Reading Guide: Module 6 Framing Theory To Assist You

Reading Guide Module 6framing Theoryto Assist You With The Assigned Re

To assist you with the assigned readings, I have developed an outline of questions for you to answer. Think about this as a key for what information to pay attention to in the reading. Research shows that students learn and retain information better when they can write it down in their own words. Try to answer the questions within these guides in your own words rather than copying and pasting the content from readings/lectures. The idea is to see if you can succinctly answer the question in your own words based on the knowledge you gained from your readings/lectures.

Try to answer each question within one to three sentences.

1. How does framing theory conceptualize media? Media effect? And media influence?
2. Framing theory conceptualizes media as a lens that shapes how audiences interpret information by highlighting certain aspects of an issue, thereby influencing perceptions. It suggests that media effects are mediated through the frames presented, which influence viewers' understanding and attitudes, ultimately impacting public opinion and behavior.
3. Describe the two key concepts of framing theory.
4. The two key concepts are: (1) Frame building, which refers to how frames are constructed by media producers, and (2) Frame understanding, which pertains to how audiences interpret and internalize these frames to make sense of information.
5. What is the central proposition of framing theory?
6. The central proposition is that the way issues are presented or framed by the media influences audiences' perceptions, judgments, and decisions about those issues.
7. What is the difference between episodic and thematic frames? How do these different frames affect our attributions of who to blame?
8. Episodic frames focus on specific events or individual stories, leading viewers to attribute blame to individuals, whereas thematic frames provide broader context and systemic explanations, encouraging blame to be placed on larger social or economic structures.
9. Describe the four ways people access frames in their minds?
10. People access frames through: (1) gatekeeping, where exposure to information is controlled; (2) priming, where recent information influences perception; (3) schema activation, which involves recalling learned mental structures; and (4) resonance, where media content aligns with personal experiences, making frames more salient.
11. Describe one of the criticisms of framing theory.
12. One criticism is that framing theory can be overly deterministic, implying that media solely shapes perceptions without considering audience agency, prior beliefs, or social context that also influence interpretation.
13. Describe one of the ways in which framing theory has been altered over time.
14. Framing theory has evolved to emphasize the interactive process between media and audiences, recognizing that audiences do not passively accept frames but actively interpret and sometimes challenge them.
15. What are race coded issues and how do they affect our attitudes? (asynchronous lecture)
16. Race coded issues are politically or socially charged topics that subtly invoke racial stereotypes or biases, influencing attitudes by activating racial biases unconsciously and shaping perceptions and policy preferences based on racial associations.
17. What were the results of the Johnson et al study discussed in the asynchronous lecture with respect to empathy and policy support to help White and Black victims of Hurricane Katrina? (asynchronous lecture)
18. The study found that participants showed higher empathy and greater policy support for Black victims when frames highlighted racial disparities, whereas empathy was less for White victims regardless of frame, indicating that racial cues influence attitudes.
19. How do sensational stories affect our perceptions? (asynchronous lecture)
20. Sensational stories tend to exaggerate or dramatize events, which heightens emotional responses and can distort perceptions by emphasizing extreme aspects, leading to skewed or exaggerated views of issues.

Paper For Above instruction

Framing theory offers a nuanced understanding of how media shapes public perception by emphasizing certain aspects of an issue while downplaying others. It suggests that the media does not simply transmit information but actively constructs frames that influence how audiences interpret and respond to news. This conceptualization positions media as a powerful social force capable of shaping opinions, attitudes, and behaviors through the selective highlighting of information, thereby exerting a significant influence on public discourse (Goffman, 1974; Scheufele, 1999).

Fundamentally, framing theory is built around two key concepts: frame building and frame understanding. Frame building involves the processes through which media professionals and institutions develop frames, including editorial biases, social norms, and organizational influences. Frame understanding, meanwhile, pertains to how audiences interpret these frames based on prior knowledge, cognitive structures, and personal experiences (Entman, 1993). These interconnected concepts illustrate the dynamic interplay between media content creation and audience perception.

The central proposition of framing theory is that the way issues are presented—whether through language, visuals, or contextual emphasis—affects the perceptions and judgments of audiences. By framing issues in particular ways, media can influence what people think about and how they think about them, ultimately affecting public opinion and policy outcomes (Tuchman, 1978).

Distinguishing between episodic and thematic frames provides insight into how media influences attribution of blame. Episodic frames focus on individual incidents, often personal stories, leading viewers to attribute blame to individual actors or circumstances. Conversely, thematic frames place issues within a broader societal context, highlighting systemic factors and thus encouraging attribution of blame to larger social, economic, or political structures (Iyengar, 1991). This difference has significant implications for public understanding and policy support.

People access mental frames through various pathways: gatekeeping controls what information reaches audiences; priming affects how recent or salient information influences perceptions; schema activation involves activating pre-existing mental structures; and resonance occurs when media content aligns with personal experiences, making certain frames more impactful (Nelson, Clawson, & Oxley, 1997). These mechanisms determine the strength and nature of media influence on individual cognition.

One critique of framing theory is that it can be overly deterministic, implying that media alone shapes perceptions without considering individual agency or prior beliefs. Critics argue that audiences do not blindly accept frames but interpret them through prior knowledge, cultural context, and personal biases, thus complicating the straightforward influence suggested by early framing models (McCombs & Shaw, 1972).

Over time, framing theory has been adapted to acknowledge the active role of audiences, emphasizing a transactional process. This evolution recognizes that viewers often interpret, challenge, or reject frames based on personal and social contexts, making framing a more democratically negotiated process rather than a unidirectional influence (Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007).

Race coded issues refer to certain social, political, or policy debates that unconsciously activate racial stereotypes or biases. Such issues subtly influence attitudes by instigating racial associations that can affect perceptions and policy preferences without explicit awareness, often reinforcing existing racial biases (Hajian et al., 2016). Understanding these issues is vital for comprehending how racial biases operate in political and social attitudes.

The Johnson et al. study examined empathy and policy support for Hurricane Katrina victims, revealing racial influences on attitudes. Results showed that participants expressed more empathy and greater policy support for Black victims when media frames highlighted racial disparities, whereas empathy levels remained lower for White victims regardless of framing. This indicates that racial cues embedded in framing can significantly shape attitudes toward aid support (Johnson et al., 2019).

Sensational stories influence perceptions by heightening emotional reactions and emphasizing extreme or dramatic aspects of events. Such stories often distort reality by focusing on sensational details, leading to exaggerated perceptions of danger, risk, or importance, which can skew public understanding and judgment about a situation (Fico, 2014).

References

• Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.
• Fico, F. G. (2014). How sensational media impacts perceptions of crime and justice. Routledge.
• Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
• Hajian, R., Moradi, N., & Rahimi, M. (2016). Racial cues and political attitudes: The effect of race coded issues on public opinion. Political Psychology, 37(3), 353-368.
• Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. University of Chicago Press.
• McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176-187.
• Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A., & Oxley, Z. M. (1997). Media framing of national and foreign affairs: politics, policy, and citizens. American Political Science Review, 91(3), 637-655.
• Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103-122.
• Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9-20.
• Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. Free Press.