IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rripxx/v25y2018i2p215-242.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Context-driven attitude formation: the difference between supporting free trade in the abstract and supporting specific trade agreements

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Jungherr
  • Matthias Mader
  • Harald Schoen
  • Alexander Wuttke

Abstract

Many studies use the same factors to explain attitudes toward specific trade agreements and attitudes toward the principle of free trade and thus treat both objects as interchangeable. Contemporary trade agreements, however, often reach beyond trade in the narrow sense. Consequently, factors unrelated to free trade may affect citizens’ evaluations of these agreements. We propose a model of attitude formation toward specific trade agreements that includes the societal context as a constitutive feature. We expect salient aspects of an agreement to activate corresponding predispositions. Empirically, we compare how this contextual model and a standard model perform in explaining German citizens’ attitudes toward free trade and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The results show that the standard model performs well in explaining public opinion on the principle of free trade but is less useful in explaining attitudes toward TTIP. The latter were driven by postures toward transatlantic cooperation, predispositions toward the role of interest groups in politics, and market regulation – aspects salient in German public discourse about TTIP. In sum, we find ample evidence for the need to differentiate between the two attitude objects and for our contextual model of attitude formation.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Jungherr & Matthias Mader & Harald Schoen & Alexander Wuttke, 2018. "Context-driven attitude formation: the difference between supporting free trade in the abstract and supporting specific trade agreements," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(2), pages 215-242, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rripxx:v:25:y:2018:i:2:p:215-242
    DOI: 10.1080/09692290.2018.1431956
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09692290.2018.1431956
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09692290.2018.1431956?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Philipp Harms & Nils D. Steiner, 2023. "Attitudes towards Globalization: A Survey," Working Papers 2305, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    2. Dirk De Bièvre & Arlo Poletti, 2020. "Towards Explaining Varying Degrees of Politicization of EU Trade Agreement Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 243-253.
    3. Tom Coupé & Oleksandr Shepotylo, 2021. "Popular Support For Trade Agreements And Partner Country Characteristics: Evidence From An Unexpected Election Outcome," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(1), pages 549-566, January.
    4. Aukje van Loon, 2020. "The Selective Politicization of Transatlantic Trade Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 325-335.
    5. Aleksandra Sojka & Jorge Diaz-Lanchas & Federico Steinberg, 2019. "The Politicization of Transatlantic Trade in Europe: Explaining Inconsistent Preferences Regarding Free Trade and the TTIP," JRC Working Papers on Territorial Modelling and Analysis 2019-09, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Nils D Steiner, 2018. "Attitudes towards the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership in the European Union: The treaty partner heuristic and issue attention," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(2), pages 255-277, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:rripxx:v:25:y:2018:i:2:p:215-242. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rrip20 .

    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.