Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of Newspaper Articles About ERPOs in Passing vs. Non-Passing States, 2018a

From: A comparative content analysis of newspaper coverage about extreme risk protection order policies in passing and non-passing US states

  All Articles (n = 244),
No. (%)
Passing Statesb (n = 124),
No. (%)
Non-Passing Statesc (n = 120),
No. (%)
χ2 (d.f. = 1) Adjusted p-valuesd
Scope of news outlet
    National 37 (15.2) 28 (22.6) 9 (7.5) 10.78  < .01
Language
    Name of policy used
        "Red flag" names only 88 (36.1) 30 (24.2) 58 (48.3) 15.41  < .01
        Official policy names only 74 (30.3) 47 (37.9) 27 (22.5) 6.85 .03
    Removal language used
        Take away 89 (36.5) 51 (41.1) 38 (31.7) 2.36 .23
        Seize 73 (29.9) 30 (24.2) 43 (35.8) 3.94 .09
            Seize only 28 (11.5) 4 (3.2) 24 (20.0) 16.89  < .01
        Remove 70 (28.7) 38 (30.6) 32 (26.7) 0.47 .55
        Bar/prohibit/ban/forbid/block 28 (11.5) 21 (16.9) 7 (5.8) 7.40 .03
        Confiscate 27 (11.1) 16 (12.9) 11 (9.2) 0.87 .45
        Prevent 23 (9.4) 19 (15.3) 4 (3.3) 10.27  < .01
            Prevent only 12 (4.9) 10 (8.1) 2 (1.7) 5.34 .05
    Key terms used
        "gun control" 79 (32.4) 40 (32.3) 39 (32.5) 0.002 .97
        "warning signs"; "red flags" 71 (29.1) 45 (36.3) 26 (21.7) 6.32 .03
        "Second Amendment" 65 (26.6) 25 (20.2) 40 (33.3) 5.41 .05
        "common sense"; "sensible" 61 (25.0) 19 (15.3) 42 (35.0) 12.59  < .01
        "due process" 56 (23.0) 26 (21.0) 30 (25.0) 0.56 .53
Contextual information
    Events mentioned
        Parkland shooting 180 (73.8) 112 (90.3) 68 (56.7) 35.70  < .01
        Las Vegas shooting 51 (20.9) 22 (17.7) 29 (24.2) 1.52 .35
        Sandy Hook shooting 35 (14.3) 21 (16.9) 14 (11.7) 1.38 .37
        Other violent incident 85 (34.8) 46 (37.1) 39 (32.5) 0.57 .53
    Case details mentioned
        Name of perpetrator 64 (26.2) 51 (41.1) 13 (10.8) 28.93  < .01
        Victim details 35 (14.3) 20 (16.1) 15 (12.5) 0.65 .53
        Firearm info 48 (19.7) 34 (27.4) 14 (11.7) 9.58 .01
        Event was/could have been prevented by an ERPO 32 (13.1) 25 (20.2) 7 (5.8) 10.99  < .01
    Program/policy mentioned
        Any firearm or violence prevention program/policy, excl. ERPOs 106 (43.4) 52 (41.9) 54 (45.0) 0.23 .69
        Other states' or federal ERPO 115 (47.1) 67 (54.0) 48 (40.0) 4.82 .07
Anecdotal and research evidence
    Stakeholder quoted or mentioned
        Official/politician 194 (79.5) 92 (74.2) 102 (85.0) 4.37 .08
        Firearm industry group 93 (38.1) 52 (41.9) 41 (34.2) 1.56 .35
        Gun violence prevention advocacy group 85 (34.8) 51 (41.1) 34 (28.3) 4.40 .08
    Evidence cited
        Any evidence related to gun violence 62 (25.4) 35 (28.2) 27 (22.5) 1.05 .42
        Evidence on ERPOs 29 (11.9) 21 (16.9) 8 (6.7) 6.14 .03
    Uses for ERPOs mentioned
        Suicide 38 (15.6) 22 (17.7) 16 (13.3) 0.90 .45
        Mass shootings 30 (12.3) 15 (12.1) 15 (12.5) 0.01 .97
        Mental illness 12 (4.9) 8 (6.5) 4 (3.3) 1.27 .38
        Othere 12 (4.9) 6 (4.8) 6 (5.0) 0.003 .97
  1. Notes
  2. a ERPO = Extreme risk protection order
  3. b Passing states included Florida, Rhode Island, and Vermont
  4. c Non-passing states included Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Ohio
  5. d p-values were adjusted for multiple testing using the Benjamini-Hochberg (false discovery rate) method. Significant differences between passing and non-passing states at p < .05 are italicized
  6. e Other included domestic violence, homicide, community violence, and violence among people with dementia or cognitive impairments