Moral reframing in contemporary U.S. presidential debates

References

• Abramowitz, A. I. (2018). The great alignment: race, party transformation, and the rise of Donald Trump. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Atari, M., Haidt, J., Graham, J., Koleva, S., Stevens, S. T., & Dehghani, M. (2023). Morality beyond the WEIRD: How the nomological network of morality varies across cultures. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 125(5), 1157–1188. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000470
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benoit, W. L., & Benoit. (2001). The functional approach to presidential television spots: Acclaiming, attacking, defending 1952–2000. Communication Studies, 52(2), 109–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510970109388546
   Google Scholar
• Benoit, W. L., Henson, J. R., & Sudbrock, L. A. (2011). A functional analysis of 2008 U.S. presidential primary debates. Argumentation & Advocacy, 48(2), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2011.11821757
   Google Scholar
• Clifford, S., & Jerit, J. (2013). How words do the work of politics: Moral foundations theory and the debate over stem cell research. The Journal of Politics, 75(3), 659–671. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381613000492
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Day, M. V., Fiske, S. T., Downing, E. L., & Trail, T. E. (2014). Shifting liberal and conservative attitudes using moral foundations theory. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(12), 1559–1573. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214551152
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2015). From gulf to bridge: When do moral arguments facilitate political influence? Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(12), 1665–1681. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215607842
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2019). Moral reframing: a technique for effective and persuasive communication across political divides. Social and Personal Psychology Compass, 13(12), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12501
   Google Scholar
• Frimer, J. A. (2020). Do liberals and conservatives use different moral languages? Two replications and six extensions of Graham, Haidt, and Nosek’s (2009) moral text analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 84, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2019.103906
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gadarian, S. K., & van der Vort, E. (2018). The gag reflex: Disgust rhetoric and gay rights in American politics. Political Behavior, 40(2), 521–543. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-017-9412-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1987). The changing culture of affirmative action. In R. G. Braungart & M. M. Braungart (Eds.), Research in political sociology (Vol. 3, pp. 137–177). JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Vintage Books.
   Google Scholar
• Haidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2007). The moral mind: How 5 sets of innate moral intuitions guide the development of many culture-specific virtues, and perhaps even modules. In P. Carruthers, S. Laurence, & S. Stich (Eds.), The innate mind (pp. 367–391). Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, R. P., Childers, J. P., & Lind, C. J. (2013). Political tone: How leaders talk and why. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hopp, F. R., Fisher, J., Cornell, D., Huskey, R., & Weber, R. (2021). The extended moral foundations dictionary (eMFD): Development and applications of a crowd-sourced approach to extracting moral intuitions from text. Behavior Research Methods, 53(1), 232–246. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01433-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, D. I. (2005). Feminine style in presidential debate discourse, 1960–2000. Communication Quarterly, 53(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370500055814
   Google Scholar
• Kraft, P. W., & Klemmensen, R. (2024). Lexical ambiguity in political rhetoric: why morality doesn’t fit in a bag of Words. British Journal of Political Science, 54, 201–219. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000712342300008X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, P. G. (2019). Moral foundations in the 2015-16 U.S. presidential primary debates: The positive and negative moral vocabulary of partisan elites. Social Sciences, 8(8), 233. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8080233
   Google Scholar
• Marietta, M. (2009). The absolutist advantage: Sacred rhetoric in contemporary presidential debate. Political Communication, 26(4), 388–411. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600903296986
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinney, M. S., & Warner, B. R. (2013). Do presidential debates matter? Examining a decade of campaign debate effects. Argumentation & Advocacy, 49(4), 238–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2013.11821800
   Google Scholar
• MoralFoundations.org. (2022). Home page. Retrieved September 5, 2023 from: https://moralfoundations.org/
   Google Scholar
• Neiman, J. L., Gonzalez, F. J., Wilkinson, K., Smith, K. B., & Hibbing, J. R. (2016). Speaking different languages or reading from the same script? Word usage of democratic and republican politicians. Political Communication, 33(2), 212–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2014.969465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Painter, D. L., & Fernandes, J. (2021). They’re not just words: The verbal style of U.S. presidential debate rhetoric. Communication Studies, 72(5), 899–914. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2021.1975145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sagi, E., & Dehghani, M. (2014). Measuring moral rhetoric in text. Social Science Computer Review, 32(2), 132–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439313506837
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stelter, B. (2020, September 30). Trump-Biden clash was watched by at least 73 million voters. CNN Business. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2023 from https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/30/media/first-presidential-debate-tv-ratings/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Voelkel, J. G., & Feinberg, M. (2017). Morally reframed arguments can affect support for political candidates. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 9(8), 917–924. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617729408
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voelkel, J. G., & Willer, R. (2019). Resolving the progressive paradox: Conservative value framing of progressive economic policies increases candidate support. SSRN working paper. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2023 from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3385818
   Google Scholar
• Wang, S. N., & Inbar, Y. (2021). Moral-language use by U.S. political elites. Psychological Science, 31(1), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620960397
   Google Scholar
• Wang, X., & Yu, Y. (2022). The impact of moral framing in the 2016 U.S. presidential debates on moral judgements and self-transcendent emotions in tweets. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 19(3), 316–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2021.1977757
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolsko, C., Ariceaga, H., & Seiden, J. (2016). Red, white, and blue enough to be green: Effects of moral framing on climate change attitudes and conservation behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 65, 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.02.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar