pacific Islander (5)  Other (6)

Q77 You identified yourself as a Black or African American person. Do you consider yourself to be of African descent, Hispanic or Latino descent, Caribbean/West Indian descent or of biracial/ multiracial descent?  African American/Black (1)  Hispanic/Latino (2)  Caribbean/West Indian (3)  African (4)  Biracial/Multiracial (5)

Page Break

273

End of Block: Default Question Block

Start of Block: Policy

Q53 The 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act changed the name, organizational guidelines and eligibility requirements of which public assistance program?  Food Stamps Program (1)  Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) (2)  Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) (3)  Housing Choice Voucher Program (Section 8) (4)

Q55 Which term describes the practice of transporting students from their local/zoned school to a different school in order to remedy historical racial segregation of schools in a given district?  Affirmative Action (1)  Chartering (2)  Busing (3)  Student Lottery (4)

274

Q57 Select the activities you have done in the past 6 months  Watch Broadcast News (ABC, CBS, NBC, etc) (1)  Watch Cable News(CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, etc) (2)  Read a Newspaper (3)  Read a News Article Online (4)  Read a Political Blog (5)  Created and/or Posted a Political Blog (6)  Started a Petition (7)  Signed a Petition (8)  Donated to a Political Campaign (9)  Contacted an Elected Official (10)  Wore Political Items - bumper sticker, t-shirt, button, etc (11)  Talked to a Family Member about Politics (12)  Talked to a Friend about Politics (13)  Talked to a Stranger about Politics (14)  Shared Political News and/or Statements on Social Media (15)  Discussed Politics with Another User on Social Media (16)

Q59 What is the name of the practice of denying services and housing to potential residents in certain areas based on the racial and ethnic composition of those areas?  Covenant Practice (1)  Redtaping (2)  White Flight (3)  Redlining (4)

Page Break

275

End of Block: Policy

Start of Block: 3

Q79 Please spend the next few minutes reading the following article. You will answer questions based on the article

Page Break

276

Q81 Timing First Click (1) Last Click (2) Page Submit (3) Click Count (4)

277

Q83

Page Break

278

Q85 How important is resolving the issue of the Diversity Visa Program for foreign policy and public safety in the US?  Not at all important (45)  Slightly important (46)  Moderately important (47)  Very important (48)  Extremely important (49)

Q87 Do you support or oppose ending the Diversity Visa Program?  Strongly Oppose (1)  Somewhat Oppose (6)  Neutral (2)  Somewhat Support (3)  Strongly Support (4)

Q89 How important is resolving the issue of the No Fly Lists for foreign policy and public safety in the US?  Not at all important (45)  Slightly important (46)  Moderately important (47)  Very important (48)  Extremely important (49)

279

Q91 Do you support or oppose the use of No Fly Lists?  Strongly Oppose (1)  Somewhat Oppose (2)  Neutral (3)  Somewhat Support (4)  Strongly Support (5)

Q93 Which organization conducted the study discussed in the article?  Bayard Rustin Center (1)  Gallup (2)  Pew Research Center (3)  Rainbow/PUSH Coalition (4)

Q95 Now we'd like you to indicate your opinion of the article you just read. The article was: 1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5)

Believable (1)     

Biased (2)     

Interesting (3)      Difficult to Read (4)      Relevant to My Life (5)     

Credible (6)     

Page Break

280

End of Block: 3

Start of Block: LF and History

Q33 Do you think that what happens generally to Black people in this country will have something to do with what happens in your life?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q35 To what extent will it have an effect on your life? Use the slider below to indicate how much of an effect it will have: 1 indicates very little and 10 indicates a large effect 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Select the extent to which it will effect your life (1)

Q37 Do you think what happens generally to White people in this country will have something to do with what happens in your life?  Yes (1)  No (2)

Q39 To what extent will it have an effect on your life? Use the slider to indicate how much of an effect it will have: 1 indicates very little and 10 indicates a large effect. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Select the extent to which it will effect your life (1)

281

Q41 Which Supreme Court case’s ruling declared that segregated public schools are unconstitutional?  Plessy v. Ferguson (1)  Brown v. Board of Education (2)  Dred Scott v. Sanford (3)  Smith v. Allwright (4)

Q43 Which executive order did Abraham Lincoln write which freed slaves in the South?  Emancipation Proclamation (1)  Missouri Compromise (2)  Declaration of Independence (3)  Articles of Confederation (4)

Q45 True/False – Towards the end of the 19th century, newly freed slaves campaigned for public office and were elected to state offices across the South  True (1)  False (2)

Q47 How many Black people have been appointed to the US Supreme Court?  1 (1)  2 (2)  3 (3)  4 (4)

282

Q49 Which Civil Rights Leader organized the Freedom Rides and the 1963 March on Washington?  John Lewis (1)  A. Philip Randolph (2)  Bayard Rustin (3)  Martin Luther King Jr. (4)

Q51 Which practices were used to prevent Blacks from voting in the South from 1890- 1965  Poll Taxes (1)  Literacy Tests (2)  Grandfather Clauses (3)  All of the above (4)

Page Break

283

End of Block: LF and History

Start of Block: 12

Q101 Please spend the next few minutes reading the following article. You will answer questions based on the article

Q103 Timing First Click (1) Last Click (2) Page Submit (3) Click Count (4)

284

Q105

Page Break

285

Q107 How important is resolving the issue of toxic air and water emissions in the US?  Not at all important (45)  Slightly important (46)  Moderately important (47)  Very important (48)  Extremely important (49)

Q109 Do you support or oppose limiting toxic air and water emissions?  Strongly Oppose (1)  Somewhat Oppose (2)  Neutral (3)  Somewhat Support (4)  Strongly Support (5)

Q111 How important is resolving the issue of residential regulations on chemical plants and factories?  Not at all important (1)  Slightly important (2)  Moderately important (3)  Very Important (4)  Extremely important (5)

286

Q113 Do you support or oppose residential regulations on chemical plants and factories?  Strongly Oppose (1)  Somewhat Oppose (2)  Neutral (3)  Somewhat Support (4)  Strongly Support (5)

Q117 Now we'd like you to indicate your opinion of the article you just read. The article was: 1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5)

Believable (1)     

Biased (2)     

Interesting (3)      Difficult to Read (4)      Relevant to My Life (5)     

Credible (6)     

Q121 What is DeAndre Huntsworth's occupation?  Mail Man (1)  Plumber (2)  Truck Driver (3)  Educator (4)

Page Break

287

End of Block: 12

Start of Block: Partisan

Q23 True/False - Abraham Lincoln was a Democrat.  True (1)  False (2)

Q25 Today, most Blacks support one political party. Which political party is that?  Republican Party (1)  Green Party (2)  Democratic Party (3)

Q27 Who is the first Black major-party nominated candidate to run for President?  Jesse Jackson (1)  Shirley Chisolm (2)  Barack Obama (3)  Al Sharpton (4)

Q29 Who is the first woman to ever campaign for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination?  Margaret Smith (1)  Cynthia McKinney (2)  Shirley Chisolm (3)  Carly Fiorina (4)

288

Q31 The acronym CBC is the abbreviated name of which minority political interest group?  Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (1)  Congressional Black Caucus (2)  Caucus of Black Congressmen (3)  China Business Council (4)

Page Break

289

End of Block: Partisan

Start of Block: 14

Q123 Please spend the next few minutes reading the following article. You will answer questions based on the article

Page Break

290

Q125 Timing First Click (1) Last Click (2) Page Submit (3) Click Count (4)

291

Q127

Page Break

292

Q129 How important is resolving the issue of effective policing in the US?  Not at all important (45)  Slightly important (46)  Moderately important (47)  Very important (48)  Extremely important (49)

Q131 Do you support or oppose police officers' use of body cameras and dashboard cameras when interacting with the public?  Strongly Oppose (1)  Somewhat Oppose (2)  Neutral (3)  Somewhat Support (4)  Strongly Support (5)

Q133 Do you support or oppose the creation of independent oversight boards for local police departments?  Strongly Oppose (1)  Somewhat Oppose (3)  Neutral (2)  Somewhat Support (4)  Strongly Support (5)

293

Q137 Now we'd like you to indicate your opinion of the article you just read. The article was: 1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5)

Believable (1)     

Biased (2)     

Interesting (3)      Difficult to Read (4)      Relevant to My Life (5)     

Credible (6)     

Q139 Where did Harold Ford Jr. give his opinion?  Panel sponsored by Bipartisan Policy Center (1)  Roundtable Sponsored by the Associated Press (2)  Symposium Sponsored by Working America (3)  Podcast Sponsored by NPR (4)

Page Break

294

End of Block: 14

Start of Block: Demographics

Q3 Enter your age in years.

______

Q5 What is your sex?  Male (1)  Female (2)

Q7 What is the highest level of education you have completed?  None (1)  Middle School/ 8th Grade (2)  Some High School (3)  High School Graduate/GED (4)  Some College (5)  Associate's Degree (6)  Bachelor's Degree (7)  Advanced Degree (Masters/PhD/JD/MD/etc.) (8)

Q9 What is your relationship status?  Single (1)  In a Relationship/ Dating (2)  Married (3)  Widowed/Divorce (4)

295

Q11 Which US region do you live in?  Northeast (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Jersey, New York, or Pennsylvania) (1)  Midwest (Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, or South Dakota) (2)  South (Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, or Texas) (3)  West (Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Montana, Utah, Nevada, Wyoming, Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, or Washington) (4)  Other (Puerto Rico, Guam, Samoa, or US Virgin Islands) (5)

Q13 Generally Speaking, do you think of yourself as a Republican, Democrat, Independent, or what?  Strong Democrat (1)  Democrat (2)  Democrat-Leaning Independent (3)  Independent (4)  Republican-Leaning Independent (5)  Republican (6)  Strong Republican (7)

296

Q15 What is your annual household income?  Less than $19,999 (1)  $20,000 - $29,999 (2)  $30,000 - $39,999 (3)  $40,000 - $49,999 (4)  $50,000 - $59,999 (5)  $60,000 - $69,999 (6)  $70,000 - $79,999 (7)  $80,000 - $89,999 (8)  $90,000 - $99,999 (9)  More than $100,000 (10)

Q17 When it comes to politics, do you usually think of yourself as a Liberal, Conservative, Moderate, or what?  Extremely Liberal (1)  Liberal (2)  Slightly Liberal (3)  Moderate/Middle of the Road (4)  Slightly Conservative (5)  Conservative (6)  Extremely Conservative (7)

Page Break

297

Q74 Do you happen to know what job or political office is now held by Mike Pence?  Vice President (1)  Speaker of the House of Representatives (2)  Attorney General (3)  Governor of New Jersey (4)

Q76 Whose responsibility is it to determine if a law is constitutional or not?  The President (1)  Congress (2)  The Supreme Court (3)  The General Public (4)

Q78 How much of a majority is required for the US Senate and House to override a presidential veto?  2/3 of Congress (1)  3/4 of Congress (2)  1/2 of Congress (3)  All of Congress (4)

Q80 Which party currently has the most members in the House of Representatives in Washington DC?  Republicans (1)  Democrats (2)  Independents (3)

298

Q82 Which political party is more conservative?  Independents (1)  Republicans (2)  Democrats (3)

Page Break

299

Q19 Many people struggle to remember facts, even when they know them, and so they get help remembering. When you were answering the factual knowledge questions, did you get help from any other source, such as the internet or another person? (Please be honest, this is for statistical purposes only.)  Yes (1)  No (2)

Page Break

300

Q21 Thank you for participating in this survey. This survey is an experiment for a study titled “Roles of Linked Fate and Political Knowledge in Shaping Black Responses to Group Messages". The purpose of the study is to examine the ways in with politicized racial identities, political knowledge, and message cues influence political attitudes. The data from this experiment will be used for scholarly purposes. In order to address the research questions, some deception was used in this study. The Bayard Rustin Center and DePew University are fictitious, as are the information, persons - Darius Greene, Tony Westbrook, and DeAndre Huntsworth, and facts presented in the newspaper articles. We created multiple hypothetical articles to examine how varying the subject matter, messenger, and content of the message would influence attitudes. Efforts will be made to keep all of the information and responses you provided confidential. The identifying information you provided to Qualtrics (such as your name, email address or IP address) are temporarily recorded as part of this experiment. If you decide that you no longer want the information you provided to be part of this study, please contact Brianna Mack (see address below) with your approximate time of completion, age, gender, and region, and they will remove your responses. Please continue in order to ensure that Qualtrics will record your responses. For more information, please contact Brianna N. Mack – Doctoral Candidate at The Ohio State University [email protected]. For questions, concerns, or complaints about the study, or you feel you have been harmed as a result of study participation, you may contact Ms. Mack. For questions about your rights as a participant in this study (IRB #2018B0031) or to discuss other study-related concerns or complaints about the study with someone who is not part of the research team, you may contact Ms. Sandra Meadows in the Office of Responsible Research Practices at 1-800-678-6251 or [email protected].

End of Block: Demographics

301