The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was among the first legislative responses to the financial and mortgage crises of 2008 and allowed the U.S. government to alleviate distressed financial institutions of equity and assets that were straining the housing and financial markets. However, the underlying economic events that precipitated the legislative intervention, including rising foreclosure rates in specific states, had been disproportionately affecting Americans months before the bill was signed into law. The purpose of this dissertation was to determine the parameters of the issue public that was supportive of TARP by studying how demographic and geographic disparities of the recession were related to selective exposure to news media and the formation of this issue public. The news effects theoretical perspectives of agenda setting and media priming, including attribute agenda setting and attribute priming, along with the theoretical framework of the public opinion concept of issue publics, particularly state-specific issue publics, guided and informed the execution of this research. This dissertation entailed two research approaches: a content analysis of national television news six months prior to and up until the passage of TARP in early October 2008, and a secondary analysis of select data from the 2008 National Annenberg Election Survey, a rolling cross-sectional phone survey conducted from late 2007 until Election Day 2008. Results from the content analysis study suggest national television news of the economy in 2008 predominantly covered the presidential election, the economic attributes of taxes and inflation, and presented the economic crisis as a national issue. As for the public opinion study, economic attitudes were predictive of support for TARP, but exposure to the news and demographics, including geography, were not associated with support for TARP. Overall, the unfolding recession was not frequently covered on national television news in 2008, and support for TARP was found to be associated with an individual's attitudes as opposed to demographic identity or geographic location. Findings suggest attribute agenda-setting effects were most likely for individual views of blame for the crisis, while the issue public that was supportive of TARP appeared to be based upon economic attitudes.

Before the Swedish election 2022 SVT presented surveys that showed that the voters are poorly informed about the regional responsibility for the Swedish healthcare system. The regions have certain mandatory and voluntary duties. The purpose of the study is to examine what knowledge students have about the decision making areas that the regional politicians have in Region Västerbotten The study also examine whether there are any variations between the students depending on their background. These different backgrounds are gender, educational orientation and political dedication. The study is a quantitative survey carried out by students with varying study orientations at Umeå University. The results of the survey present the political knowledge that the students have. The result is then analyzed with the issue public model, a theory that knowledge varies depending on interest and group affiliation. The study finds that there are knowledge differences between the students depending on gender, educational orientation and political dedication. The greatest variation regarding political knowledge was found between individuals depending on the political dedication. Interpretation of this result is that political knowledge varies depending on political interest and group affiliation.

This dissertation seeks to understand how issue publics contribute to citizen competence and the functioning of democracy. In the first part of the dissertation, a new measurement was constructed by theoretically and empirically analyzing the attributes of issue public members. Through the hypotheses testing, the new measure was more reliable in identifying issue public members compared to previous measurement strategies. Employing the new measure, results show that issue public members with concern about a specific issue, exercised their issue-specificity in seeking information (i.e., issue-based selectivity) with exposure to both attitude-consistent and counter-attitudinal perspectives. Issue public membership also had significant effects on issue-specific knowledge, and generating rationales for their own and other's oppositional viewpoints. These direct effects were mediated by issue-based selectivity. The relationships highlight the importance of issue publics in contributing to the deliberative democracy. In addition, issue publics play a significant role in contributing to the participatory democracy in that issue public members have greater intentions to participate in issue-related activities than nonmembers. However, while issue publics come close to solve the deliberative-participatory paradox, it was found that their information selectivity and argument generation were unbalanced in a way of favoring pro-attitudinal perspectives over counter-attitudinal perspectives. The second part of the dissertation examined conditional factors--accuracy and directional goals in affecting information selectivity and processing. The findings show that directional goals influenced participants to apply either the strategies of selective approach or selective avoidance to seek information depending on the issue. Accuracy goals exerted a main effect on the issue that is relatively less controversial and less obtrusive. They also interacted with issue public membership in influencing the less controversial and less obtrusive issue. Argument generation was not affected by accuracy or directional goals. Overall, through conceptualizing citizens as members of different issue publics, individuals are more competent then we thought. Their intrinsic interest in an issue serves as a strong factor affecting their information selectivity, information processing, and political actions. Despite finding an optimistic role for issue publics in the democratic process, their limitations also should be recognized. The implications for the deliberative and participatory democracy are discussed.