This article shows that political elites can use political explanations to transform public opinion about European integration. It also finds that concentric group affiliation based on self-categorization as a member of the nation and Europe impedes elite influence, while individuals with exclusive affiliations are more easily persuaded to change their opinions on European integration. I conduct a laboratory experiment to test my theoretical expectations. By investigating elite influence and its interaction with identity, the article addresses conflicting perspectives on the transformation of public opinion in prior research: one approach proposes that integration attitudes are anchored in individual dispositions and thus relatively stable, while another argument emphasizes the capacity of elites to induce attitude change. A comparison with utilitarian considerations and political sophistication shows that no other disposition imposes more robust limits on elite influence than a concentric group affiliation, and none triggers greater susceptibility to persuasion than an exclusive identity.
AndersonC (1998) When in doubt, use proxies: Attitudes toward domestic politics and support for European integration. Comparative Political Studies31(5): 569–601.
2.
AreniCLutzR (1988) The role of argument quality in the elaboration likelihood model. In: HoustonM (ed.) Advances in consumer researchVol. 15, Provo, Utah: Association for Consumer Research, pp. 197–203.
3.
ArmingeonKCekaB (2014) The loss of trust in the European Union during the great recession since 2007: The role of heuristics from the national political system. European Union Politics15(1): 82–107.
4.
ArmitageCConnerM (2000) Attitudinal ambivalence: A test of three key hypotheses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin26(11): 1421–1432.
5.
BennettW (1980) The paradox of public discourse. Journal of Politics42(3): 792–817.
6.
BenoitW (1995) Accounts, excuses, and apologies: A theory of image restoration strategies, Albany: State University of New York Press.
7.
BrewerM (1991) The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin17(5): 475–482.
8.
BrewerM (1999) The psychology of prejudice: In-group love or out-group hate?Journal of Social Issues55(3): 429–444.
9.
BrewerM (2000) Superordinate goals versus superordinate identity as bases for intergroup cooperation. In: CapozzaDBrownR (eds) Social identity processes, London: Sage, pp. 117–132.
10.
BrinegarAJollySKitscheltH (2004) Varieties of capitalism and political divides over European integration. In: MarksGSteenbergenM (eds) European integration and political conflict, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 62–89.
11.
BruterM (2003) Winning hearts and minds for Europe. Comparative Political Studies36(10): 1148–1179.
12.
ByrneD (1971) The attraction paradigm, San Diego: Academic Press.
13.
CareyS (2002) Undivided loyalties. Is national identity an obstacle to European integration?European Union Politics3(4): 387–413.
14.
CareySBurtonJ (2004) The influence of the press in shaping public opinion towards the European Union in Britain. Political Studies52(3): 623–640.
15.
ChaikenS (1980) Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology39(5): 752–766.
16.
ChristinTTrechselA (2002) Joining the EU? Explaining public opinion in Switzerland. European Union Politics3(4): 415–443.
17.
CitrinJSidesJ (2004) More than nationals: How identity choice matters in the New Europe. In: HerrmannRRisseTBrewerM (eds) Transnational identities: Becoming European in the EU, Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 161–185.
18.
ConnerMSparksPPoveyR (2002) Moderator effects of attitudinal ambivalence on attitude–behavior relationships. European Journal of Social Psychology32(5): 705–718.
19.
Delli CarpiniMKeeterS (1993) Measuring political knowledge: Putting first things first. American Journal of Political Science37(4): 1179–1206.
20.
De VriesCEdwardsE (2009) Taking Europe to its extremes. Extremist parties and public Euroscepticism. Party Politics15(1): 5–28.
21.
Diez MedranoJ (2003) Framing Europe. Attitudes to European integration in Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
22.
FazioR (1989) On the power and functionality of attitudes: The role of attitude accessibility. In: PratkaniABrecklerSGreenwaldA (eds) Attitude structure and function, Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 153–179.
23.
GabelM (1998) Public support for European integration. An empirical test of five theories. Journal of Politics60(2): 333–354.
24.
HaeslyR (2001) Euroskeptics, europhiles, and instrumental Europeans: European attachment in Scotland and Wales. European Union Politics2(1): 81–102.
25.
HendersonMde LiverYGollwitzerP (2008) The effects of an implemental mind-set on attitude strength. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology94(3): 396–411.
26.
HerrmannRBrewerM (2004) Identities and institutions: Becoming European in the EU. In: HerrmannRRisseTBrewerM (eds) Transnational identities: Becoming European in the EU, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 1–2.
27.
HoboltSvan der BrugWde VreeseC (2011) Religious intolerance and Euroscepticism. European Union Politics12(3): 359–379.
28.
HoboltSWittrockJ (2011) The second-order election model revisited. Electoral Studies30(1): 29–40.
29.
HoogheLMarksG (2004) Does identity or economic rationality drive public opinion on European integration?Political Science and Politics37(3): 415–420.
30.
HoogheLMarksG (2005) Calculation, community and cues. Public opinion on European integration. European Union Politics6(4): 419–443.
31.
InglehartR (1970) Cognitive mobilization and European identity. Comparative Politics3(1): 45–70.
32.
KlandermansBSabucedoJRodriquezM (2004) Inclusiveness of identification among farmers in the Netherlands and Galicia (Spain). European Journal of Social Psychology34(3): 279–295.
33.
KrosnickJPettyR (1995) Attitude strength: An overview. In: PettyRKrosnickJ (eds) Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences, Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 1–24.
34.
KuhnT (2012) Europa ante portas: Border residence, transnational interaction and Euroskepticism in Germany and France. European Union Politics13(1): 94–117.
35.
LeonardelliGPickettCBrewerM (2010) Optimal distinctiveness theory: A framework for social identity, social cognition, and intergroup relations. In: ZannaMOlsonJ (eds) Advances in experimental social psychologyVol. 43, New York: Elsevier, pp. 65–115.
36.
LuedtkeA (2005) European integration, public opinion and immigration policy. Testing the impact of national identity. European Union Politics6(1): 83–112.
37.
MaierJRittbergerB (2008) Shifting Europe’s boundaries: Mass media, public opinion, and the enlargement of the EU. European Union Politics9(2): 243–267.
38.
McGrawK (1991) Managing blame: An experimental investigation into the effectiveness of political accounts. American Political Science Review85(4): 1133–1158.
39.
McGrawKBestSTimponeR (1995) What they say or what they do?American Journal of Political Science39(1): 53–74.
40.
McGrawKHubbardC (1996) Some of the people some of the time: Individual differences in acceptance of political accounts. In: MutzDSnidermanPBrodyR (eds) Political persuasion and attitude change, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 145–170.
41.
McLarenL (2002) Public support for the European Union: Cost/benefit analysis or perceived cultural threat?Journal of Politics64(2): 551–566.
42.
Müller-PetersA (1998) The significance of national pride and national identity to the attitude toward the single currency. Journal of Economic Psychology19(6): 701–719.
43.
PettyRCacioppoJ (1986) The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In: BerkowitzL (ed.) Advances in experimental social psychologyVol. 19, New York: Academic Press, pp. 123–205.
44.
PriesterJPettyR (2003) The influence of spokesperson trustworthiness on message elaboration, attitude strength, and advertising effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Psychology13(4): 408–421.
45.
RayL (2003) When parties matter: The conditional influence of party positions on voter opinions about European integration. Journal of Politics65(4): 978–994.
46.
RobertsJ (1985) The attitude-memory relationship after 40 years: A meta-analysis of the literature. Basic and Applied Social Psychology6(3): 221–241.
47.
SchuckAde VreeseC (2006) Between risk and opportunity: News framing and its effects on public support for EU enlargement. European Journal of Communication21(1): 5–32.
48.
SteenbergenMBächtigerASpörndliM (2003) Measuring political deliberation: A discourse quality index. Comparative European Politics1(1): 21–48.
49.
SteenbergenMEdwardsEde VriesC (2007) Who’s cueing whom?European Union Politics8(1): 13–35.
50.
TajfelH (1981) Human groups and social categories, New York: Cambridge University Press.
51.
TajfelHTurnerJ (1979) An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: AustinWWorchelS (eds) Social psychology of intergroup relations, Chicago: Nelson, pp. 33–48.
52.
TilleyJWlezienC (2008) Does political information matter? An experimental test relating to party positions on Europe. Political Studies56(1): 192–214.
53.
TurnerJ (1987) Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory, New York: Basil Blackwell.
54.
TverdovaYAndersonC (2004) Choosing the West? Referendum choices on EU membership in east-central Europe. Electoral Studies23(2): 185–208.
55.
Vliegenthart R, Schuck A, Boomgaarden H and De Vreese C (2008) News coverage and support for European integration, 1990-2006. International Journal of Public Opinion Research29(4): 415–439.
56.
VössingK (2005) Nationality and the preferences of the European public toward EU policy making. European Union Politics6(4): 447–469.
57.
WeigelRNewmanL (1976) Increasing attitude-behavior correspondence by broadening the scope of the behavioral measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology33(6): 793–802.
58.
WesselsB (1995) Evaluations of the EC: Elite or mass-driven? In: NiedermayerOSinnottR (eds) Public opinion and internationalized governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 137–162.
59.
ZallerJ (1992) The nature and origins of mass opinion, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
