Legalize cannabis? Effects of party cues on attitudes to a controversial policy proposal

References

• Andersson, U., J. Ohlsson, H. Oscarsson, and M. Oskarson, eds. 2017. Larmar och gör sig till. University of Gothenburg, the SOM Institute: Gothenburg.
   Google Scholar
• Bankert, A., L. Huddy, and M. Rosema. 2017. “Measuring Partisanship as a Social Identity in Multi-Party Systems.” Political Behavior 39 (1): 103–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barber, M., and J. C. Pope. 2019. “Does Party Trump Ideology? Disentangling Party and Ideology in America.” American Political Science Review 113 (1): 38–54. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055418000795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolsen, T., J. N. Druckman, and F. L. Cook. 2014. “The Influence of Partisan Motivated Reasoning on Public Opinion.” Political Behavior 36 (2): 235–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boudreau, C., and S. A. Mackenzie. 2014. “Informing the Electorate? How Party Cues and Policy Information Affect Public Opinion About Initiatives.” American Journal of Political Science 58 (1): 48–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boudreau, C., and S. A. Mackenzie. 2018. “Wanting What Is Fair: How Party Cues and Information About Income Inequality Affect Public Support for Taxes.” The Journal of Politics 80 (2): 367–381.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brader, T., and J. A. Tucker. 2012. “Following the Party’s Lead: Party Cues, Policy Opinion, and the Power of Partisanship in Three Multiparty Systems.” Comparative Politics 44 (4): 403–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, M. B. 1991. “The Social Self: On Being the Same and Different at the Same Time.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 17 (5): 475–482.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ditto, P. H., B. S. Liu, C. J. Clark, S. P. Wojcik, E. E. Chen, R. H. Grady, Jared B. Celniker, and Joanne F. Zinger. 2018. “At Least Bias is Bipartisan: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Partisan Bias in Liberals and Conservatives.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 14 (2): 273–291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eagly, A. H., and S. Chaiken. 1993. The Psychology of Attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. Fort Worth, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Hewstone, M. 1990. “The ‘Ultimate Attribution Error’? A Review of the Literature on Intergroup Causal Attribution.” European Journal of Social Psychology 20: 311–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huddy, L., A. Bankert, and C. L. Davies. 2018. “Expressive Versus Instrumental Partisanship in Multi-Party European Systems.” Political Psychology 39: 173–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iyengar, S., Y. Lelkes, M. Levendusky, N. Malhotra, and S. J. Westwood. 2019. “The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States.” Annual Review of Political Science 22: 129–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson, J. 2019. “Legalize cannabis?.” [Legalisera cannabis?] Svenska Dagbladet, 8 January 2019, retreived from https://www.svd.se/legalisera-cannabis.
   Google Scholar
• Jarosz, A. F., and J. Wiley. 2014. “What Are the Odds? A Practical Guide to Computing and Reporting Bayes Factors.” The Journal of Problem Solving 7: 2–9.
   Google Scholar
• Ling, R. 2020. Green Party Representative Wants to Review Cannabis Legalisation Politics. Dagens Nyheter, Accessed April 28, 2020. https://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/mp-topp-vill-utreda-avkriminalisering-och-legalisering-av-cannabis/.
   Google Scholar
• Mummolo, J., E. Peterson, and S. Westwood. 2019. “The Limits of Partisan Loyalty.” Political Behavior, doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09576-3.
   Google Scholar
• Nicholson, S. P. 2012. “Polarizing Cues.” American Journal of Political Science 56 (1): 52–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oscarsson, H.. 2017. The Swedish party system under change [Det svenska partisystemet i förändring]. In Larmar och gör sig till, edited by U. Andersson, J. Ohlsson, , H. Oscarsson, and M. Oskarson. pp. 411–427. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.
   Google Scholar
• Pickup, M. A., E. O. Kimbrough, and E. A. de Rooij. 2020. “Identity and the Self-Reinforcing Effects of Norm Compliance.” Southern Economic Journal 86 (3): 1222–1240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renström, E. A., H. Bäck, and Y. Schmeisser. 2020. “Vi ogillar olika. Om affektiv polarisering bland svenska väljare.” In Regntunga skyar, edited by U. Andersson, A. Carlander, and P. Öhberg. pp. 427–444. University of Gothenburg. SOM-institute: Gothenburg.
   Google Scholar
• Resko, Stella, Jennifer Ellis, Theresa J. Early, Kathryn A. Szechy, Brooke Rodriguez, and Elizabeth Agius. 2019. “Understanding Public Attitudes Toward Cannabis Legalization: Qualitative Findings From a Statewide Survey.” Substance Use & Misuse 54 (8): 1247–1259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reuterskiöld, A. 2019. The Last Taboo of Swedish Politics: “Making Me Afraid of Losing My Job” [Politikens sita tabu. Gör mig rädd att förlora jobbet]. Svenska Dagbladet. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://www.svd.se/politikens-sista-tabu-gor-mig-radd-att-forlora-jobbet.
   Google Scholar
• Sannerstedt, A. 2015. “How Extreme are the Sweden Democrats?” [Hur extrema är Sverigedemokraterna?]. In Fragment, edited by Annika Bergström, Bengt Johansson, Henrik Oscarsson, and Maria Oskarson. pp. 399–414. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.
   Google Scholar
• SVT (Swedish Public Television). 2017. The Swedish Parliamentary Parties’ Attitudes Toward Legalising Cannabis. [Så ställer riksdagspartierna till en legalisering av Cannabis]. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/sa-staller-riksdagspartierna-till-en-legalisering-av-cannabis.
   Google Scholar
• Taber, C. S., and M. Lodge. 2006. “Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 755–769.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tajfel, H., and J. C. Turner. 1986. “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict.” In The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, edited by W. G. Austin, and S. Worchel, 33–37. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
   Google Scholar
• Torcal, M., S. Martini, and L. Orriols. 2018. “Deciding About the Unknown: The Effect of Party and Ideological Cues on Forming Opinions About the European Union.” European Union Politics 19 (3): 502–523.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walgrave, S., J. Lefevere, and A. Tresch. 2012. “The Associative Dimension of Issue Ownership.” Political Opinion Quarterly 76 (4): 771–782.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar