Framing Studies Evolution in the Social Media Era. Digital Advancement and Reorientation of the Research Agenda
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- O1. Identify its current strengths and limitations when explaining the process of the construction of the informative message and organization of the public debate;
- O2. Contextualize the opening of a new stage of research evolution, taking the arrival of social media as a key dynamic factor;
- O3. Synthesize the main theoretical and operational consensus reached in the last decade;
- O4. Analyse the digital reorientation of its research agenda, paying special attention to new analysis techniques and innovative fields of application;
- O5. Review the current debate in research on framing effects, analysing the increase in its activity and the use of new experimental approaches;
- O6. Propose several future challenges for its advance in the context of hybridization of political communication.
2. Method
3. Success and Limitations of Framing Studies in Political Communication
3.1. Reasons for a Research Success
3.2. Limitations for Its Scientific Study
4. Opening of a New Stage in Framing Studies: Consolidation and Digitization
4.1. Evolution in Three Stages
- He defines the framing process as a strategic action that develops four discursive functions (definition of the problem, attribution of causality, moral judgment and treatment recommendation);
- And he places it at four points throughout the communication process (emitter, text, receiver, and culture).
4.2. A Fourth Stage of (Re)organization and Digital Advancement
5. Consensus under Construction: Current Keys in Framing Studies
5.1. Plural Definition as a Research Program
- Paradigms such as the cognitive, the constructionist, and the critical;
- To quantitative and qualitative methods;
- To diverse epistemological approaches, from the sociological to the psychological;
- To empirical and interpretive approaches;
- Innovation in the academic and professional field.
5.2. Application of a Dual Concept of Frame
5.3. Organization on the Study of Three Processes
- First, it goes from the cognitive impact of the media and/or political message to the audience’s thinking;
- Second, it is established as an individual mental scheme that will be used for several purposes: to think about a topic while building opinions about it;
- Ultimately, to trigger behavioural changes.
5.4. Approach to a Comprehensive Analytical Model
- To place the research focus on two processes: thematic selection and discursive organization, as key professional actions in the informative setting;
- Seek the methodological balance, betting on designs that combine quantitative content analysis of the message, together with the complementary use of qualitative techniques, such as observation or interviews, that confirm or qualify the detected patterns;
- Bet on longitudinal analysis samples that allow identifying stable discursive patterns in the medium term;
- Whenever possible, opt for an inductive approach that builds analysis categories, validate them from previous farms and, finally, measure them in the final sample. It is a more complex approach but offers more interesting results than the deductive approach. Frame mapping techniques that automate the study of the presence or absence of keywords are relevant inductive examples (Matthes and Kohring 2008);
- Depending on the objective, to take advantage of the entire tradition of existing generic and specific typologies (Semetko and Valkenburg 2000; De Vreese 2005) to improve the proposal of their analysis models and try to be integrated into a debate of broader results.
- To reorganize the experimental studies based on the use of more realistic informative materials. Instead of using artificial samples as a stimulus, it is recommended to obtain the samples beforehand by identifying the news frames through an analysis of real content (Scheufele 2004);
- To increase the external validity of the experiments, a more realistic exposure to the materials is proposed (Lecheler and De Vreese 2016). In particular, to repeat the exposure of the same frames several times or to carry out the simultaneous exposure of several contradictory frames is recommended.
6. Triple Impact of Social Media on Framing Research
6.1. Methodological Advances
6.2. Reorientation of the Research Agenda
6.2.1. Innovative Trends on Media Frames
6.2.2. Development of Social Media as Object of Study
6.2.3. Framing Analysis on Media Hybridization
7. Development of Experimentality in Framing Effects Studies
7.1. Conceptual and Operational Classification
- On the one hand, they link the effect of framing to its sociological definition while selecting a set of facts or arguments about a fact (“the what”) and differentiate it from their psychological notion. Finally, there is a presentation of two equivalent ideas about a theme (“the how”);
- Therefore, they define the framing effect as an applicability process. There is a connection with previous mental schemes invoked by the media message. This helps to process the information in a certain way (Scheufele 2004).
7.2. Increased Experimental Activity
8. Conclusions
Challenges and Future Approaches
- Comprehensive approach to the process. Although the concept of frame allows it, there are still few works that study the framing process as a whole, from the production of the message to the effects. An in-depth study of media and political frames needs to take into account both the professional context where they are built and the society where they are interpreted and disseminated;
- Balanced methodological designs. As it occurs latently, the study of the frame requires sophisticated techniques for its detection and measurement. Given the limitations offered by content analysis, it is recommended to advance in inductive approaches that combine a quantitative base with a qualitative refinement. Although more complex, this approach is more rigorous and realistic. Beyond the use of big data techniques, it is recommended to always provide examples that clarify and contextualize the categories and their interpretation (D’Angelo et al. 2019). On the other hand, in the current context, the study of the frame demands increasingly complete comparative and longitudinal perspectives. Regarding the study of effects, “experimental realism” opens an interesting way for methodological improvement;
- Expansion of the research agenda towards the study of the visual frame. Photographs and videos are key content of digital journalism and social media. The very idea of framing contains a powerful explanatory metaphor and in the current context, its investigative interest has increased. Although relevant work has already been observed, it is a field of enormous potential. However, its study requires specific methodological improvements that take into account the framing power and uniqueness of the image and its combination with the text;
- Analysis of new factors in the hybrid context. Among the consequences of the hybrid media system is the appearance of new factors that influence the framing process (Entman and Usher 2018; Knüpfer and Entman 2018). Standing out among them is the role of platforms that are almost monopolistic, such as Google or Facebook, which can determine access to political information and its interpretation. Furthermore, the power of algorithms and strategic technologies (such as digital analytics) that can be used to monitor online debates, refine communications, and quantify opinion and political engagement. For its part, it also highlights the influence exerted by new digital actors that subvert the traditional dynamics of political communication. Among them stand out “ideological media” that are committed to orienting their message towards the polarization of the public sphere. Furthermore, “rogue actors”, such as hackers and disinformation platforms, who are disrupting the classic news ecosystem. Integrating all these factors is key to understanding the competition between frames and its political consequences in the future;
- Go beyond the message, delve into the consequences. Starting from a more determined sociological approach, the critical study of the political effects of framing can become an interesting field of research in current political communication and, in this way, review in detail how networks and media hybridization are altering the process of the construction of public debate (Entman and Usher 2018). In this way, it can delve into relevant phenomena such as the fragmentation of the media system, the increase in transnational information flows, or the growing control of information by economic and political elites and analyze others in expansion such as the ability of new actors to manipulate media messages and distort the functioning of the democratic system without forgetting the role of traditional journalism in full transformation, with its limitations and its new roles.
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ahmed, Saifuddin, Jaeho Cho, and Kokil Jaidka. 2019. Framing social conflicts in news coverage and social media: A multicountry comparative study. International Communication Gazette 81: 346–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Amores, Javier J., Carlos Arcila-Calderón, and David Blanco-Herrero. 2020. Evolution of negative visual frames of immigrants and refugees in the main media of Southern Europe. Profesional de la Información 29: e290624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Araújo, Bruno, and Hélder Prior. 2021. Framing political populism: The role of media in framing the election of Jair Bolsonaro. Journalism Practice 15: 226–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ardévol-Abreu, Alberto. 2015. Framing theory in communication research. Origins, development and current situation in Spain. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social 70: 423–50. [Google Scholar]
- Aruguete, Natalia, and Ernesto Calvo. 2018. Time to# protest: Selective exposure, cascading activation, and framing in social media. Journal of Communication 68: 480–502. [Google Scholar]
- Ballesteros-Herencia, Carlos A., and Salvador Gómez-García. 2020. Battle of frames during the electoral campaign of April 2019: Engagement and promotion of political parties’ messages on Facebook. Profesional de la Información 29: e290629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banks, Antoine, Ernesto Calvo, David Karol, and Shibley Telhami. 2021. #polarizedfeeds: Three experiments on polarization, framing, and social media. The International Journal of Press/Politics 26: 609–34. [Google Scholar]
- Bateson, Gregory. 1972. A Theory of Play and Fantasy. Boston: MIT Press. First published in 1955. [Google Scholar]
- Bigman, Cabral A., Marisa A. Smith, Lillie D. Williamson, Arrianna M. Planey, and Shardé McNeil Smith. 2019. Selective sharing on social media: Examining the effects of disparate racial impact frames on intentions to retransmit news stories among US college students. New Media & Society 21: 2691–709. [Google Scholar]
- Bolsen, Toby, Risa Palm, and Justin T. Kingsland. 2020. Framing the Origins of COVID-19. Science Communication 42: 562–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borah, Porismita. 2011. Conceptual issues in framing theory: A systematic examination of a decade’s literature. Journal of Communication 61: 246–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brugman, Britta C., and Christian Burgers. 2018. Political framing across disciplines: Evidence from 21st-century experiments. Research & Politics 5: 2053168018783370. [Google Scholar]
- Brugman, Britta C., Christian Burgers, and Gerard J. Steen. 2017. Recategorizing political frames: A systematic review of metaphorical framing in experiments on political communication. Annals of the International Communication Association 41: 181–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bryant, Jennings, and Dorina Miron. 2004. Theory and research in mass communication. Journal of Communication 54: 662–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burgers, Christian, Elly A. Konijn, and Gerard J. Steen. 2016. Figurative framing: Shaping public discourse through metaphor, hyperbole, and irony. Communication Theory 26: 410–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cacciatore, Michael A., Dietram A. Scheufele, and Shanto Iyengar. 2016. The end of framing as we know it… and the future of media effects. Mass Communication and Society 19: 7–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calvo, Ernesto, and Tiago Ventura. 2021. Will I get Covid-19? Partisanship, social media frames, and perceptions of health risk in Brazil. Latin American Politics and Society 63: 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carragee, Kevin M., and Wim Roefs. 2004. The neglect of power in recent framing research. Journal of Communication 54: 214–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casero-Ripollés, Andreu. 2018. Research on political information and social media: Key points and challenges for the future. Profesional de la Información 27: 964–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cervi, Laura, and Santiago Tejedor. 2020. Framing “The Gypsy Problem”: Populist Electoral Use of Romaphobia in Italy (2014–2019). Social Sciences 9: 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chadwick, Andrew, Cristian Vaccari, and Ben O’Loughlin. 2018. Do tabloids poison the well of social media? Explaining democratically dysfunctional news sharing. New Media & Society 20: 4255–74. [Google Scholar]
- Chadwick, Andrew. 2017. The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- D’Angelo, Paul, and Jim A. Kuypers. 2010. Introduction: Doing news framing analysis. In Doing News Framing Analysis: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. Edited by Paul D’Angelo and Jim A. Kuypers. New York: Taylor & Francis, pp. 17–30. [Google Scholar]
- D’Angelo, Paul, Jack Lule, W. Russell Neuman, Lulu Rodriguez, Daniela V. Dimitrova, and Kevin M. Carragee. 2019. Beyond framing: A forum for framing researchers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 96: 12–30. [Google Scholar]
- D’Angelo, Paul. 2002. News framing as a multiparadigmatic research program: A response to Entman. Journal of Communication 52: 870–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- D’Angelo, Paul. 2012. Studying framing in political communication with an integrative approach. American Behavioral Scientist 56: 353–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- D’Angelo, Paul. 2018. Doing News Framing Analysis II: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
- De Vreese, Claes H. 2003. Framing Europe: Television News and European Integration. Amsterdam: Aksant. [Google Scholar]
- De Vreese, Claes H. 2005. News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal & Document Design 13: 51–62. [Google Scholar]
- De Vreese, Claes H. 2012. New avenues for framing research. American Behavioral Scientist 56: 365–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Vreese, Claes H., and Sophie Lecheler. 2012. News framing research: An overview and new developments. In The SAGE Handbook of Political Communication. Edited by Holli H. Semetko and Margaret Scammell. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, pp. 292–306. [Google Scholar]
- Entman, Robert M. 1993. Framing: Towards a Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication 43: 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Entman, Robert M., and Nikki Usher. 2018. Framing in a fractured democracy: Impacts of digital technology on ideology, power and cascading network activation. Journal of Communication 68: 298–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Entman, Robert M., Jörg Matthes, and Lynn Pellicano. 2009. Nature, Sources, and Effects of News Framing. In The Handbook of Journalism Studies. Edited by Karin Wahl-Jorgensen and Thomas Hanitzsch. New York: Routledge, pp. 175–90. [Google Scholar]
- Gamson, William A. 1992. Talking politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Gamson, William A., and André Modigliani. 1989. Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology 95: 1–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gans, Herbert J. 2004. Deciding What’s News: A Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time. Evanston: Northwestern University Press. First published in 1979. [Google Scholar]
- Gitlin, Todd. 1980. The Whole World Is Watching. Mass Media in the Making and Unmaking of the New Left. Berkeley: University of California Press. [Google Scholar]
- Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Hamdy, Naila, and Ehab H. Gomaa. 2012. Framing the Egyptian uprising in Arabic language newspapers and social media. Journal of Communication 62: 195–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hänggli, Regula, and Hanspeter Kriesi. 2010. Political framing strategies and their impact on media framing in a Swiss direct-democratic campaign. Political Communication 27: 141–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hänggli, Regula, and Hanspeter Kriesi. 2012. Frame construction and frame promotion (strategic framing choices). American Behavioral Scientist 56: 260–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hänggli, Regula. 2012. Key Factors in Frame Building How Strategic Political Actors Shape News Media Coverage. American Behavioral Scientist 563: 300–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harlow, Summer, Danielle K. Kilgo, Ramón Salaverría, and Víctor García-Perdomo. 2020. Is the whole world watching? Building a typology of protest coverage on social media from around the world. Journalism Studies 21: 1590–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hopke, Jill E., and Luis E. Hestres. 2018. Visualizing the Paris climate talks on Twitter: Media and climate stakeholder visual social media during COP21. Social Media+ Society 4: 2056305118782687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iyengar, Shanto. 1991. Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
- Joris, Willem, Liina Puustinen, and Leen d’Haenens. 2018. More news from the Euro front: How the press has been framing the Euro crisis in five EU countries. International Communication Gazette 80: 532–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky. 1984. Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist 39: 341–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kilgo, Danielle K., Summer Harlow, Víctor García-Perdomo, and Ramón Salaverría. 2018. From# Ferguson to# Ayotzinapa: Analyzing differences in domestic and foreign protest news shared on social media. Mass Communication and Society 21: 606–30. [Google Scholar]
- Knüpfer, Curd B., and Robert M. Entman. 2018. Framing conflicts in digital and transnational media environments. Media, War & Conflict 11: 476–88. [Google Scholar]
- Lakoff, George. 2004. Don’t Think of an Elephant. Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. New York: Duell, Sloan, and Pearce. [Google Scholar]
- Lecheler, Sophie, and Claes H. De Vreese. 2016. How long do news framing effects last? A systematic review of longitudinal studies. Annals of the International Communication Association 40: 3–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lecheler, Sophie, and Claes H. De Vreese. 2019. News Framing Effects: Theory and Practice. London and New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
- Lecheler, Sophie, Linda Bos, and Rens Vliegenthart. 2015. The mediating role of emotions: News framing effects on opinions about immigration. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 92: 812–38. [Google Scholar]
- Lichtenstein, Dennis, Katharina Esau, Lena Pavlova, Dmitry Osipov, and Nikita Argylov. 2019. Framing the Ukraine crisis: A comparison between talk show debates in Russian and German television. International Communication Gazette 81: 66–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- López-Rabadán, Pablo. 2010. Nuevas vías para el estudio del framing periodístico. La noción de estrategia de encuadre. Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico 16: 235–58. [Google Scholar]
- López-Rabadán, Pablo, and Andreu Casero-Ripolles. 2014. The cover news reporting in Spain: Historical evolution of sources, agenda and frames (1980–2010). Historia y Comunicación Social 19: 457–74. [Google Scholar]
- López-Rabadán, Pablo, and Miguel Vicente-Mariño. 2013. Propuestas de consolidación teórica y analítica para los estudios de framing en la investigación sobre comunicación política. In Estudios sobre Comunicación Política. Libro del año 2012. Edited by Karen Sanders, María J. Canel, Arantxa Capdevila and Mario G. Gurrionero. Madrid: Tecnos, pp. 239–59. [Google Scholar]
- Louie, Vivian, and Anahí Viladrich. 2021. “Divide, Divert, & Conquer” Deconstructing the Presidential Framing of White Supremacy in the COVID-19 Era. Social Sciences 10: 280. [Google Scholar]
- Lück, Julia, Hartmut Wessler, Antal Wozniak, and Diógenes Lycarião. 2018. Counterbalancing global media frames with nationally colored narratives: A comparative study of news narratives and news framing in the climate change coverage of five countries. Journalism 19: 1635–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manor, Ilan, and Rhys Crilley. 2018. Visually framing the Gaza War of 2014: The Israel ministry of foreign affairs on Twitter. Media, War & Conflict 11: 369–91. [Google Scholar]
- Matthes, Jörg, and Matthias Kohring. 2008. The content analysis of media frames: Toward improving reliability and validity. Journal of communication 58: 258–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matthes, Jörg. 2009. What’s in a frame? A content analysis of media framing studies in the world’s leading communication journals, 1990–2005. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 86: 349–67. [Google Scholar]
- Matthes, Jörg. 2012. Framing Politics: An Integrative Approach. American Behavioral Scientist 56: 247–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miceviciute, Jurate. 2013. News Frame: A Bridging Concept between Psychology, Sociology and Linguistics. Zer. Revista de Estudios de Comunicación 18: 71–96. [Google Scholar]
- Milutinović, Irina. 2021. Media framing of COVID-19 pandemic in the transitional regime of Serbia: Exploring discourses and strategies. Media, Culture & Society 43: 1311–27. [Google Scholar]
- Muñiz, Carlos, and Martín Echeverría. 2020. Framing effects in experimental realism designs: Frame consumption and political engagement in the 2018 Mexican election campaign. Profesional de la Información 29: e290613. [Google Scholar]
- Muñiz, Carlos. 2020. Framing as a research project: A review of concepts, fields, and methods of study. Profesional de la Información 29: e290623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nee, Rebecca Coates, and Mariana De Maio. 2019. A ‘presidential look’? An analysis of gender framing in 2016 persuasive memes of Hillary Clinton. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 63: 304–21. [Google Scholar]
- Nortio, Emma, Miira Niska, Tuuli Anna Renvik, and Inga Jasinskaja-Lahti. 2021. ‘The nightmare of multiculturalism’: Interpreting and deploying anti-immigration rhetoric in social media. New Media & Society 23: 438–56. [Google Scholar]
- Ödmark, Sara. 2021. Making news funny: Differences in news framing between journalists and comedians. Journalism 22: 1540–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ophir, Yotam, Devin K. Forde, Madison Neurohr, Dror Walter, and Virginia Massignan. 2021. News media framing of social protests around racial tensions during the Donald Trump presidency. Journalism, 14648849211036622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parrott, Scott, Jennifer Hoewe, Minghui Fan, and Keith Huffman. 2019. Portrayals of immigrants and refugees in US news media: Visual framing and its effect on emotions and attitudes. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 63: 677–97. [Google Scholar]
- Powell, Thomas E., Hajo G. Boomgaarden, Knut De Swert, and Claes H. de Vreese. 2018. Video Killed the News Article? Comparing Multimodal Framing Effects in News Videos and Articles. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 62: 578–96. [Google Scholar]
- Powell, Thomas E., Hajo G. Boomgaarden, Knut De Swert, and Claes H. de Vreese. 2019. Framing fast and slow: A dual processing account of multimodal framing effects. Media Psychology 22: 572–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pöyhtäri, Reeta, Matti Nelimarkka, Kaarina Nikunen, Markus Ojala, Mervi Pantti, and Juho Pääkkönen. 2021. Refugee debate and networked framing in the hybrid media environment. International Communication Gazette 83: 81–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Qin, Jie. 2015. Hero on Twitter, traitor on news: How social media and legacy news frame Snowden. The International Journal of Press/Politics 20: 166–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radojevic, Radmila, Dennis Nguyen, Jan Bajec, and Ioanna Ferra. 2020. Visual Framing and Migrant Discourses in Social Media: The Story of Idomeni on Instagram. In Understanding Media and Society in the Age of Digitalisation. Edited by Dennis Nguyen, Ivonne Dekker and Sergül Nguyen. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 157–82. [Google Scholar]
- Reese, Stephen D., Oscar H. Gandy, and August E. Grant. 2001. Framing Public Life. Perspectives on Media and Our Understanding of the Social World. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar]
- Sahly, Abdulsamad, Chun Shao, and K. Hazel Kwon. 2019. Social media for political campaigns: An examination of Trump’s and Clinton’s frame building and its effect on audience engagement. Social Media+ Society 5: 2056305119855141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saperas, Enric, and Ángel Carrasco-Campos. 2015. The operationalization of the concept of framing in the Journal of Communication (2009–2013): Objects of study, research techniques and theoretical construction. Communication & Society 28: 49–66. [Google Scholar]
- Scheufele, Bertram. 2004. Framing-effects approach: A theoretical and methodological critique. European Journal of Communication Research 29: 401–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Scheufele, Dietram A. 1999. Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication 49: 103–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scheufele, Dietram A. 2000. Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication & Society 3: 297–316. [Google Scholar]
- Scheufele, Dietram A., and David Tewksbury. 2007. Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication 57: 9–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scheufele, Dietram A., and Shanto Iyengar. 2017. The state of framing research: A call for new directions. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Communication. Edited by Kate Kenski and Kathleen Jamieson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 61932. [Google Scholar]
- Segado-Boj, Francisco. 2020. Research on social media and journalism (2003–2017): A bibliometric and content review. Transinformação 32: e180096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Semetko, Holli A., and Patti M. Valkenburg. 2000. Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication 50: 93–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siapera, Eugenia, Moses Boudourides, Sergios Lenis, and Jane Suiter. 2018. Refugees and network publics on Twitter: Networked framing, affect, and capture. Social Media+ Society 4: 2056305118764437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Snow, David A., and Robert D. Benford. 1988. Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research 1: 197–217. [Google Scholar]
- Snow, David A., Rens Vliegenthart, and Pauline Ketelaars. 2018. The framing perspective on social movements: Its conceptual roots and architecture. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. Edited by David A. Snow, Sara H. Soule, Hanspeter Kriesi and Holly McCammon. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 392–410. [Google Scholar]
- Starkey, Jesse C., Amy Koerber, Miglena Sternadori, and Bethany Pitchfor. 2019. #MeToo goes global: Media framing of silence breakers in four national settings. Journal of Communication Inquiry 43: 437–61. [Google Scholar]
- Stecula, Dominik A., and Eric Merkley. 2019. Framing climate change: Economics, ideology, and uncertainty in American news media content from 1988 to 2014. Frontiers in Communication 4: 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tankard, James. 2001. The empirical approach to the study of media framing. In Framing Public Life. Perspectives on Media and Our Understanding of the Social World. Edited by Stephen D. Reese, Oscar H. Gandy and August E. Grant. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 111–21. [Google Scholar]
- Tewksbury, David, and Julius Matthew Riles. 2018. Framing in an interactive news environment. In Doing News Framing Analysis II. Edited by Paul D’Angelo. New York: Routledge, pp. 137–62. [Google Scholar]
- Tuchman, Gaye. 1978. Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality. New York: The Free Press. [Google Scholar]
- Valenzuela, Sebastián, Martina Piña, and Josefina Ramírez. 2017. Behavioral effects of framing on social media users: How conflict, economic, human interest, and morality frames drive news sharing. Journal of Communication 67: 803–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valera-Ordaz, Lidia. 2016. The ‘media bias’ in the Spanish framing literature: A critical review of how communication studies apply framing theory. Zer: Revista de Estudios de Comunicación 21: 13–31. [Google Scholar]
- Van-Gorp, Baldwin. 2010. Strategies to take subjectivity out of framing analysis. In Doing News Framing Analysis: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. Edited by Paul D’Angelo and Jim A. Kuypers. New York: Routledge, pp. 84–109. [Google Scholar]
- Vicente-Mariño, Miguel, and Pablo López-Rabadán. 2009. Resultados actuales de la investigación sobre framing: Sólido avance internacional y arranque de la especialidad en España. Zer-Revista de Estudios de Comunicación 14: 13–34. [Google Scholar]
- Vliegenthart, Rens, and Liesbet Van Zoonen. 2011. Power to the frame: Bringing sociology back to frame analysis. European Journal of Communication 26: 101–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Von Sikorski, Christian, and Johannes Knoll. 2019. Framing political scandals: Exploring the multimodal effects of isolation cues in scandal news coverage on candidate evaluations and voting intentions. International Journal of Communication 13: 23. [Google Scholar]
- Vu, Hong Tien, Matthew Blomberg, Hyunjin Seo, Yuchen Liu, Fatemeh Shayesteh, and Hong Tien Do. 2021. Social media and environmental activism: Framing climate change on Facebook by global NGOs. Science Communication 43: 91–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weaver, David H. 2007. Thoughts on agenda setting, framing, and priming. Journal of Communication 57: 142–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wicke, Philipp, and Marianna M. Bolognesi. 2020. Framing COVID-19: How we conceptualize and discuss the pandemic on Twitter. PLoS ONE 15: e0240010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, Stephen. 2018. The effects of cueing and framing on youth attitudes towards gun control and gun rights. Social Sciences 7: 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
López-Rabadán, P. Framing Studies Evolution in the Social Media Era. Digital Advancement and Reorientation of the Research Agenda. Soc. Sci. 2022, 11, 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11010009
López-Rabadán P. Framing Studies Evolution in the Social Media Era. Digital Advancement and Reorientation of the Research Agenda. Social Sciences. 2022; 11(1):9. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11010009
Chicago/Turabian StyleLópez-Rabadán, Pablo. 2022. "Framing Studies Evolution in the Social Media Era. Digital Advancement and Reorientation of the Research Agenda" Social Sciences 11, no. 1: 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11010009