IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v55y2022i4d10.1007_s11077-022-09478-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Politicking with evidence: examining evidence-based issues in electoral policy narratives

Author

Listed:
  • Laura Wolton

    (University of Colorado Denver
    Legislative Policy and Research Office, Oregon State Capitol)

  • Deserai A. Crow

    (University of Colorado Denver)

Abstract

The construction, influence, and strategic use of narratives to influence policy decisions have garnered increased scholarly attention over the past decade as the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) has matured within the policy studies field. Our prior analysis extended the NPF scholarship to examine electoral policy narrative construction during the 2018 elections. We found that the NPF can apply to electoral politics, but there are differences in how electoral policy narratives are constructed according to candidate party, gender, and electoral outcomes. Analyzing the narratives from both Republican and Democratic campaigns in U.S. House swing districts, here we assess whether policy issues can be differentiated based on their use of evidence and examine narratives to understand if there are systematic differences of construction according to policy issue type. The findings suggest that narrative use of evidence by congressional campaigns varies strategically and systematically by policy issue. Overall, the article presents a novel application of NPF analysis across policy domains while proposing a relationship between evidence and the setting and moral of the story element of narrative form based on issue type.

Suggested Citation

  • Laura Wolton & Deserai A. Crow, 2022. "Politicking with evidence: examining evidence-based issues in electoral policy narratives," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(4), pages 661-691, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:55:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s11077-022-09478-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-022-09478-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11077-022-09478-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-022-09478-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Falk Daviter, 2015. "The political use of knowledge in the policy process," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(4), pages 491-505, December.
    2. Christina Boswell, 2009. "Knowledge, Legitimation and the Politics of Risk: The Functions of Research in Public Debates on Migration," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(1), pages 165-186, March.
    3. Stucki, Iris, 2018. "Evidence-based arguments in direct democracy: The case of smoking bans in Switzerland," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 148-156.
    4. Alexander W. Severson & Eric A. Coleman, 2015. "Moral Frames and Climate Change Policy Attitudes," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1277-1290, November.
    5. Christina Boswell, 2009. "Knowledge, Legitimation and the Politics of Risk: The Functions of Research in Public Debates on Migration," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57, pages 165-186, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cynthia Couette, 2024. "Epistemic competition in global governance: The case of pharmaceutical patents," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(3), pages 516-527, June.
    2. H鲩court & Spielvogel, 2014. "Beliefs, media exposure and policy preferences on immigration: evidence from Europe," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(2), pages 225-239, January.
    3. Jean Philippe Décieux, 2021. "The Dialectic of Transnational Integration and National Disintegration as Challenge for Multilevel Governance," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-11, July.
    4. repec:sae:envval:v:25:y:2016:i:6:p:687-705 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Dorren, Lars & Van Dooren, Wouter, 2021. "Chameleonic knowledge: a study of ex ante analysis in large infrastructure policy processes," SocArXiv 2shq9, Center for Open Science.
    6. repec:dau:papers:123456789/9773 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Sam Scott, 2017. "Venues and Filters in Managed Migration Policy: The Case of the United Kingdom," International Migration Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 375-415, June.
    8. H鲩court & Spielvogel, 2014. "Beliefs, media exposure and policy preferences on immigration: evidence from Europe," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(2), pages 225-239, January.
    9. Cedric Dawkins & John Fraas, 2011. "Coming Clean: The Impact of Environmental Performance and Visibility on Corporate Climate Change Disclosure," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 100(2), pages 303-322, May.
    10. Lars Dorren & Wouter Dooren, 2021. "Chameleonic knowledge: a study of ex ante analysis in large infrastructure policy processes," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(2), pages 289-312, June.
    11. Vargas, Andrés & Sarmiento Erazo, Juan Pablo & Diaz, David, 2020. "Has Cost Benefit Analysis Improved Decisions in Colombia? Evidence from the Environmental Licensing Process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    12. Alberto Arenal & Claudio Feijoo & Ana Moreno & Sergio Ramos & Cristina Armuña, 2021. "Entrepreneurship Policy Agenda in the European Union: A Text Mining Perspective," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(2), pages 243-271, March.
    13. Jacques Yana Mbena, 2022. "The status quo of research in sustainable FDI: exploring the theoretical agenda and policy inferences in West and Central Africa," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-16, December.
    14. Degeling, Chris & Rychetnik, Lucie & Street, Jackie & Thomas, Rae & Carter, Stacy M., 2017. "Influencing health policy through public deliberation: Lessons learned from two decades of Citizens'/community juries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 166-171.
    15. Denitsa Marchevska, 2024. "Enlightenment, politicisation or mere window dressing? Europeanisation and the use of evidence for policy making in Bulgaria," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(2), pages 281-303, June.
    16. Garrett Ward Richards, 2019. "The Science–Policy Relationship Hierarchy (SPRHi) model of co-production: how climate science organizations have influenced the policy process in Canadian case studies," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 67-95, March.
    17. Jingjing Zeng & Guihua Huang, 2024. "Bureaucratic biases in trust of expert policy advice: a randomized controlled experiment based on Chinese think tank reports," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(2), pages 305-351, June.
    18. Jialing Huang & Janet Z. Yang & Haoran Chu, 2022. "Framing Climate Change Impacts as Moral Violations: The Pathway of Perceived Message Credibility," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-19, April.
    19. Heinz, Nicolai & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin, 2021. "Other-regarding preferences and pro-environmental behaviour: An interdisciplinary review of experimental studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    20. Shane P Singh & Meili Swanson, 2017. "How issue frames shape beliefs about the importance of climate change policy across ideological and partisan groups," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-14, July.
    21. Bert Fraussen & Darren Halpin, 2017. "Think tanks and strategic policy-making: the contribution of think tanks to policy advisory systems," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 105-124, March.
    22. Caspar F. Berg, 2017. "Dynamics in the Dutch policy advisory system: externalization, politicization and the legacy of pillarization," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 63-84, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:55:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s11077-022-09478-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.