The present study adds to the framing literature by providing a test of Mauro Porto’s “News Diversity” standard for professional journalism: providing multiple, equally persuasive frames in every news story. What are the effects of multiple versus single media frames on a foreign policy issue, and how do they interact with people’s foreign policy values? Previous studies have looked at how single frames influence opinions, how frames interact with values, and a few studies have investigated the effects of two competing frames at varying levels of persuasiveness. None, however, have used four, equally strong frames on a foreign policy issue and measured their effects among those with differing foreign policy values. We found that exposure to only single frames tended to move participants away from their stated values and in the direction of the frame, while exposure to multiple, competing frames kept participants’ opinions closer to their stated values—without merely reinforcing previously held opinions.
Abrams v. United States. 250 U.S. 616. Supreme Court of the United States. 1919. Legal Information Institute. Web. 21 May2016.
2.
AklinMichaëlUrpelainenJohannes. 2013. “Debating Clean Energy: Frames, Counter Frames, and Audiences.” Global Environmental Change23 (5): 1225–32.
3.
BadenChristianLechelerSophie. 2012. “Fleeting, Fading, or Far-Reaching? A Knowledge-Based Model of the Persistence of Framing Effects.” Communication Theory22 (4): 359–82.
BarkerDavid C.2005. “Values, Frames, and Persuasion in Presidential Nomination Campaigns.” Political Behavior27 (4): 375–394.
6.
BaumMatthew A.GroelingTim J.2009. War Stories: The Causes and Consequences of Public Views of War. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
7.
BeattiePeter. 2016. “Information: Evolution, Psychology, and Politics.” Papers on Social Representations25 (1): 1–37.
8.
BennettW. Lance. 1990. “Toward a Theory of Press-State Relations in the United States.” Journal of Communication40 (2): 103–27.
9.
BensonRodney. 2009. “What Makes News More Multiperspectival? A Field Analysis.” Poetics37 (5): 402–18.
10.
BerinskyAdam J.HuberGregory A.LenzGabriel S.2012. “Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon. com’s Mechanical Turk.” Political Analysis20 (3): 351–68.
11.
BorahPorismita. 2011. “Conceptual Issues in Framing Theory: A Systematic Examination of a Decade’s Literature.” Journal of Communication61 (2): 246–63.
12.
BrewerPaul R.GrossKimberly. 2005. “Values, Framing, and Citizens’ Thoughts about Policy Issues: Effects on Content and Quantity.” Political Psychology26 (6): 929–48.
13.
BrulleRobert J.CarmichaelJasonJenkinsJ. Craig. 2012. “Shifting Public Opinion on Climate Change: An Empirical Assessment of Factors Influencing Concern over Climate Change in the US, 2002–2010.” Climatic Change114 (2): 169–188.
14.
BuhrmesterMichaelKwangTracyGoslingSamuel D.2011. “Amazon’s Mechanical Turk a New Source of Inexpensive, yet High-Quality, Data?”Perspectives on Psychological Science6 (1): 3–5.
15.
ChongDennisDruckmanJames N.2007. “Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies.” American Political Science Review101 (4): 637–55.
16.
ChongDennisDruckmanJames N.2013. “Counterframing Effects.” The Journal of Politics75 (1): 1–16.
17.
DahlRobert A.1959. “Business and Politics: A Critical Appraisal of Political Science.” American Political Science Review53 (1): 1–34.
18.
de VreeseClaes H.BoomgaardenHajo G.SemetkoHolli A.2011. “(In)direct Framing Effects: The Effects of News Media Framing on Public Support for Turkish Membership in the European Union.” Communication Research38 (2): 179–205.
19.
DolanChris J.2008. “The Shape of Elite Opinion on US Foreign Policy, 1992 to 2004.” Politics & Policy36 (4): 542–85.
20.
DruckmanJames N.2011. “What’s It All About? Framing in Political Science.” In Perspectives on Framing, ed. KerenGideon, 279–302. New York: Psychology Press.
21.
EichenbergRichard C.2007. “Citizen Opinion on Foreign Policy and World Politics.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, ed. DaltonRussellKlingemannHans-Dieter, 383–400. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22.
EntmanRobert M.1989. “How the Media Affect What People Think: An Information Processing Approach.” The Journal of Politics51 (2): 347–70.
23.
EntmanRobert M.2007. “Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power.” Journal of Communication57 (1): 163–73.
24.
HallinDaniel C.ManciniPaolo. 2004. Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.
HansenKasper M.2007. “The Sophisticated Public: The Effect of Competing Frames on Public Opinion.” Scandinavian Political Studies30 (3): 377–96.
26.
HitlinStevenPinkstonKevin. 2013. “Values, Attitudes, and Ideologies: Explicit and Implicit Constructs Shaping Perception and Action.” In Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. DeLamaterJohnWardAmanda, 319–39. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
27.
HolstiOle R.RosenauJames N.1990. “The Structure of Foreign Policy Attitudes among American Leaders.” The Journal of Politics52 (1): 94–125.
28.
HolstiOle R.RosenauJames N.1993. “The Structure of Foreign Policy Beliefs among American Opinion Leaders-After the Cold War.” Millennium-Journal of International Studies22 (2): 235–78.
29.
HolstiOle R.RosenauJames N.1996. “Liberals, Populists, Libertarians, and Conservatives: The Link between Domestic and International Affairs.” International Political Science Review17 (1): 29–54.
30.
HurwitzJonPeffleyMark. 1987. “How Are Foreign Policy Attitudes Structured? A Hierarchical Model.” American Political Science Review81 (4): 1099–1120.
31.
ImYung-HoKimEun-meeKimKyungmoKimYeran. 2011. “The Emerging Mediascape, Same Old Theories? A Case Study of Online News Diffusion in Korea.” New Media & Society13 (4): 605–25.
32.
JonssonStefanBuhrHelena. 2011. “The Limits of Media Effects: Field Positions and Cultural Change in a Mutual Fund Market.” Organization Science22 (2): 464–81.
33.
KundaZiva. 1990. “The Case for Motivated Reasoning.” Psychological Bulletin108 (3): 480–98.
34.
KinderDonald R.2003. “Communication and Politics in the Age of Information.” In Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, ed. SearsDavid O.HuddyLeonieJervisRobert357–393. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35.
LakoffGeorge. 2011. “Changing Brains: Lessons from the Living Wage Campaign.” In Manipulating Democracy: Democratic Theory, Political Psychology, and Mass Media, ed. CheminantWayne LeParrishJohn M., 93–112. New York: Routledge.
36.
LechelerSophiede VreeseClaes H.2011. “Getting Real: The Duration of Framing Effects.”Journal of Communication61 (5): 959–83.
37.
LinosKaterinaTwistKimberly. 2013. “Endorsement and Framing Effects in Experimental and Natural Settings: The Supreme Court, the Media and the American Public.” UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 2223732. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2223732
38.
NelsonThomas E.ClawsonRosalee A.OxleyZoe M.1997. “Media Framing of a Civil Liberties Conflict and Its Effect on Tolerance.” American Political Science Review91 (3): 567–83.
39.
NelsonThomas E.GarstJennifer. 2005. “Values-Based Political Messages and Persuasion: Relationships among Speaker, Recipient, and Evoked Values.” Political Psychology26 (4): 489–516.
40.
NelsonThomas E.GwiasdaGregoryLyonsJoseph. 2011. “Vilification and Values.” Political Psychology32 (5): 813–35.
41.
NyhanBrendanReiflerJason. 2010. “When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions.” Political Behavior32 (2): 303–330.
42.
PortoMauro P.2007a. “Frame Diversity and Citizen Competence: Towards a Critical Approach to News Quality.” Critical Studies in Media Communication24 (4): 303–21.
43.
PortoMauro P.2007b. “Framing Controversies: Television and the 2002 Presidential Election in Brazil.” Political Communication24 (1): 19–36.
44.
PowlickPhilip J.KatzAndrew Z.1998. “Defining the American Public Opinion/Foreign Policy Nexus.” Mershon International Studies Review42 (Suppl. 1): 29–61.
45.
RathbunBrian C.2007. “Hierarchy and Community at Home and Abroad Evidence of a Common Structure of Domestic and Foreign Policy Beliefs in American Elites.” Journal of Conflict Resolution51 (3): 379–407.
46.
RosatiJerelCreedJohn. 1997. “Extending the Three-and Four-Headed Eagles: The Foreign Policy Orientations of American Elites during the 80s and 90s.” Political Psychology18 (3): 583–623.
47.
SchwartzShalom H.CapraraGian VittorioVecchioneMichele. 2010. “Basic Personal Values, Core Political Values, and Voting: A Longitudinal Analysis.” Political Psychology31 (3): 421–52.
48.
SchwartzShalom H.CapraraGian VittorioVecchioneMicheleBainPaulBianchiGabrielCapraraMaria GiovannaCieciuchJanKirmanogluHasanBasleventCemönnqvistJan-Erik LMamaliCatalinManziJorgePavlopoulosVassilisPosnovaTetyanaSchoenHaraldSilvesterJoTaberneroCarmenTorresClaudioVerkasaloMarkkuVondrákováEvaWelzelChristianZaleskiZbigniew. 2014. “Basic Personal Values Underlie and Give Coherence to Political Values: A Cross National Study in 15 Countries.” Political Behavior36 (4): 899–930.
49.
ShahDhavan V.DomkeDavidWackmanDaniel B.1996. “‘To Thine Own Self Be True’ Values, Framing, and Voter Decision-Making Strategies.” Communication Research23 (5): 509–60.
50.
ShenFuyuan. 2004. “Effects of News Frames and Schemas on Individuals’ Issue Interpretations and Attitudes.”Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly81 (2): 400–16.
51.
ShenFuyuanEdwardsHeidi Hatfield. 2005. “Economic Individualism, Humanitarianism, and Welfare Reform: A Value-Based Account of Framing Effects.” Journal of Communication55 (4): 795–809.
52.
SimonAdam F.JeritJennifer. 2007. “Toward a Theory Relating Political Discourse, Media, and Public Opinion.” Journal of Communication57 (2): 254–71.
53.
SnidermanPaul M.TheriaultSean M.2004. “The Structure of Political Argument and the Logic of Issue Framing.” In Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change, ed. SarisWilliam E.SnidermanPaul M., 133–65. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
54.
SotirovicMira. 2000. “Effects of Media Use on Audience Framing and Support for Welfare.” Mass Communication and Society3 (2–3): 269–96.
55.
TaberCharles S.CannDamonKucsovaSimona. 2009. “The Motivated Processing of Political Arguments.”Political Behavior31 (2): 137–55.
56.
TaberCharles S.LodgeMilton. 2006. “Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs.” American Journal of Political Science50 (3): 755–69.
57.
TewksburyDavidScheufeleDietram A.2009. “News Framing Theory and Research.” In Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research, ed. BryantJenningsOliverMary B., 17–33. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
58.
UhlmannEric LuisPizarroDavid A.TannenbaumDavidDittoPeter H.2009. “The Motivated Use of Moral Principles.” Judgment and Decision Making4 (6): 479–91.
59.
Van GorpBaldwin. 2007. “The Constructionist Approach to Framing: Bringing Culture Back In.” Journal of Communication57 (1): 60–78.
60.
VragaEmily K.CarrD. JasunNytesJeffrey P.ShahDhavan V.2010. “Precision vs. Realism on the Framing Continuum: Understanding the Underpinnings of Message Effects.” Political Communication27 (1): 1–19.
61.
WiseDavidBrewerPaul R.2010. “Competing Frames for a Public Health Issue and Their Effects on Public Opinion.” Mass Communication and Society13 (4): 435–57.
62.
WuthnowRobert. 2008. “The Sociological Study of Values.” Sociological Forum23 (2): 333–43.
63.
ZallerJohn. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
