Abstract

In Matthew Levendusky’s review of Alex Coppock's Persuasion in Parallel, he praises, overall, the book's clear focus, rich data, and striking results, arguing that it makes an important contribution to the literature. He takes issue, however, with Coppock's treatment of theories of motivated reasoning, and he explores ways in which the literature might profitably move forward to better understand how citizens process political information.

This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/pages/standard-publication-reuse-rights)
You do not currently have access to this article.