Đang chuẩn bị liên kết để tải về tài liệu:
FRAMING AS A THEORY OF MEDIA EFFECTS

“ Abuse is different from dissent. So long as you have a clear terms-of-use policy in place (or the social media tool you are using does) then this is simply a case of evaluating comments and posts against that policy. Where possible explain to the commenter why his or her comments are unacceptable, particularly if the commenter might simply not have understood or has just got carried away in a discussion. The exception here is someone who is simply out to ‘troll’ you. This means the person is being inten- tionally rude, challenging and disrespectful. It is never advisable to engage a troll. | Framing as a Theory of Media Effects by Dietram A. Scheufele Research on framing is characterized by theoretical and empirical vagueness. This is due in part to the lack of a commonly shared theoretical model underlying framing research. Conceptual problems translate into operational problems limiting the comparability of instruments and results. In this paper I systematize the fragmented approaches to framing in political communication and integrate them into a comprehensive model. I classify previous approaches to framing research along two dimensions the type of frame examined media frames vs. audience frames and the way frames are operationalized independent variable or dependent variable . I develop a process model of framing identifyingfour key processes that should be addressed in future research frame building frame setting individuallevel processes of framing and a feedback loop from audiences to journalists. Entman 1993 referred to framing as a scattered conceptualization p. 51 with previous studies lacking clear conceptual definitions and relying on context-specific rather than generally applicable operationalizations. Brosius and Eps 1995 went even further positing that framing is not a clearly explicated and generally applicable concept but only a metaphor that cannot be directly translated into research questions. Partly because of these vague conceptualizations the term framing has been used repeatedly to label similar but distinctly different approaches. For example Wicks 1992 identified subtle but distinct differences between various concepts of cognitive categorization. Hamill and Lodge 1986 and Lodge Hamill 1986 saw only a terminological difference between concepts like frame script or schema. At the same time studies have operationalized framing in combination with other concepts such as agenda setting or priming Iyengar Kinder 1987 . More recently McCombs Shaw and Weaver 1997 suggested that not only are agenda setting and framing effects .