In psychology, framing refers to the effects of judgment and choice. Kahneman and Tversky have demonstrated in a series of experiments that individuals’ choice varies significantly depending whether the choices are presented as potential gains or as losses. The prospect of relative gains (e.g. winning 100 dollars) let experimental participants to exhibit risk-aversion because they prefer a certain win. Facing a potential loss, however, participants in the experiment became more risk seeking and would rather gamble than accepting a certain loss. In short, the way in which options are presented or “framed”, as potential gains or losses, can influence an individual’s choice.
Others, such as Goffman, suggest that frames are “definitions of a
…show more content…
A Frame is therefore “a central organizing idea or story line that provides meaning to an unfolding strip of events weaving a connection among them. The frame suggests what the controversy is about, the essence of the issue.” Nelson and Kinger argue “frames are more than simply positions or arguments about the issue. Frames are constructions of the issue: the spell out the essence of the problem, suggest how it should be thought about.” For all these authors, frames go beyond merely presenting events and helping to understand complex subjects but they actively contribute to the opinion formation of the issue at hand. Similarly, Entman conceptualizes framing as a process “to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation.” By arguing that the concept of framing could also include treatment recommendation, Entman goes further in his definition of media frames. For most scholars, however, framing is about selecting and presenting aspects of an event in a manner that facilitates the understanding of a complex issue and, at least implicitly, influences how individuals think about certain
Americans have embraced debate since before we were a country. The idea that we would provide reasoned support for any position that we took is what made us different from the English king. Our love of debate came from the old country, and embedded itself in our culture as a defining value. Thus, it should not come as a surprise that the affinity for debate is still strong, and finds itself as a regular feature of the mainstream media. However, if Deborah Tannen of the New York Times is correct, our understanding of what it means to argue may be very different from what it once was; a “culture of critique” has developed within our media, and it relies on the exclusive opposition of two conflicting positions (Tannen). In her 1994 editorial, titled “The Triumph of the Yell”, Tannen claims that journalists, politicians and academics treat public discourse as an argument. Furthermore, she attempts to persuade her readers that this posturing of argument as a conflict leads to a battle, not a debate, and that we would be able to communicate the truth if this culture were not interfering. This paper will discuss the rhetorical strategies that Tannen utilizes, outline the support given in her editorial, and why her argument is less convincing than it should be.
In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, the sciences are described as “going through alternating periods of ‘normal science’, when an existing model of reality dominates a protracted period of puzzle solving and revolution, until the model of reality itself undergoes a sudden drastic change” (Kuhn, 1996. Pg 56). Also known as a ‘paradigm shift’ (Handa, 1986). The purpose of the current study is to define and analyse the theoretical concept of discourse analysis (DA) and its application as the potential new dominant paradigm in modern psychology.
The author talks about selecting alternatives and I think that is how she would incorporate my issue in her study. The term issuing framing makes me think of gun control. A frame is a boundary that cuts off parts of something from our view while focusing attention on other parts (Stone, 252). The way we think about problems is sensitive to the language to describe them. Stone believes that rational decisions should be based on the objective of consequences of actions. In terms of gun control people have their different feelings on gun control and its restrictions. I think that Stone would say that with my issue people have freedom and under the second amendment guns control is
Based on the extent of Maggie’s mental health condition, it would be necessary to implement the Psychodynamic Frame of Reference. This Frame of Reference is appropriate due to Maggie’s diagnosis of major depressive disorder, and her previous history with generalized anxiety disorder. According to Cole and Tufano (2008), the Psychodynamic Frame of Reference is beneficial to clients who are wanting to improve in their social participation and relationships, emotional expression, and motivation for engagement, self-awareness, defense mechanisms, and projective mechanisms (p. 255-256). These are all factors which will assist Maggie in improving her mental health status. Having Maggie advance these factors in her life will enable her to participate in more activities, which may in turn improve her depressive symptoms. It is important for Maggie to continue participation in the activities she enjoys in order for her mental health to improve. While the Psychodynamic Frame of Reference is beneficial to Maggie, it is important for a therapist to follow a model as well to lead Maggie to gaining the largest
According to Mackay (2009, p. 466), Agenda setting theory suggests that the media has the ability to influence the public’s way of thinking through the topics that are covered. If a news item is more prominently covered, it is thought that
To sell news, the media’s coverage of sexual assaults tends to be slanted with imposed stereotypes upon the victim. An example of media coverage in The Accused occured after the initial appearance before the judge when the offenders are granted bail. The news station only covered the offenders’ angle and stated, “the facts will prove the victim was not really raped.” The defense attorney stated in his interview, “There was no rape. The so-called victim participated enthusiastically…put on a show” (Kaplan, The Accused). One offender is immediately congratulated with applause from fellow college students watching the media coverage. The movie demonstrated journalists’ and media’s power and ability to sway and form public opinion. Society begins to believe only what they are told from these sources. Through biased news coverage of criminal acts, especially sexual assault, the media is already playing judge and jury effecting the outcome of the
In Chapter fourteen, page 405 of the textbook “American Government Roots and Reform” it states that “narrowcasting---targeting media programming at specific populations within society” (Yanus) this course of action prompts audiences and listeners to find the media source that relates to what view you have traditionally through family and background beliefs. Analyzing how the media reported President Clinton’s State of the Union address, the difference in what the media reports and what American citizens want to hear, and the YouTube example of the style of reporting that the media utilizes will be the goal of this essay.
According to Hallahan (1999), practitioners employ seven different framing models — action, issue, attribute, event, news, responsibility, and choice — to influence a targeted public reaction (e.g., complete an action, notice some attributes and ignore others). To frame an issue, Zoch and Molleda (2006) identify five steps public relations practitioners use to predetermine the media’s narrative. More specifically, when pitching an issue to media members, it is packaged to define a problem, establish its root cause, purport judgements about the situation driving the cause, and offer a solution (p. 282). If used effectively, issue framing is a powerful organizational asset that can strengthen consumer loyalty or even propel a tarnished brand to greater heights. For example, Waller and Conaway (2010) attribute Nike’s ability to overcome a high-profile smear campaign in the 1990s, and later outshine its top rivals, to effective framing tactics. More specifically, Nike responded to press linking its factories abroad to sweatshop conditions by introducing an alternative narrative about its international presence. The company crafted several information subsidies (e.g., online statements) resulting in widespread media coverage about its
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458.
The way choices are framed impacts the way they are perceived and decided upon. Tversky and Kahneman (1981) suggested that choice between a "certain" and a risky option of equal expected value is affected by option phrasing, a phenomenon known as the framing effect. The framing effect is an example of a psychological terms called cognitive bias, in which people respond to differently to a choice depending on how it is presented; i.e. as a gain or as a loss. When a positive frame is presented, people tend to avoid the risky option, selecting the “certain” option as opposed to when a negative frame is presented, people tend to select the risker option. Gain and loss are defined in scenarios as descriptions of outcomes (i.e. lives lost or saved
Prospect theory is a descriptive model concerning the issue of decision making under risk. The theory stated that people tend to made decision by examining the potential gain and loss comparing to reference point and exhibit certain kinds of heuristics and biases in this process such as certainty effect, reflection effect, probabilistic insurance and isolation effect. It also divided choice process into editing phases and the subsequent phase of evaluation, which were modified to framing and valuation phases in the later version (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979, Tversky and Kahneman, 1992).
News media outlets do not shy away from media framing. Media framing is how information is presented to the public, whether it is leaving information out or exaggerating the details. Erving Goffman was the first to bring forth the idea and theory of framing and defined framing as a “schemata of interpretation” that enables individuals to “locate, perceive, identify and label” occurrences or life experiences (Goffman, 1974). In his 1993 discussion of framing, Robert Entman offered a more thorough explanation: “To frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, casual interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation.” (Entman, p.52). Entman used the term “salient” when referring to framing. Salient terms are more noticeable and important. As he described it, “Texts can make bits of information more salient by placement or repetition, or by associating them with culturally familiar symbols” (Entman, p.53) Entman further explains that frames are a particular way in which the human consciousness can
Salwen, M. B. (1987). Mass Media Issue Dependency and Agenda Setting. Communication Research Reports, 4(1), 26-31.
In our democratic society, mass media is the driving force of public opinion. Media sources such as Internet, newspaper, news-broadcasts, etc, play significant roles in shaping a person’s understanding and perception about the events occurred in our daily lives. As long as the newspapers, internet, network television, etc, continued to be easily accessible to the public, the media will continue to have an influence in shaping its opinions. Factors such as agenda-setting, framing and priming help shape the public opinions. Agenda-setting is when the media focuses their attention on selected issues on which the public will form opinion on, whereas framing allows the media to select certain aspects about the problem and then make them appear more salient. Similarly, priming works by repeatedly exposing certain issues to public. As the issues get more exposure, the individual will be more likely to recall or retain the information in their minds. This paper will discuss these three factors played out systemically by media and how our opinions are constantly being influence and shape by them.
The evolution of media, from old media to new media, has transformed the way we understand the world around us. New media is interactive and is user-generated while old media is a more traditional way of communicating through television, radio, newspapers, magazines, books, etc (Lecture Notes. January 12, 2011). New media gives us a new perspective by allowing us to interact with one another through the Internet. Media has become much more personal and diverse as user-generated content becomes more prominent in our lives (Lecture Notes. January 24, 2011). We are exposed to various viewpoints shape our understanding and knowledge of the social world, but does the form of media actually affect the way we understand the content which is presented to us? For my paper, I will determine whether or not the medium is the message by analyzing two different types of media sources and how they affect our understanding of the content. For my old media source I have chosen a news clip from the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric that deals with the ongoing Egyptian uprising. For my new media source I have chosen a video blog, or ‘vlog’, by an Egyptian man named Omar who discusses the crisis in Egypt from a personal point of view. Both media sources deal with the same topic, but result in different understandings of the crisis.