Does Framing Change Citizens’ Attitudes Towards the Free Movement of Persons?

The free movement of persons (FMP) is one of the economically and culturally most salient aspects of European integration politics. Undoubtedly, the FMP has had far-reaching consequences for nation states that can be considered negative or positive – depending on one’s standpoint. However, individual attitudes towards the FMP are not just a given factor, but largely dependent on the political context and public debate. Here is where political communication comes into play: Pursuing their own economic interests and political agendas, the media and political actors alike often present consequences of the FMP in a biased way. By emphasising either positive or negative outcomes, these actors are powerful shapers of public opinion and capable of activating, reinforcing or changing citizens’ opinions on the matter. The acceptance of the «Mass Immigration Initiative» in Switzerland in February 2014 and the Brexit vote in June 2016 represent major setbacks for the FMP. In order to consolidate their strategies on this highly contested issue, governments and policymakers need to understand to what extent public opinion towards the FMP is malleable. This paper analyses data of the 2019 Swiss Election Study (Selects). The three-wave panel study of Selects that was conducted before, during and after the campaign leading up to the federal elections includes a survey experiment on attitudes towards the FMP. The experiment investigates the effect of framing survey respondents with positive and negative cultural and economic implications of the FMP on their support for the issue. In doing so, the survey experiment relies on a classification of actual frames that have been used in political campaigns by various parties. This classification is based on Helbling et al. (2010) who studied how political parties frame the issue of European integration in six Western European countries. Do citizens change their attitudes towards the FMP when framed with, for example, increasing immigration pressures or enhanced economic well-being since the FMP entered into force? Which social and political groups of citizens are prone to change their attitudes when exposed to the different framing strategies? How strong are attitude changes across these different groups? By digging into more details, the paper will elucidate which framing strategies are the most successful ones when it comes to political communication about the highly salient European integration topic of the FMP.