Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHÄNGGLI, Regula
dc.contributor.authorKRIESI, Hanspeter
dc.date.accessioned2012-09-27T10:02:38Z
dc.date.available2012-09-27T10:02:38Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier.citationAmerican Behavioral Scientist, 2012, 56, 3, 260-278en
dc.identifier.issn0002-7642
dc.identifier.issn1552-3381
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1814/23967
dc.description.abstractIn this article, the authors discuss the three most important strategic framing choices by political actors (“substantive emphasis choice,” “oppositional emphasis choice,” and “contest emphasis choice”) of direct-democratic campaigns. The authors investigate these strategic framing choices in the media input and look at how the political actors change their choices in another communication channel (political advertisement) and over time. The results provide the following insights: First, political actors tend to emphasize one to two main frames in their media input. They generally also use their main frames in the political advertisements and stay on their main frames over time. Second, although political actors tend to emphasize their own frames, they do not exclusively revert to this behavior. The authors find that the political actors pay more attention to their opponents’ frames in the media input than in the ads. With regard to variation over time, the authors can state that campaign dialogue does not disappear over the course of the campaign. Third, framing is primarily accomplished in substantive terms. In the advertisements and toward the end of the campaign, the authors do not find more contest frames.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.titleFrame Construction and Frame Promotion (Strategic Framing Choices)en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0002764211426325


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record