|
HU Credits:
2
Degree/Cycle:
2nd degree (Master)
Responsible Department:
Communication & Journalism
Semester:
2nd Semester
Teaching Languages:
Hebrew
Campus:
Mt. Scopus
Course/Module Coordinator:
Dr. Eran Amsalem
Coordinator Office Hours:
Tuesday, 9:00-10:00, Room 5408
Teaching Staff:
Dr. Eran Amsalem
Course/Module description:
Why do people vote for some political candidates and not for others? Why are some policy proposals accepted, while others get rejected? And how come some media outlets, and some journalists, are more successful at shaping public opinion than others? At the core of these effects (and many others) lie persuasion processes. This class discusses a variety of factors predicting political persuasion and demonstrates the impact of persuasion principles in a variety of political contexts.
Course/Module aims:
Learning outcomes - On successful completion of this module, students should be able to:
Describe the main factors predicting political persuasion and analyze real-world political events using those principles.
Attendance requirements(%):
Teaching arrangement and method of instruction:
Each class will focus on one issue related to political persuasion. We will begin each meeting with a short lecture in which I will introduce the topic of that class in a broad context. Then, one student will present that week's reading material and lead a discussion based on the weekly article's findings and conclusions. We will conclude each class with a discussion of the implications of that week's topic for those trying to persuade in political contexts.
Course/Module Content:
Introduction to political persuasion
Group affiliation and political attitudes
Recipient values
Source credibility
Negative campaigns
Ambiguous rhetoric
Backlash effects
Motivation and political persuasion
Interpersonal political persuasion
Voter mobilization
Required Reading:
Group affiliation and political attitudes
Barber, M., & Pope, J. C. (2019). Does party trump ideology? Disentangling party and ideology in America. American Political Science Review, 113(1), 38-54.
Recipient values
Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2015). From gulf to bridge: When do moral arguments facilitate political influence? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(12), 1665-1681.
Source credibility
Druckman, J. N. (2001). On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? The Journal of Politics, 63(4), 1041-1066.
Negative campaigns
Lau, R. R., Sigelman, L., & Rovner, I. B. (2007). The effects of negative political campaigns: A meta-analytic reassessment. The Journal of Politics, 69(4), 1176-1209.
Ambiguous rhetoric
Milita, K., Simas, E. N., Ryan, J. B., & Krupnikov, Y. (2017). The effects of ambiguous rhetoric in congressional elections. Electoral Studies, 46, 48-63.
Backlash effects
Guess, A., & Coppock, A. (2020). Does counter-attitudinal information cause backlash? Results from three large survey experiments. British Journal of Political Science, 50(4), 1497-1515.
Motivation and political persuasion
Bayes, R., Druckman, J. N., Goods, A., & Molden, D. C. (2020). When and how different motives can drive motivated political reasoning. Political Psychology, 41(5), 1031-1052.
Interpersonal political persuasion
Kalla, J. L., & Broockman, D. E. (2020). Reducing exclusionary attitudes through interpersonal conversation: Evidence from three field experiments. American Political Science Review, 114(2), 410-425.
Voter mobilization
Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Larimer, C. W. (2008). Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review, 102(1), 33-48.
Additional Reading Material:
Course/Module evaluation:
End of year written/oral examination 0 %
Presentation 30 %
Participation in Tutorials 0 %
Project work 40 %
Assignments 0 %
Reports 30 %
Research project 0 %
Quizzes 0 %
Other 0 %
Additional information:
Grades will be based on weekly responses to the reading materials (30%), presentation of an article in class (30%), and a final paper where students are asked to propose an original political persuasion experiment (40%).
|
