Search results

Historically, citizen input into the capital budgeting planning and project selection process has been sporadic and often limited to the most politically-attentive, “connected” individuals and groups. The near-sightedness of such an approach has become apparent as the public’s cynicism toward government has intensified, along with its reticence to support bond referenda, and its propensity to file equity-oriented lawsuits criticizing capital project decisions. To combat these problems, local governments across the U.S. are broadening constituent involvement in their capital budget process, especially at the front-end where possible projects are identified and selected for inclusion in the capital improvement plan. This article examines the four major approaches that are being utilized: decentralizing public hearings; using community-wide public opinion surveys to gauge public support for various projects and revenue-raising options; expanding citizen access and input to, and feedback from, government interactive data bases; and creating more formalized roles for citizens on capital budget planning committees. Each of these approaches has its own assets and liabilities which are delineated.

In recent times, police policy makers have been encouraged to use public opinion surveys to identify, and target the allocation of resources to, activities that members of the public believe are important. However, these surveys have concentrated on the types of problems that the public would like addressed, and have not determined what types of activities they would prefer the police to be undertaking. In the present study, a comprehensive list of police activities formed the basis of a survey used to examine attitudes toward police priorities in Australia. Comparisons were made between police and public understanding of the police role, and between present and preferred priorities. The results suggest that the public has an understanding of policing which differs from that of police officers. However, the picture of what they want police to be doing is similar to that of the police, albeit giving higher priorities to almost all of the activities. Police managers may need to educate the public about the functions of the police service, emphasizing functions other than investigating crime and providing advice. At the same time, the police may need to alter their resource allocation and modify organizational structure and reward systems to encourage operational officers to be more involved in the activities that the public see as high priority. This should result in better ties with the community, a better understanding within the community of the police role, and more realistic expectations on both sides of the outcomes of policing.

In US political reporting, the top story has become the public opinion polls that purport to state the voters’ evaluations of potential candidates, current office holders or the impact of current events. Many politicians, in turn, often develop their campaign positions in response to the polls. This discussion aims to address how year after year, despite increasing spending by news organizations to predict election results, the polls are repeatedly unable to predict election outcomes. Excuses are made, while the misuse and misunderstanding of marketing research spreads to other types of public organizations.

Points out the contradictions between public opinion polling predictions of election results and actual events, with explanations of the usually unstated qualitative limitations to survey data.

Qualitative research bias could have a greater impact on outcomes than statistical margins of error, although it is only the latter that is reported or discussed by the news media.

This abuse and misuse of marketing research lowers the credibility of all marketing research, and the people in marketing research, should speak out. The pollsters want to keep their methods as having a mystical value as they sell their research information to the public and other data users. At worst, this is a misleading selling of marketing insight to the public and research experts should start to speak out, encouraging journalists to report more properly the reality of public opinion polls.

The popular metaphor of public opinion polls has been to call them a “snapshot” of public views. This offers a more realistic metaphor of survey data, an impressionistic painting that is influenced by numerous researchers or respondent biases that cannot be controlled.

Fiscal conditions and budget constraints in the United States have placed solutions to budget deficit problems at the center of the public policy debate. Preferences for deficit reduction strategies are likely to be heavily associated with particular ideologies and other demographic and economic variables. Therefore, since this study is a true randomized experiment, it provides strong evidence about the influence of question wording on deficit reduction preferences, and therefore the likelihood it is susceptible to manipulation. We find clear evidence that using the word ‘tax’ significantly and substantially influences respondents’ choices. This result is robust over two experimental trials about a year apart and whether or not control variables are included.

This paper aims to identify both the traditional and novel forms of marketing behind New Zealand Prime Minster Jacinda Ardern’s landslide victory in the 2020 New Zealand General Election during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This research analysed both qualitative and quantitative data, including over 70 primary sources, the perspectives of practitioners, polling and data from surveys with over 450,000 respondents. The qualitative data was analysed interpretively against established theoretical concepts, whereas the quantitative data was analysed through descriptive statistics.

This research found that COVID-19 drastically changed what the public prioritised, allowing Ardern and Labour to position themselves as guardians of government stability, while camouflaging previous delivery failures. Labour also used a more emergent market-oriented and “polite” populist political marketing strategy.

While the survey data used is not a perfect sample of the population, it is the largest public opinion survey in New Zealand and, given its convergence with other sources, provides valuable insights into political marketing during a crisis more broadly.

This research reinforces marketing’s most important aspect; the market should drive action. How decision makers respond to the market should depend on the environment. Thus, up-to-date market research becomes even more important during a crisis, as the environment changes rapidly. This leaves prior assumptions obsolete and implies strategy needs to be adaptive. Additionally, greater public attention provides governing leaders with the opportunity to present a more well-rounded leadership image.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first research to look at marketing while in government and election campaigning in the context of successful management of a global pandemic.

The suddenness, urgency and social publicity of emergency events lead to great impacts on public life. The deep analysis of emergency events can provide detailed and comprehensive information for the public to get trends of events timely. With the development of social media, users prefer to express opinions on emergency events online. Thus, massive public opinion information of emergencies has been generated. Hence, this paper aims to conduct multidimensional mining on emergency events based on user-generated contents, so as to obtain finer-grained results.

This paper conducted public opinion analysis via fine-grained mining. Specifically, public opinion about an emergency event was collected as experimental data. Secondly, opinion mining was conducted to get users’ opinion polarities. Meanwhile, users’ information was analysed to identify impacts of users’ characteristics on public opinion.

The experimental results indicate that public opinion is mainly negative in emergencies. Meanwhile, users in developed regions are more active in expressing opinions. In addition, male users, especially male users with high influence, are more rational in public opinion expression.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first research to identify public opinion in emergency events from multiple dimensions, which can get in-detail differences of users’ online expression.

Although Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) is the most commonly diagnosed sexually transmitted infection in the USA, much controversy exists with respect to HPV vaccination, especially among parents of adolescents. Previous research has shown that exemplars in the media influence public opinion estimates about controversial social issues. However, little is known about the underlying psychological processes of how exemplars influence public opinion formation. The purpose of this paper is to systematically explore such psychological processes based on the projection theory. To this end, the important yet controversial public health issue, the mandatory HPV vaccination, was chosen.

A two-factor (exemplar vs proportion), between-subject experiment was conducted using online newspaper articles as main stimuli. A total of 138 participants completed the study. The analytical framework comprised the Sobel test with the Bootstrap method and a series of Ordinary Least Square hierarchical regression analyses.

The higher the proportion of exemplars against the HPV vaccination in a news article was, the greater the number of individuals who became opposed to it was. And the high personal opposition translated into negative public opinion change estimation.

The findings indicate that news exemplars may influence individuals’ personal opinion formation, and, in turn, contribute to their estimations of future public opinion climate, as suggested by the projection theory. Theoretical, methodological and practical implications for journalists, health educators and policy makers are discussed.

What does it mean in practice to claim a right? Does claiming a right add to the persuasive power of political demands? Does it clothe political demands with a moral urgency, setting such claims apart from the ordinary class of interests? In examining these questions, I suggest that in practice rights’ claims add little to political discourse. This is because Americans equate their policy preferences with rights. I find scant evidence for the belief that Americans have sufficient knowledge of rights to make them meaningful or that pronouncements of rights have persuasive power or imbue issues with heightened moral legitimacy.