Smith Olivia K H, Flick Cassandra, Michalski Nicholas D
Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina Aiken, Aiken, SC, United States.
Department of Psychology, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND, United States.
Front Psychol. 2024 Sep 2;15:1439463. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1439463. eCollection 2024.
Previous research and public polls demonstrate the public has varying levels of support for Defund the Police (DTP). However, much of these results assess how individuals about DTP rather than how they it. Additionally, the literature fails to consider the role of these definitions and framing in individuals' assessments of DTP. Using both qualitative and quantitative methodology, the current studies assess the following research questions: (1) How do individuals define DTP and to what extent do individuals support it? and (2) Does framing DTP as either redirecting police funds or eliminating police impact level of support?
Participants in both Study 1 ( = 93) and Study 2 (N = 494) were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk. Study 1 used a nonexperimental design, in which participants provided their definition of DTP and reported their level of support for DTP. Study 2 used a two-group experimental design in which participants were randomly assigned to one of two frames for DTP garnered from Study 1: redirect funds or eliminate police. Subsequently, participants reported their DTP support, DTP definition, familiarity with DTP, political orientation, and alignment with the frame presented.
In the absence of a frame (Study 1), more participants opposed DTP than supported DTP. Participants also reported several different definitions of DTP, including decreasing police funds, redirecting police funds to social services, and eliminating police altogether. Notably, how an individual defined DTP was associated with level of support (e.g., defining DTP as redirecting funds was associated with greater support for DTP, compared to this theme being absent in participant definitions). When using the redirect theme and eliminate theme as experimental frames (Study 2), a causal relationship was found between the framing manipulation and support of DTP (i.e., the redirect frame led to greater support than the eliminate theme).
The findings from the current studies shed light on how individuals conceptualize DTP, and most importantly, they provide evidence that differential framing can impact support for DTP in the general population. These results have implications for police reform advocates in that the words used to describe DTP can have an impact on public buy-in of policies.
先前的研究和民意调查表明，公众对“削减警察经费”（Defund the Police，简称DTP）的支持程度各不相同。然而，这些结果大多评估的是个人对DTP的看法，而非他们对DTP的理解。此外，现有文献未能考虑这些定义和框架在个人对DTP评估中的作用。本研究采用定性和定量方法，评估以下研究问题：（1）个人如何定义DTP，以及他们对DTP的支持程度如何？（2）将DTP表述为重新分配警察经费或消除警察影响，是否会影响支持程度？
研究1（n = 93）和研究2（N = 494）的参与者均从亚马逊土耳其机器人平台招募。研究1采用非实验设计，参与者需提供他们对DTP的定义，并报告他们对DTP的支持程度。研究2采用两组实验设计，参与者被随机分配到从研究1中得出的DTP的两种框架之一：重新分配资金或消除警察。随后，参与者报告他们对DTP的支持程度、DTP的定义、对DTP的熟悉程度、政治倾向以及与所呈现框架的契合度。
在没有框架的情况下（研究1），反对DTP的参与者多于支持DTP的参与者。参与者还报告了几种不同的DTP定义，包括减少警察经费、将警察经费重新分配用于社会服务以及完全消除警察。值得注意的是，个人对DTP的定义与支持程度相关（例如，将DTP定义为重新分配资金与对DTP的更大支持相关，相比之下，参与者定义中缺乏这一主题）。当使用重新分配主题和消除主题作为实验框架时（研究2），发现框架操纵与对DTP的支持之间存在因果关系（即重新分配框架比消除主题导致更大的支持）。
本研究的结果揭示了个人如何概念化DTP，最重要的是，它们提供了证据表明不同的框架可以影响普通人群对DTP的支持。这些结果对警察改革倡导者具有启示意义，即用于描述DTP的措辞可能会影响公众对政策的接受程度。
