A Theory of Framing and Opinion Formation in Competitive Elite Environments

Public opinion often depends on how elites choose to frame issues. For example, citizens’ opinions about a Ku Klux Klan rally may depend on whether elites frame the event as a free-speech issue or a public safety issue. Past research has focused largely on documenting the size of framing effects in uncontested settings. By contrast, there has been little research on framing in competitive environments in which individuals receive multiple frames representing alternative positions on an issue. We take an initial step toward understanding how frames work in competitive environments by integrating research on attitude structure and persuasion. Our theory of framing identifies the key individual and contextual parameters that determine which of many competing frames will have an effect on public opinion.

[1]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .

[2]  M. Sherif,et al.  The psychology of attitudes. , 1946, Psychological review.

[3]  E. Goffman.  Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience , 1974 .

[4]  W. S. Rholes,et al.  Category accessibility and impression formation , 1977 .

[5]  M. Fishbein.  A theory of reasoned action: some applications and implications. , 1980, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation.

[6]  Robert M. Entman,et al.  Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm , 1993 .

[7]  P. Herr,et al.  On the consequences of priming: Assimilation and contrast effects , 1983 .

[8]  The additive nature of chronic and temporary sources of construct accessibility. , 1986 .

[9]  S. Iyengar,et al.  News That Matters: Television and American Opinion , 1987 .

[10]  W. Gamson,et al.  The Changing Culture of Affirmative Action , 1987 .

[11]  J. Bargh,et al.  The Role of Consciousness in Priming Effects on Categorization , 1987 .

[12]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  Priming and communication: Social determinants of information use in judgments of life satisfaction , 1988 .

[13]  Automaticity of chronically accessible constructs in person x situation effects on person perception: it's just a matter of time. , 1988 .

[14]  J. Bargh,et al.  Automaticity of chronically accessible constructs in person x situation effects on person perception: it's just a matter of time. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[15]  W. Gamson,et al.  Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach , 1989, American Journal of Sociology.

[16]  R. Fazio.  Multiple Processes by which Attitudes Guide Behavior: The Mode Model as an Integrative Framework , 1990 .

[17]  D. Kinder,et al.  Mimicking Political Debate with Survey Questions: The Case of White Opinion on Affirmative Action for Blacks , 1990 .

[18]  S. Iyengar.  Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. , 1991 .

[19]  Leonard L. Martin,et al.  Beyond accessibility: The role of processing objectives in judgment , 1992 .

[20]  D. Rucinski.  The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. , 1994 .

[21]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  Effects of Epistemic Motivations on the Use of Accessible Constructs in Social Judgment , 1995 .

[22]  D. Wittman.  The myth of democratic failure , 1995 .

[23]  Russell H. Fazio,et al.  Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. , 1995 .

[24]  W. Riker.  The Political Psychology of Rational Choice Theory , 1995 .

[25]  Wafburm.  RESEARCH IN POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY , 1995 .

[26]  Diana C. Mutz,et al.  Political persuasion and attitude change , 1996 .

[27]  E. Higgins,et al.  Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. , 1996 .

[28]  E. Higgins.  Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. , 1996 .

[29]  J. Shanteau,et al.  An information processing view of framing effects: The role of causal schemas in decision making , 1996, Memory & cognition.

[30]  J. Cappella,et al.  Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good , 1997 .

[31]  Thomas E. Nelson,et al.  Toward a Psychology of Framing Effects , 1997 .

[32]  Thomas E. Nelson,et al.  Media Framing of a Civil Liberties Conflict and Its Effect on Tolerance , 1997, American Political Science Review.

[33]  Dhavan V. Shah,et al.  MEDIA PRIMING EFFECTS: ACCESSIBILITY, ASSOCIATION, AND ACTIVATION , 1998 .

[34]  M. Zeelenberg,et al.  The impact of accuracy motivation on interpretation, comparison, and correction processes: accuracy x knowledge accessibility effects. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[35]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. , 1998 .

[36]  Dhavan V. Shah,et al.  Framing and the Public Agenda: Media Effects on the Importance of the Federal Budget Deficit , 1998 .

[37]  Shelly Chaiken,et al.  The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. , 1999 .

[38]  R. Fazio,et al.  The MODE model of attitude-behavior processes. , 1999 .

[39]  Icek Ajzen,et al.  Depth of processing, belief congruence, and attitude-behavior correspondence. , 1999 .

[40]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Dual-process theories in social psychology , 1999 .

[41]  Dietram A. Scheufele,et al.  Framing as a theory of media effects , 1999 .

[42]  W. Wood.  Attitude change: persuasion and social influence. , 2000, Annual review of psychology.

[43]  Jon A. Krosnick,et al.  News Media Impact on the Ingredients of Presidential Evaluations: Politically Knowledgeable Citizens Are Guided by a Trusted Source , 2000 .

[44]  Paul M. Kellstedt.  The Mass Media and the Dynamics of American Racial Attitudes: Media Framing and the Dynamics of Racial Policy Preferences , 2000 .

[45]  D. Scheufele.  Agenda-Setting, Priming, and Framing Revisited: Another Look at Cognitive Effects of Political Communication , 2000 .

[46]  Dennis Chong.  Rational Lives: Norms and Values in Politics and Society , 2000 .

[47]  James N. Druckman,et al.  The Implications of Framing Effects for Citizen Competence , 2001 .

[48]  P. Messaris,et al.  The Role of Images in Framing News Stories , 2001 .

[49]  Mark R. Joslyn,et al.  Gun Policy, Opinion, Tragedy, and Blame Attribution: The Conditional Influence of Issue Frames , 2001, The Journal of Politics.

[50]  Paul R. Brewer,et al.  Value Words and Lizard Brains: Do Citizens Deliberate About Appeals to Their Core Values? , 2001 .

[51]  James N. Druckman,et al.  On the Limits of Framing Effects: Who Can Frame? , 2001, The Journal of Politics.

[52]  James N. Druckman,et al.  Evaluating framing effects , 2001 .

[53]  Paul D'Angelo,et al.  News Framing as a Multiparadigmatic Research Program: A Response to Entman , 2002 .

[54]  Dhavan V. Shah,et al.  News Framing and Cueing of Issue Regimes: Explaining Clinton's Public Approval in Spite of Scandal , 2002 .

[55]  James N. Druckman,et al.  The Power of Television Images: The First Kennedy-Nixon Debate Revisited , 2003, The Journal of Politics.

[56]  R. Petty,et al.  Persuasion and Attitude Change , 2003 .

[57]  Robin L. Nabi,et al.  Exploring the Framing Effects of Emotion , 2003, Commun. Res..

[58]  James N. Druckman,et al.  Framing and Deliberation: How Citizens' Conversations Limit Elite Influence , 2003 .

[59]  P. Sniderman,et al.  CHAPTER 5: The Structure of Political Argument and the Logic of Issue Framing , 2004 .

[60]  James N. Druckman,et al.  Political Preference Formation: Competition, Deliberation, and the (Ir)relevance of Framing Effects , 2004, American Political Science Review.

[61]  James N. Druckman,et al.  Priming the Vote: Campaign Effects in a U.S. Senate Election , 2004 .

[62]  B. Scheufele,et al.  Framing-effects approach: A theoretical and methodological critique , 2004 .

[63]  K. Fiedler,et al.  Social Cognition: How Individuals Construct Social Reality , 2004 .

[64]  P. Brewer,et al.  Values, Framing, and Citizens' Thoughts about Policy Issues: Effects on Content and Quantity , 2005 .

[65]  D. Barker.  Values, Frames, and Persuasion in Presidential Nomination Campaigns , 2005 .

[66]  Fuyuan Shen,et al.  Economic Individualism, Humanitarianism, and Welfare Reform: A Value‐Based Account of Framing Effects , 2005 .

[67]  Joe Bob Hester.  Setting the Agenda: The Mass Media and Public Opinion , 2005 .

[68]  Norman noach Milgram.  To thine own self be true. , 2006 .

[69]  Joanne M. Miller.  Examining the Mediators of Agenda Setting: A New Experimental Paradigm Reveals the Role of Emotions , 2007 .

[70]  Rune Slothuus,et al.  More Than Weighting Cognitive Importance: A Dual‐Process Model of Issue Framing Effects , 2008 .