Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-09T04:18:15.333Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Thematic analysis using the Schwartz values theory: exploring the use of values appeals in persuasive speech during COVID-19 in Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2022

Linda Courtenay Botterill Open the ORCID record for Linda Courtenay Botterill [Opens in a new window]  and
Niobe Lewis
Linda Courtenay Botterill*
Affiliation:
Canberra School of Politics, Economics & Society, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia
Niobe Lewis
Affiliation:
Faculty of Business, Government & Law, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia
*
*E-mail: Linda.Botterill@canberra.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Schwartz theory of personal values has been used extensively, and almost exclusively quantitatively, by researchers to increase understanding of the impact of values on human behaviour. While it provides a well-tested methodology and common language, the approach has been limited by its reliance on survey work, in which the researcher asks participants questions of interest, and then correlates these with respondents’ self-reporting of their values. There is limited qualitative work that has drawn on the insights of the Schwartz theory. The main exception is based on a lexicon of values words derived from Schwartz’s work which has been used to identify dominant societal values across time. We are proposing that the Schwartz theory can also be used to analyse values appeals in persuasive speech. Using thematic analysis of an example of political persuasion, we illustrate how Schwartz’s values work can be further adapted for qualitative research.

Keywords

valuespolitical persuasionAustraliaCOVID-19thematic analysis
Type
Research Note
Information
European Political Science Review , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , February 2023 , pp. 136 - 144
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of European Consortium for Political Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ABC News (2020a), ‘Daniel Andrews is finally taking a day off. Is this a sign things are looking up for Victoria?’. 30 October, https://www.abc.net.au/news/20201030/daniel-andrews-takes-day-off-after120-covid-media-briefings/12831460 Google Scholar
ABC News (2020b), ‘Police arrest demonstrators at Melbourne protest against Victoria’s coronavirus lockdown restrictions’. 23 October, https://www.abc.net.au/news/20201023/anti-lockdown-protesters-converge-on-melbourne-shrine/12706900 Google Scholar
Abu-Akel, A., Spitz, A. and West, R. (2021), ‘The effect of spokesperson attribution on public health message sharing during the COVID-19 pandemic’, PLoS ONE 16(2): e0245100. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bardi, A., Calogero, R.M. and Mullen, B. (2008), ‘A new archival approach to the study of values and value-behavior relations: Validation of the value Lexicon’, Journal of Applied Psychology 93(3): 483–497. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Billig, M. (1996), Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Botterill, L., Lake, J. and Walsh, M.J. (2021), ‘Factors affecting public responses to health messages during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia: partisanship, values, and source credibility’, Australian Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1978389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Botterill, L.C. and Fenna, A. (2019), Interrogating Public Policy: A Political Values Perspective, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006), ‘Using thematic analysis in psychology’, Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2019), ‘Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis’, Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 11: 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2022), Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide, London, Sage.Google Scholar
Brewer, P.R. (2001), ‘Value words and Lizard brains: do citizens deliberate about appeals to their core values?’, Political Psychology 22(1): 45–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, D. (2022), ‘A worked example of Braun and Clark’s approach to reflextive thematic analysis’, Quality and Quantity 56: 1391–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1113502101182-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chong, D. and Druckman, J.N. (2007), ‘Framing theory’, Annual Review of Political Science 10: 103–126. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeBono, K.G. and Harnish, R.J. (1988), ‘Source expertise, source attractiveness, and the processing of persuasive information: A functional approach’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55(4): 541–546. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.4.541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, S. (1988), ‘Structure and consistency in public opinion: the role of core beliefs and values’, American Journal of Political Science 32(2): 416–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galston, W.A. (1999), ‘Value pluralism and liberal political theory’, American Political Science Review 93(4): 769–778. https://doi.org/10.2307/2586111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammack, P.L. and Pilecki, A. (2012), ‘Narrative as a root metaphor for political psychology’, Political Psychology 33(1): 75–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14679221.2011.00859.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howe, N. (1988), ‘Metaphor in contemporary American political discourse’, Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 3(2): 87–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, S. (2005), ‘Speaking of values: The framing of American politics’, The Forum 3(3): 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacoby, W.G. (2000), ‘Issue framing and public opinion on government spending’, American Journal of Political Science 44(4): 750–767. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kosmidis, S., Hobolt, S.B., Molloy, E. and Whitefield, S. (2019), ‘Party competition and emotive rhetoric’, Comparative Political Studies 52(6): 811–837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414018797942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lake, J., Gerrans, P., Sneddon, J., Attwell, K., Botterill, L.C. and Lee, J.A. (2021), ‘We’re all in this together, but for different reasons: social values and social actions that affect COVID-19 preventative behaviors’, Personality and Individual Differences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110868.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lindblom, C.E. (1959), ‘The science of “Muddling Through”’, Public Administration Review 19: 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mio, J.S. (1997), ‘Metaphor and politics’, Metaphor and Symbol 12(2): 113–133. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1202_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, S.M. and Sandbakken, E.M. (2021), ‘“Everybody needs to do their part, so we can get this under control.” Reactions to the Norwegian government meta-narratives on COVID-19 measures’, Political Psychology. Early View online https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, T.E. and Garst, J. (2005), ‘Values-based political messages and persuasion: Relationships among speaker, recipient, and evoked values’, Political Psychology 26(4): 489–515. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00428.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nofal, A.M., Cacciotti, G. and Lee, N. (2020), ‘Who complies with COVID-19 transmission mitigation behavioral guidelines?’, PLoS ONE 15(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240396.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rokeach, M. (1973), The Nature of Human Values, New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Roskos-Ewoldsen, D.R. and Fazio, R.H. (1992), ‘The accessibility of source likability as a determinant of Persuasion’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 18(1): 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167292181004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schouten, B.C. (2008), ‘Compliance behavior and the role of ethnic background, source expertise, self-construals and values’, International Journal of Intercultural Relations 32: 515–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2008.06.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, S.H. (1992), ‘Universals in the Content and the Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries’, in Zanna, M.P. (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. San Diego: Academic Press Inc, pp. 1–65.Google Scholar
Sheafer, T. (2001), ‘Charismatic skill and media legitimacy: an actor-centered approach to understanding the political communication competition’, Communication Research 28(6): 711–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365001028006001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegal, G., Siegal, N. and Bonnie, R.J. (2009), ‘An account of collective actions in public health’, American Journal of Public Health 99: 1583–1587. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2008.152629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sniderman, P.M. and Theriault, S.M. (2004), ‘The Structure of Political Argument and the Logic of Issue Framing’, in Saris, W.E. and Sniderman, P.M. (eds.), Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change, Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 133–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sternthal, B., Phillips, L.W. and Dholakia, R. (1978), ‘The persuasive effect of source credibility: A situational analysis’, The Public Opinion Quarterly 42(3): 285–314.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stone, D. (2002), Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making, New York: W W Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Thacher, D. and Rein, M. (2004), ‘Managing value conflict in public policy’, Governance 17(4): 457–486. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0952-1895.2004.00254.xlak.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visontay, E. (2020). ‘More than 400 people arrested at anti-lockdown protest in Melbourne’. The Guardian, 3 November.Google Scholar