Publication details

 

Rámcování a nastolování agendy: Dva paralelní procesy v interakci

Basic information
Original title:Rámcování a nastolování agendy: Dva paralelní procesy v interakci
Title in English:Framing and agenda-setting: two parallel processes in interaction
Authors:František Kalvas, Jan Váně, Martina Štípková, Martin Kreidl
Further information
Citation:KALVAS, František, Jan VÁNĚ, Martina ŠTÍPKOVÁ a Martin KREIDL. Rámcování a nastolování agendy: Dva paralelní procesy v interakci. Sociologicky casopis/Czech Sociological Review, 2012, roč. 48, s. 3-37. ISSN 0038-0288.Export BibTeX
@article{986898,
author = {Kalvas, František and Váně, Jan and Štípková, Martina and Kreidl, Martin},
keywords = {framing; agenda setting; cognitive dissonance; panel data; quantitative content analysis},
issn = {0038-0288},
journal = {Sociologicky casopis/Czech Sociological Review},
title = {Rámcování a nastolování agendy: Dva paralelní procesy v interakci},
volume = {48},
year = {2012}
}
Type:Article in Periodical
Keywords:framing; agenda setting; cognitive dissonance; panel data; quantitative content analysis

We interconnect the framing and agenda-setting theories of mass-communication effects in this text. We postulate that the framing process creates conditions for the agenda-setting process. We argue that differently framed news have different effect in the agenda-setting process. We hypothesize that issue-specific frames, episodic frames, and value frames have a stronger agenda-setting effect than generic frames, thematic frames, and strategy frames. We suggest an explanation of the role of frames in the agenda-setting process through the theory of cognitive dissonance. We verify our hypotheses using matched panel survey data on respondents’ personal agendas and media content analysis results regarding one particular issue. We choose this issue – church restitutions – because it contains a diverse combination of frames from our typology. Furthermore, the issue of church restitutions enables us to study the effect of the so-called focusing event, which may have an additional and distinct effect in addition to the “regular” frames. We show that indeed differently framed news have distinctive effects on setting the personal agenda. Some frames have a strong positive effect, while some other have no effect. We have event identified a frame that appears to have a slightly negative effect on setting personal agenda. This is a rather revolutionary result, since it documents that – unlike the predictions made by many theories of “media effects” – people may react to a heightened media exposure of an issue by denying its importance.