Framing Theory 框架理論
Released已發布Apply framing theory to analyze how selection, emphasis, and exclusion shape interpretation of issues. Use this skill when the user needs to deconstruct media or organizational frames, evaluate how different frames affect audience perception and decision-making, or design strategic communication frames — even if they say 'how is this issue being portrayed', 'why do people see this differently', or 'how should we frame this message'.
學術研究技能：Framing Theory 分析與應用。
Overview概述
Framing theory examines how the presentation of information — through selection, emphasis, and exclusion — shapes how audiences interpret and respond to issues. The same facts, framed differently, lead to systematically different judgments and decisions.
When to Use使用時機
Trigger conditions:
- Analyzing how media or organizations present issues to shape interpretation
- Comparing competing frames on the same issue
- Designing strategic communication with specific interpretive goals
When NOT to use:
- When studying which issues get attention (use agenda-setting instead)
- When analyzing long-term cumulative media effects (use cultivation theory)
- When studying individual cognitive processing (use dual-process theory)
Assumptions前提假設
IRON LAW: Framing Is About SELECTION and SALIENCE
The same facts presented in different frames lead to different
interpretations and decisions. A frame:
1. SELECTS some aspects of perceived reality
2. Makes them MORE SALIENT in communication
3. Promotes a particular problem definition, causal interpretation,
moral evaluation, or treatment recommendation (Entman, 1993)
There is no "unframed" message — all communication involves framing choices.
Framework 框架
Step 1: Identify Frames
Use inductive (emerge from data) or deductive (apply existing typology) frame analysis. Common generic frames: conflict, human interest, economic consequence, morality, responsibility.
Step 2: Analyze Frame Elements
For each frame, identify: problem definition, causal attribution, moral judgment, and recommended treatment (Entman's four functions).
Step 3: Compare Frame Effects
Assess how different frames affect audience: interpretation, attribution of responsibility, emotional response, policy preference.
Step 4: Evaluate Frame Competition
Analyze which frames dominate, who promotes them, and how counter-framing operates in public discourse.
Output Format輸出格式
# Frame Analysis: {Issue/Topic}
Gotchas注意事項
- Equivalency vs emphasis framing: Equivalency frames present logically identical information differently (e.g., 90% survival vs 10% mortality). Emphasis frames highlight different aspects of an issue. Don't conflate these two distinct mechanisms.
- Frame ≠ bias: Framing is inherent in ALL communication. Identifying a frame does not mean the message is biased — it means choices were made about what to emphasize.
- Frame resonance matters: A frame's effectiveness depends on cultural resonance — frames that align with existing cultural narratives are more powerful than novel frames.
- Individual-level variation: Audiences are not passive frame recipients. Prior knowledge, values, and interpersonal discussion moderate frame effects.
- Frame-building vs frame-setting: Frame-building is how frames enter media discourse (sources, journalists). Frame-setting is how media frames affect audiences. These are separate processes.
References參考資料
- For Entman's cascading activation model, see
references/cascading-activation.md - For frame analysis coding methodology, see
references/frame-coding.md