Issue Framing and Engagement: Rhetorical Strategy in Public Policy Debates

180 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Getting real: the duration of framing effects (2011, background): “In doing so, the authors create a more realistic setting, as most media exposure on a particular issue is characterized not just by repetition of one specific, but a multitude of competing frames (see also Jerit, 2009; Scheufele, 2004; Sniderman & Theriault, 2004).”
Who sets the agenda and who responds to it in the Danish parliament? A new model of issue competition and agenda-setting (2010, background): “And risky because a hotly debated issue always has a particular tone or frame attached to it (Baumgartner & Jones 1993; Stone 1997; Baumgartner et al. 2008), and ignoring such an issue means relinquishing influence over how it is framed (Jerit 2008).”
Deservingness versus values in public opinion on welfare: The automaticity of the deservingness heuristic (2011, background): “As evidenced by studies of framing, the information citizens rely on in opinion formation may often have been strategically presented by political elites in order to win support for their preferred positions (see Chong & Druckman 2007; Jerit 2008).”
Debunking: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Efficacy of Messages Countering Misinformation (2017, background): “Therefore, offering a well argued, detailed debunking message appears to be necessary to reduce misinformation persistence ( Jerit, 2008).”