Examining the relationship between media and personal expressive rights : the effect of need for cognition

This study attempted to determine whether cognitive traits influence the relationship between media rights and personal expressive rights. Previous research into support for expressive rights has seldom used cognitive variables, and those that have been studied lack either parsimony or a driving mechanism. This study used need for cognition (Cacioppo & Petty, 1986) as a measure of cognitive motivation. Research on expressive rights has used survey methodology, which provides a snapshot of attitudes. Critics of such research argue that survey respondents are asked to respond without being given adequate time to consider the implications of their answers. This experiment used priming messages to provide subjects with a cognitive context for thinking about either media or personal expressive rights. The experiment was designed with three priming conditions. A sample of 169 students read one priming message - an essay calling either for further regulation of personal expressive rights, media rights or a control message. They then completed two parallel 13-item scales, one designed to measure support for various media rights and the other to measure support for the same kinds of personal rights. The subjects completed the 18-item Need for Cognition Scale. Information on gender and political orientation was also gathered. It was hypothesized that need for cognition would have the greatest effect on the relationship between media and personal rights in the control condition, a moderate effect in the personal-priming condition and the least effect in the media-priming condition. Correlation tests and a multiple regression analysis performed on the data indicated the hypothesis should be rejected. Subsequent analyses were performed on the mean support for personal rights and media rights. A multivariate analysis of variance with a repeated-measures design was conducted with support for expressive rights as the dependent variables. Need for cognition, priming condition and political orientation were the independent variables, resulting in a 2 X 3 X 3 design, with support for rights as within-subjects meastires. Personal rights received significantly more support than media rights. Need for cognition was a significant, positive predictor of support for expressive rights. Political orientation was also significant, such that liberals were much more likely than conservatives or moderates to support expressive rights. Support for media rights varied according to priming condition while support for personal rights remained stable. Mean scores of support for media or personal rights were highest when the priming message called for further regulation of those rights, in a backlash effect. Support for both kinds of rights was lowest in the control condition. These findings suggest that when people are primed to think about expressive rights, they may reflect on the implications of restricting those rights. They seem to be more likely to support expression. This notion is supported by the finding that people who are more motivated to think about issues are more likely to support expressive rights. It seems that to increase public tolerance for free expression, people need to be stimulated to think about the potential loss of some of their (and the media's) rights.