Framing, Agenda Setting, and Priming: The Evolution of Three Media Effects Models

By Dietram A. Scheufele, David Tewksbury. 2007

2,909 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9455584f50fd907cd0e5a7a15b52e6ec9d6870c2

How researchers see this paper

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

In Communication

Citations in the corpus

Framing the alcohol policy debate: industry actors and the regulation of the UK beverage alcohol market (2013, background): “Frames provide an ordering logic that renders issues comprehensible (Schön and Rein 1996, Triandafyllidou and Fotiou 1998, Hajer and Laws 2006, Daviter 2007, Scheufele and Tewksbury 2007).”
Media and Politics (2015, background): “…health or civil rights issue (Sniderman, Brody, and Tetlock, 1991), whether a Klu Klux Klan meeting is framed as a freedom of speech or civil liberties issue (Nelson et al., 1997), or whether considerations about unemployment are applicable to questions about taxes (Scheufele and Tewksbury, 2007).”
A Clearer Picture: The Contribution of Visuals and Text to Framing Effects (2015, positive): “However, if the recipient lacks required knowledge, of both of the language and the context, the text will not be decoded and framing will fail (Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007).”
Attitude Change in Competitive Framing Environments? Open-/Closed-Mindedness, Framing Effects, and Climate Change (2013, background): “Framing research has the advantage of explanatory power at both the macro, or contextual, and micro, or individual, levels of analysis (Benford & Snow, 2000; Chong & Druckman, 2007a; Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007).”
From enabling technology to applications: The evolution of risk perceptions about nanotechnology (2011, background): “Research on priming (Iyengar and Kinder, 1987; Scheufele, 2000; Scheufele and Tewksbury, 2007), for instance, has shown that people’s evaluation of candidates or issues can be influenced by the considerations that are most salient at the time of decision making.”
What's next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions. (2009, background): “Successful framing suggests a linkage between two concepts or things, such that after exposure to a message, audiences now accept that they are connected ( Scheufele and Tewksbury, 2007 ).”
Can the Media Discipline Chinese Firms’ Pollution Behaviors? The Mediating Effects of the Public and Government (2016, background): “Especially in an information explosion era when numerous events are competing for the limited attention of stakeholders, an issue has to receive a certain amount of processing time and attention to ensure the media’s effect (Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007).”
The Impact of Climate Change–Related Imagery and Text on Public Opinion and Behavior Change (2016, positive): “…and respond to the information to which they attend (Borah, 2011; Chong & Druckman, 2007; Feldman, Hart, Leiserowitz, Maibach, & Roser-Renouf, 2015; Hart, Feldman, Leiserowitz, & Maibach, 2015; Iyengar, 1994; Kunda, 1990; Myers et al., 2012; M. C. Nisbet, 2009; Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007).”
Public Opinion and Affordable Housing: A Review of the Literature (2010, neutral): “However, some suggest that the media also influences how the public thinks about issues and policies (Entmen 1993; Iyengar, Peters, and Kinder 1982; Scheufele and Tewksbury 2007).”
The End of Framing as we Know it … and the Future of Media Effects (2016, background): “Models of agenda-setting and priming therefore assume that individuals form attitudes based on the most salient considerations at the time of decision making (Hastie & Park, 1986; Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007).”
Do voters follow the recommendations of voter advice application websites? A study of the effects of kieskompas.nl on its users’ vote choices in the 2010 Dutch legislative elections (2014, background): “The agenda-setting, priming and framing literatures in communication and media studies, for instance, have uncovered the existence of politically influential behaviours that rarely register in the consciousness of voters (Scheufele and Tewksbury, 2007).”