304 records matched your query
03710aam a2200445 i 4500 001 934B2C60403511EB87AA299C42ECA4DB 003 SILO 005 20201217010015 008 191104t20202020quca b 001 0 eng 010 $a 2020416035 020 $a 0228000793 020 $a 9780228000792 020 $a 0228000807 020 $a 9780228000808 035 $a (OCoLC)1126211927 040 $a NLC $b eng $e rda $c YDX $d BDX $d NLC $d OCLCF $d ERASA $d CDX $d DLC $d YDX $d VP@ $d SILO 042 $a lac 043 $a e-uk--- 050 4 $a JF497.G7 $b A85 2020 055 0 $a JF497.G7 $b A85 2020 084 $a cci1icc $2 lacc 100 1 $a Atikcan, Ece OÂzlem, $d 1982- $e author. 245 10 $a Framing risky choices : $b Brexit and the dynamics of high-stakes referendums / $c Ece OÂzlem Atikcan, Richard Nadeau, and Eric Belanger. 264 1 $a Montreal ; $b McGill-Queen's University Press, $c [2020] 300 $a xii, 244 pages : $b illustrations ; $c 23 cm 504 $a Includes bibliographical references (pages 217-236) and index. 505 0 $a The Brexit Conundrum -- The Brexit Campaign in Comparative Perspective -- Preparing and Executing the Brexit Campaign -- How Did the Scapegoating of the European Union Affect the Vote Choice? -- How Did the Perceptions of Risk Affect the Vote Choice? -- Why Do Some Remain Voters Accept the Outcomeand Some Do Not? -- Arguing for and against Borders. 520 $a "The majority of policymakers, academics, and members of the general public expected British citizens to vote to remain in the European Union in the 2016 referendum. This perception was based on the well-established idea that voters don't like change or uncertainty. So why did the British public vote to take such a major economic risk? Framing Risky Choices addresses this question by placing the Brexit vote in the bigger picture of EU and Scottish independence referendums. Drawing from extensive interviews and survey data, it asserts that the framing effect--mobilizing voters by encouraging them to think along particular lines--matters, but not every argument is equally effective. Simple, evocative, and emotionally compelling frames that offer negativity are especially effective in changing people's minds. In the Brexit case, the Leave side neutralized the economic risks of Brexit and proposed other risks relating to remaining in the EU, such as losing control of immigration policy and a lack of funding for the National Health Service. These concrete, impassioned arguments struck an immediate and familiar chord with voters. Most intriguingly, the Remain side was silent on these issues, without an emotional case to present. Framing Risky Choices presents a multi-method, comparative, state-of-the-art analysis of how the Brexit campaign contributed to the outcome. Uncovering the core mechanism behind post-truth politics, it shows that the strength of an argument is not its empirical validity but its public appeal."-- $c Provided by publisher. 530 $a Issued also in electronic format. 610 20 $a European Union $z Great Britain. 610 27 $a European Union. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst00916630 650 0 $a Referendum $z Great Britain. 650 7 $a Referendum. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst01092465 651 7 $a Great Britain. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst01204623 700 1 $a Nadeau, Richard, $d 1956- $e author. 700 1 $a Belanger, Eric, $e author. 776 08 $i Online version: $a Atikcan, Ece OÂzlem, 1982- $t Framing risky choices. $d Montreal ; Kingston ; London ; Chicago : McGill-Queen's University Press, 2020 $z 9780228002246 $z 9780228002246 $w (OCoLC)1136153466 941 $a 1 952 $l OVUX522 $d 20210721015452.0 956 $a http://locator.silo.lib.ia.us/search.cgi?index_0=id&term_0=934B2C60403511EB87AA299C42ECA4DBInitiate Another SILO Locator Search