F r ami ng and t he P ubli c Agenda: M edia E f f ects
on t he I mpor t ance of t he F eder al B udget D ef i ci t
A M Y E. JA S P E R S O N
D H AV AN V . S H AH
U n i v er s i ty of M i n n es ota
M AR K W AT T S
F l or i da I n ter n ati on al U n i ver s i ty
R O N A L D J. F A B E R
D AV ID P. FAN
U n i v er s i ty of M i n n es ota
W h at ex pl ai n s th e sh i ft i n pu bl i c opi n i on ov er ti m e on th e i s s ue of th e 1 9 9 6
U . S . feder al bu dget? P u bl i c opi n i on pol l s dem on str ate dr am ati c sh i fts i n the
per cen tage of peopl e con s i der i n g th e bu dget i ss u e to be th e m ost i m por tan t
pr obl em faci n g th e coun tr y fr om N ov em ber 1 9 9 4 th r ou gh A pr i l 1 9 9 6 . I n th i s
ar ti cl e, w e m odel R oper Cen ter opi n i on pol l s agai n st a pr edi cti on of opi n i on
fr om m edi a con ten t to i nv es ti gate h ow m edi a cov er age affects th e i m por tan ce
as s i gn ed to th e bu dget i s su e. W e i den ti fy fou r dom i n an t fr am es pr esen t i n
m edi a cov er age of th e budget i s s ue an d ar gu e th at a m odel com bi ni n g the
th eor i es of agen da s etti n g an d fr am i ng pr ov i des a better ex pl an ati on for the
s hi fts i n aggr egate opi n i on th an ei th er th eor y on i ts ow n . B y com bi ni n g fr am i ng
w i th th e tr adi ti on al agen da-s etti n g appr oach , w e tak e i nto accou nt th e n u an ces
of cover age w i th i n the i s su e, i n addi ti on to the sh eer am ou n t of cov er age, for a
m or e com pl ete ex pl an ati on of m edi a effects on pu bl i c opi n i on on th e i ss u e of
th e feder al bu dget.
K eyw or ds agenda s etti n g, feder al bu dget, fr am i n g, m edi a effects , pu bl i c opi n i on , publ i c opi ni on pol l s , conten t an al ys i s
W h er e does th e pu bl i c get i ts i n for m ati on abou t i s s u es an d pol i cy al ter n ati v es ?
M an y m odel s of pu bl i c opi n i on s u gges t th at pr es en tati on of i s s u es i n th e m edi a
pl ays an i m por tan t r ol e i n s h api n g th e atti tu des of th e pu bl i c (i .e. , M cCl os k y &
Z al l er , 1 9 8 4 ; F an , 1 9 8 8 ; P age & S h api r o, 1 9 9 2 ; S ti m s on , 1 9 9 1 ; Z al l er , 1 9 9 2 , 1 9 9 4 ).
M edi a s er v e as th e pr i m ar y m ech an i s m by w h i ch el i te opi n i on i s com m u n i cated to
th e pu bl i c. R es ear ch on m edi a agen da s etti n g tes ti fi es to th i s i n fl u en ce (M cCom bs
& S h aw , 1 9 7 2 ; I y en gar & K i n der , 1 9 8 7 ). A ccor di n g to th i s per s pecti v e, m edi a do
n ot tel l th e au di en ce w h at to th i n k bu t, r ath er , w h at to th i n k abou t (Coh en , 1 9 6 3 ).
T h i s i s accom pl i s h ed th r ou gh th e s h eer am ou n t of atten ti on gi v en by m edi a ou tl ets
to var i ou s pol i ti cal i s s u es ; th e m or e cov er age an i s s u e r ecei v es , th e fu r th er u p th e
agen da i t s u ppos edl y m ov es . A gen da s etti n g, th en , ex pl ai n s w h y cer tai n i s s u es i n
th e i n for m ati on en vi r on m en t ar e con s i der ed to be m or e i m por tan t th an oth er s by
th e pu bl i c (M cCom bs & S h aw , 1 9 9 3 ). E x per i m en tal ev i den ce dem on s tr ates th at
2 05
P ol i ti cal Com m uni cati on, 1 5 :2 0 5 – 2 2 4 , 1 9 9 8
Copyr i ght ã 1 9 9 8 T ayl or & F r anci s
1 0 5 8 -4 6 0 9 /9 8 $ 1 2 .0 0 + .0 0
2 06
A m y E . Jas per s on et al .
w h en n ew s cov er age focu s es m or e on a par ti cu l ar i s s u e, peopl e ar e m or e l i k el y to
ci te th at i s s u e as th e m os t i m por tan t con cer n faci n g th e n ati on (I y en gar et al .,
1 9 8 2 ).
H ow ev er , th e tr adi ti on al agen da-s etti n g co n cept, al s o r efer r ed to as th e “fi r s t
l ev el ” of agen da s etti n g (M cCom bs & B el l , 1 9 9 6 ), attem pts to ex pl ai n on l y w h y
on e i s s u e becom es m or e i m por tan t th an an oth er i s s u e i n th e pu bl i c’s m i n d; i t does
n ot ex pl i ci tl y focu s on th e n u an ces of cov er age w i th i n an i s s u e. S om e h ave ar gu ed,
th er efor e, th at th e or i gi n al agen da-s etti n g th eor y does n ot go far en ou gh ; i t “s tr i ps
aw ay al m os t ev er y th i n g w or th k n ow i n g abou t h ow th e m edi a cover an i s s u e an d
l eav es on l y th e s h el l of th e topi c” (K os i ck i , 1 9 9 3 , p. 1 1 2 ). T h e tr adi ti on al m odel of
agen da s etti n g ov er l ook s th e i dea th at con tr over s y i s th e u n der l yi n g bas i s of an y
i s s u e th at becom es a topi c of m edi a cov er age. H ow di ffer en t con cepti on s of i s s u es
em er ge an d ev ol v e ov er ti m e, n ot m er el y th ei r i n cr eas ed pr es en ce i n m edi a, i s
i m por tan t for u n der s tan di n g ch an ge i n pu bl i c opi n i on .
Con sequen tl y, s chol ar s w or k i n g i n thi s dom ai n h ave begu n to ex tend the agen das etti n g con cept to con s i der h ow v ar i ati on s w i th i n cov er age of an i s s u e i n fl u en ce an
i s su e’s s al i ence i n the pu bl i c m i nd (M cCom bs , 1 9 9 2 , 1 9 9 4 ; M cCom bs & B el l , 1 9 9 6 ).
D es cr i bed as th e “co m pel l i n g ar gu m en ts ” h y poth es i s , th i s per s pecti v e as s er ts th at
th e s el ecti on of par ti cu l ar attr i bu tes of an i s s u e for atten ti on pl ay s a pow er fu l r ol e
i n s etti n g th e pu bl i c agen da (G h an em & E v att, 1 9 9 5 ). A s M cCom bs an d Es tr ada
(1 9 9 7 , p. 2 4 0 ) ex pl ai n : “H ow n ew s fr am es affect pu bl i c opi n i on i s th e em er gi n g
s econ d-l ev el of agen da-s etti n g. T h e fi r s t l ev el i s th e tr an s m i s s i on of obj ect s al i en ce.
T h e s econ d l evel i s th e tr an s m i s s i on of attr i bu te s al i en ce.” A ttr i bu te s al i en ce r efer s
to th e m u l ti tu de of w ays pol i ti cal el i tes or m edi a s ou r ces can ch oos e to s h ape th e
pr es en tati on of an i s s ue; as s u ch , th e s econ d l evel of agen da s etti n g i m pl i ci tl y dr aw s
u pon th eor i es of m edi a fr am i n g.
F r am i n g— m ak i n g s om e as pects of r eal i ty m or e s al i en t i n a tex t i n or der to
pr om ote a par ti cu l ar “pr obl em defi n i ti on , cau s al i n ter pr etati on , m or al ev al u ati on
an d/or tr eatm en t r ecom m en dati on for th e i tem des cr i bed” (En tm an , 1 9 9 3 , p. 5 2 )—
h as gi ven r i s e to th e ar gu m en t th at i t i s n ot th e s h eer qu an ti ty of i n for m ati on abou t
a topi c th at dr i v es i ts i m por tan ce. R ath er , i t i s h ow m edi a di s cu s s a topi c th at
fos ter s ch an ges i n pu bl i c opi n i on . S ch ol ar s h ave l on g ar gu ed th at j ou r n al i s ts ’ ch ar acter i z ati on of an i s s u e s h apes i ts r eal i ty for an au di en ce, cr eati n g th e acceptabl e
r an ge of m ean i n g (B al l -R ok each & R ok each , 1 9 8 7 ; G am s on , 1 9 8 5 , 1 9 9 2 ; G i tl i n ,
1 9 8 0 ; G r aber , 1 9 8 9 ; H al l et al ., 1 9 7 8 ). T h i s per s pecti v e con ten ds th at m edi a atten ti on to di s cr ete featu r es of an i s s u e w i l l al ter th e publ i c’s u n der s tan di n g of th e i s s u e
an d th e i m por tan ce th ey as s i gn to i t.
F r am i n g, th en , pr ov i des a m ean s of des cr i bi n g th e pow er of com m u n i cati on to
di r ect i n di v i du al cogn i ti on s tow ar d a pr es cr i bed i n ter pr etati on of a s i tu ati on or obj ect. S ev er al em pi r i cal ex am pl es tes ti fy to th e i n s i gh ts th at th e fr am i n g appr oach
can pr ovi de r egar di n g m edi a effects on opi n i on (I y en gar , 1 9 9 1 ; Z al l er , 1 9 9 2 ). B y
fr am i n g i s s u es i n cer tai n w ay s , th e m edi a i n fl u en ce th e w ay peopl e per cei ve a
pr obl em or i s s u e an d i ts co n s equ en ces , pos s i bl y al ter i n g th ei r fi n al ev al u ati on of
th e i s s u e. F or ex am pl e, r es ear ch s u gges ts th at fr am i n g econ om i c an d for ei gn pol i cy
qu es ti on s i n ter m s of gai n s ver s u s l os s es (Q u attr on e & T v er s k y, 1 9 8 8 ) or fr am i n g
affi r m ati v e acti on i n ter m s of u n fai r adv an tage v er s u s j u s t com pen s ati on (K i n der &
S an der s , 1 9 9 0 ) can ch an ge th e bas i s of pol i ti cal j u dgm en t. S i m i l ar l y , s h i fti n g th e
n ew s fr am e of h eal th car e r efor m fr om a focu s on econ om i c con s i der ati on s to
eth i cal con s i der ati on s al ter s h ow v oter s i n ter pr et th e i s s u e an d u s e i t i n el ector al
F r am i n g an d th e P u bl i c A gen da
2 07
deci s i on s (S h ah et al ., 1 9 9 6 , 1 9 9 7 ). M edi a fr am i n g can al s o s h ape opi n i on i n ti m es
of i n ter n ati on al pol i cy di s pu tes . P r es en tati on of th e G u l f W ar i n ter m s of patr i oti c,
tech n ol ogi cal , an d eu ph em i s ti c l an gu age, as oppos ed to di s s en t, er r or , an d h u m an
l os s , s h aped pu bl i c opi n i on abou t A m er i can i n v ol v em en t i n th e con fl i ct (A l l en et
al ., 1 9 9 4 ).
T h es e fr am i n g s tu di es dem on s tr ate th at th e w ay i n w h i ch th e m edi a di s cu s s an
i s s ue i n fl u en ces pu bl i c opi n i on . A gen da-s etti n g r es ear ch th at does n ot di r ectl y dr aw
u pon a fr am i n g per s pecti ve s ti l l tou ch es on th e i m por tan ce of th i s “s econ d l evel ” of
agen da s etti n g (A tw ater et al ., 1 9 8 5 ; Y agade & D oz i er , 1 9 9 0 ). I n par ti cu l ar , r es ear ch i n di cates th at i s s u es w i th a h i gh degr ee of con fl i ct h ave a gr eater i n fl u en ce
on th e agen da th an w ou l d be w ar r an ted by th e s h eer am ou n t of cov er age gi ven
to th em (M acK u en & Coom bs , 1 9 8 1 ). Ex pl or i n g th e r el ati on s h i p betw een s tor i es
w i th h i gh l evel s of con fl i ct an d th e pu bl i c agen da, W an ta an d H u (1 9 9 3 , p. 2 5 1 )
con cl u ded th at “th e agen da-s etti n g i n fl u en ce of th e m as s m edi a on th e pu bl i c [i s ]
con ti n gen t to a gr eat degr ee u pon th e s u b-i s s u e, or n ew s fr am e, r epor ted. ” H ow ev er , th ei r s tu dy co n s i der ed 1 5 i s s u e-s peci fi c categor i es of i n ter n ati on al n ew s (s u ch
as m i l i tar y /n u cl ear ar m s , ter r or i s m i n v ol v i n g th e U n i ted S tates , or cr i m e/dr u gs ) an d
n ot abs tr act fr am es or par ti cu l ar r h etor i cal dev i ces . T h u s , th ey focu s ed on th e s u bi s s u es acr os s th e br oader topi c of i n ter n ati on al n ew s r ath er th an th e n atu r e of th e
con tr over s y w i th i n a m or e di s cr ete i s s u e. F u r th er i n ves ti gati on n eeds to co n s i der
th e di ffer i ng pol i ti cal l an gu age u s ed to ch ar acter i z e a s i ngl e i s s u e an d to ex pl or e, i n
com bi n ati on w i th th e am ou n t of cover age th e i s s u e r ecei v es , th e i m pact of th es e
n ew s fr am es on th e i m por tan ce as s i gn ed to th at i s s u e by th e pu bl i c.
I n th i s ar ti cl e, w e u s e a m odel th at accou n ts for both tr adi ti on al agen da-s etti n g
effects an d “s econ d-l ev el ” fr am i n g effects i n or der to pr ov i de a r i ch er accou n t of
ch an ges i n aggr egate pu bl i c opi n i on . S peci fi cal l y, w e ex am i n e th e con tr ov er s y ov er
th e 1 9 9 6 feder al bu dget an d ar gu e th at ch an ges i n both th e qu an ti ty an d n atu r e of
m edi a cover age pr edi ct s h i fts i n th e i m por tan ce as s i gn ed to th i s i s s ue by th e A m er i can pu bl i c. M or e s peci fi cal l y , w e bel i eve th at an agen da-s etti n g per s pecti v e, w h i ch
em ph as i z es h ow m u ch cov er age a s i n gl e i s s u e r ecei v es , i s en r i ch ed by a m edi a
fr am i n g per s pecti v e, w h i ch con s i der s w h at ty pe of cov er age th at i s s u e r ecei v es .
T h i s con ten ti on w as tes ted th r ou gh th e i deody n am i c m odel an d th e I n foT r en d
con ten t an al y s i s com pu ter pr ogr am (F an , 1 9 8 8 , 1 9 9 4 ). T h i s appr oach u s es con ten t
an al ys i s of th e m ass m edi a to m odel chan ges i n pu bl i c opi ni on— i n thi s case, ch an ges
i n th e i m por tan ce of th e feder al bu dget defi ci t.
T h e B u dget D ef i cit Con t r over sy
I n th e 1 9 9 4 el ecti on s an d con ti n u i n g i n to th e 1 9 9 6 cam pai gn s , th e feder al bu dget
w as a topi c of m u ch debate am on g pol i cy m ak er s i n W as h i n gton . B as ed on th e
“Con tr act w i th A m er i ca, ” th e n ew R epu bl i can m aj or i ti es i n th e H ou s e an d S en ate
j ou s ted r epeatedl y w i th P r es i den t Cl i n ton ov er com peti n g pl an s for bal an ci n g th e
bu dget. R epu bl i can s cl ai m ed th at D em ocr ats w er e n ot s er i ou s abou t r edu ci n g th e
defi ci t. D em ocr ats i n s i s ted th at R epu bl i can s w er e r eal l y i n ter es ted i n di s m an tl i n g
popu l ar s oci al pr ogr am s s u ch as M edi car e.
I n N ov em ber 1 9 9 5 , P r es i den t Cl i n ton an d con gr es s i on al R epu bl i can s cou l d n ot
agr ee on l on g-ter m defi ci t r edu cti on pl an s . I n an effor t to pr es s u r e th e pr es i den t,
con gr es s i on al R epu bl i can s r efu s ed to pas s a bi l l au th or i z i n g s top-gap s pen di n g u n ti l
2 08
A m y E . Jas per s on et al .
a bu dget agr eem en t h ad been r each ed. T h i s for ced th e gov er n m en t to s h u t dow n ,
fu r l ou gh i n g 8 0 0 ,0 0 0 feder al em pl oy ees . T em por ar y s pen di n g m eas u r es m ai n tai n i n g
ex pen di tu r es at th e pr evi ou s y ear ’s l evel ar e r ou ti n el y u s ed to av oi d s u ch s h u tdow n s ; bu dget agr eem en ts ar e th en pas s ed after th e n ew fi s cal y ear h as begu n . I n
th i s i n s tan ce, th e con gr es s i on al l eader s h i p deci ded to u s e th e cl os i n g of th e gover n m en t as a w eapon to dr aw atten ti on to th e di s agr eem en t ov er defi ci t r edu cti on
pl an s . T h u s , w h i l e th er e w as n o n eces s ar y or l ogi cal con n ecti on betw een th e tw o,
th e s h u tdow n w as co n s tr u cted by el i tes an d u n der s too d by th e pu bl i c i n ter m s of
th e bu dget defi ci t.
T h e i n i ti al s h u tdow n l as ted 7 day s , after w h i ch s top-gap s pen di n g w as i m pl em en ted. T h e pr es i den t an d Con gr es s con ti n u ed to battl e ov er th e bal an ced bu dget
ti m e fr am e an d w h eth er to u s e th e pr oj ecti on s an d as s u m pti on s of th e Con gr es s i on al B u dget O ffi ce or th os e of th e W h i te H ou s e’s O ffi ce of M an agem en t an d
B u dget. B u dget tal k s , w h i ch began on N ov em ber 2 8 , 1 9 9 5 , w er e cu t s h or t j u s t
after th ey com m en ced, as n egoti ator s “th r ew u p th ei r h an ds ” on N ov em ber 3 0 an d
can cel ed n ego ti ati on s w i th a l oom i n g D ecem ber 1 5 deadl i n e (H ager , 1 9 9 5 ).
A l th ou gh tal k s r es u m ed on D ecem ber 4 , s top-gap fu n di n g r an ou t at m i dn i gh t
of D ecem ber 1 5 , befor e an y k i n d of agr eem en t cou l d be r each ed. Con ten ti ou s
pol i ti cal debate an d an u n pr eceden ted s econ d gov er n m en t s h u tdow n of 2 1 day s
dom i n ated th e pol i ti cal di s cou r s e of th e h ol i day s eas on . T h e Con gr es s an d th e
pr es i den t agr eed on th r ee s top-gap s pen di n g bi l l s to s en d fu r l ou gh ed w or k er s back
to th ei r j obs on Jan u ar y 6 , 1 9 9 6 . H ow ev er , addi ti on al con ten ti on an d s h u tdow n
deadl i n es con ti n u ed th r ou gh th e en d of Jan u ar y an d th e fi r s t few m on th s of 1 9 9 6 .
I n addi ti on to pol i ti cal debates an d m an eu v er i n g, pu bl i c opi n i on on th e i s s u e
of th e feder al bu dget s h i fted ov er th i s per i od of ti m e (fr om th e s u m m er of 1 9 9 4
th r ou gh th e s pr i n g of 1 9 9 6 ). I n par ti cu l ar , s u r v ey m ar gi n al s fr om th e R oper Cen ter
i n di cate th at th e per cen tage of th e pu bl i c con s i der i n g th e feder al bu dget defi ci t to
be th e “m os t i m po r tan t pr obl em ” faci n g th e cou n tr y i n cr eas ed fr om 5 per cen t du r i n g O ctober 2 7 – 3 0 , 1 9 9 5 , to 2 0 per cen t by th e fi r s t par t of 1 9 9 6 (s ee F i gu r e 1 ).
T h e pu bl i c’s r es po n s e to th e i s s u e of th e bu dget defi ci t i s n ot th e s am e as a r es pon s e to th e gov er n m en t s h u tdow n as an i m por tan t pr obl em . W e m eas u r ed pu bl i c
opi n i on fr om N ov em ber 1 9 9 4 th r ou gh A pr i l 1 9 9 6 ; th e s h u tdow n w as a s m al l par t
of th i s ti m e fr am e, w i th on l y on e pol l qu es ti on bei n g as k ed du r i n g th e s h u tdow n
per i od. I n addi ti on , th e pol l con du cted du r i n g th e s h u tdow n r eveal ed th at w h en
both th e bu dget defi ci t an d th e s h u tdow n w er e coded as s epar ate r es pon s e opti on s
to th e m os t i m por tan t pr obl em qu es ti on , 1 9 per cen t ch os e th e bu dget defi ci t, w h i l e
on l y 1 per cen t m en ti on ed th e s h u tdow n .
T h e ch an ge i n pu bl i c opi n i on con cer n i n g th e bu dget defi ci t an d th e l i ter atu r e
on m edi a agen da s etti n g an d fr am i n g s u gges t th e n eed for an i n -depth an al y s i s of
m edi a con ten t on th i s i s s u e. H ow w er e th e m edi a pr es en ti n g cov er age on th e
bu dget i s s u e? W as th i s cov er age affecti n g pu bl i c per cepti on s of th i s i s s u e as th e
m os t i m por tan t pr obl em ? W e con du cted an ex ten s i v e con ten t an al ys i s of th e debate s u r r ou n di n g th e feder al bu dget fr om a di v er s e s am pl e of n ew s paper s acr os s
th e co u n tr y . T h i s an al y s i s w as u s ed to deter m i n e w h eth er ch an ges i n th e m edi a
cov er age s u r r ou n di n g th e feder al bu dget h ad an i m pact on pu bl i c opi n i on over
ti m e. M or e s peci fi cal l y , w e focu s ed on ch an ges i n h ow n ew s m edi a ch ar acter i z ed
th e po l i ti cs s u r r ou n di n g th e bu dget debate an d h ow th i s cov er age con tr i bu ted to
s h i fts i n th e pu bl i c’s per cepti on of th e m os t i m por tan t pr obl em faci n g th e n ati on .
T o do s o, w e deter m i n ed dom i n an t m edi a fr am es of th e bu dget debate, ex am -
F r am i n g an d th e P u bl i c A gen da
2 09
F i gur e 1 . P er cen tage of th e pu bl i c con s i der i n g th e budget to be the m os t i m por tan t pr obl em
faci n g th e cou n tr y . S u r vey data ar e tak en fr om th e R oper Cen ter pu bl i c opi n i on pol l databas e for th e ques ti on “W h at i s th e m os t i m por tan t pr obl em faci n g th e cou n tr y today ?” S u r v ey spons or i n g or gan i z aton s i n cl u de: CN N /U S A T oday , CB S /N ew Y or k T i m es , th e W as h i n gton P os t, CB S N ew s, A B C/W as hi n gton P ost, an d A B C N ew s . T h e w i dths of th e h as h m ar k
s ym bol s cor r es pon d to th e begi n n i n g an d endi n g dates of th e s u r v ey s, an d th e h ei gh ts i n di cate 9 5 per cen t con fi den ce i n ter val s .
i n ed ch an ges i n n ew s fr am es ov er ti m e, an d m odel ed th es e fr am es agai n s t var i ati on
i n pu bl i c opi n i on fou n d i n th e R oper Cen ter pol l data. P u bl i c opi n i on w as m eas u r ed by r es pon s es to th e qu es ti on “W h at do you th i n k i s th e m os t i m por tan t pr obl em faci n g th e cou n tr y today ?” R es pon s es fr om 1 2 pol l s as k i n g th i s qu es ti on du r i n g
th e per i od of ti m e ex am i n ed i n th i s s tu dy (N ov em ber 1 9 9 4 – A pr i l 1 9 9 6 ) w er e r etr i ev ed fr om th e R oper Cen ter at th e U n i ver s i ty of Con n ecti cu t an d u s ed for th i s
an al ys i s . W e began ou r con ten t an al y s i s i n N ov em ber 1 9 9 4 to captu r e al l m edi a
con ten t fol l ow i n g th at y ear ’s co n gr es s i on al el ecti on s . T h e con fl i ct betw een Con gr es s an d th e pr es i den t ov er th e feder al bu dget defi ci t began w h en th e R epu bl i can s
took con tr ol of Con gr es s an d began di s cu s s i n g th e Con tr act w i th A m er i ca.
O ver th e cou r s e of th e bu dget debate i n th e n ew s , th e m edi a r epeatedl y u s ed
par ti cu l ar fr am es , or w ay s of r epr es en ti n g th e m ean i n g of th e bu dget i s s u e. A s
n oted by M cCom bs (1 9 9 7 , p. 6 ), “a r i ch v ar i ety of fr am es i n fl u en ce th e detai l s of
ou r pi ctu r es of th e obj ects i n th e n ew s ,” m an y of th es e dr aw i n g u pon r h etor i cal
2 10
A m y E . Jas per s on et al .
tool s s u ch as ton e an d dr am a (P atter s on , 1 9 9 4 ). W e i den ti fi ed fou r s peci fi c fr am es :
a “tal k ” fr am e, a “fi gh t” fr am e, an “i m pas s e” fr am e, an d a “cr i s i s ” fr am e. T h es e
fr am es r epr es en ted v ar y i n g l ev el s of i n ten s i ty i n h ow th e bu dget i s s u e w as di s cu s s ed an d i ts s tatu s i n pol i ti cal di s cou r s e. F or ex am pl e, pol i ti ci an s en gaged i n
tal k s abou t th e bu dget. O n ce th er e w as di s agr eem en t ov er bu dget opti on s , fi gh ts
er u pted betw een th e v ar i ou s s i des an d con ti n u ed u n ti l th er e w as a br eak dow n i n
com m u n i cati on , or an i m pas s e. U l ti m atel y , th e i s s u e r each ed cr i s i s pr opor ti on s ,
u n ti l th e ch ai n of ev en ts w as br ok en by a r es ol u ti on . T h es e fr am es r epr es en t th e
r an ge of depi cti on s w i th i n th e pol i ti cs s u r r ou n di n g th e bu dget i s s u e; togeth er , th ey
r efl ect th e total am ou n t of cov er age devoted to th e di s cu s s i on of bu dget r es ol u ti on
effor ts .
T h es e fr am es car r y di ffer i n g m ean i n gs for th e s er i ou s n es s of th e bu dget con fl i ct. T h er efor e, th e di ffer en t fr am es s h ou l d h av e di ffer en t i m pl i cati on s for th e
i m por tan ce as s i gn ed to th e i s s u e of th e bu dget i n th e m i n ds of j ou r n al i s ts an d th e
A m er i can pu bl i c. Jou r n al i s ts ’ or th ei r s ou r ces ’ ch ar acter i z ati on — th e s pi n , or fr am e,
of a s tor y — can h av e dr am ati c con s equ en ces for h ow th e i s s u e i s defi n ed an d w h at
l i n k ages ar e m ade betw een i t an d oth er i s s u es . A n an al y s i s th at focu s es on ch an ges
i n par ti cu l ar fr am es of th e bu dget i s s u e, i n s tead of focu s i n g on l y on th e s h eer
pr es en ce of th e i s s u e i n th e m edi a, m ay pr ov i de a cl ear er u n der s tan di n g of th e
i m pact of m edi a cov er age on pu bl i c opi n i on . W e do n ot cl ai m th at the r el ati on s h i p
betw een th e s h eer am ou n t of co ver age an i s s u e r ecei v es an d th e i m por tan ce attach ed to i t by th e pu bl i c w i l l be abs en t. R ath er , w e bel i ev e th at con s i der i n g both
th e qu an ti ty an d n atu r e of co ver age, as s u gges ted by th e “co m pel l i n g ar gu m en ts ”
per s pecti v e (G h an em & E v att, 1 9 9 5 ), offer s a cl ear er ps y ch ol ogi cal m ech an i s m for
u n der s tan di n g w h y th e pu bl i c agen da m ay ch an ge.
W e offer tw o h ypoth es es to tes t both l ev el s of agen da s etti n g an d to com par e
th e r es u l ts . T h e fi r s t h ypo th es i s focu s ed on th e fi r s t l ev el of agen da s etti n g an d
s u gges ted th at ch an ges i n th e s h eer am ou n t of cov er age dev oted to bu dget r es ol u ti on effor ts w i l l s i gn i fi can tl y accou n t for var i an ce ov er ti m e i n pu bl i c opi n i on con cer n i n g th e r el ati v e i m por tan ce of th e bu dget defi ci t, i r r es pecti v e of th e n atu r e or
fr am e of th e co ver age. T h e s econ d h y poth es i s tes ted th e com bi n ed agen da-s etti n g
an d fr am i n g appr oach (i .e., a co m bi n ati on of both th e “fi r s t l ev el ” an d “s econ d
l ev el ” of agen da s etti n g). T h i s appr oach s u gges ts th at ch an ges i n th e qu an ti ty of
fr am es r efl ecti n g m or e s er i ou s or con fl i ctu al m ean i n g— s u ch as th e “fi gh t, ” “i m pas s e, ” an d “cr i s i s ” fr am es — m ay pl ay a gr eater r ol e i n accou n ti n g for v ar i an ce i n
pu bl i c opi n i on con cer n i n g th e bu dget i s s u e. T h i s s econ d h y poth es es w as bas ed on
th e bel i ef th at a fu r th er th eor eti cal el abor ati on of th e agen da-s etti n g per s pecti ve
w i th a s econ d l ev el , or fr am i n g per s pecti v e, offer s a r i ch er ex pl an ati on of ch an ges
i n pu bl i c opi n i on .
M et h o d
M edi a Con t en t
T o s tudy m edi a pr esentati on of feder al budget r es ol uti on effor ts , w e r andom l y sam pl ed
n ew s s tor i es fr om a n u m ber of m aj or A m er i can n ew s paper s av ai l abl e th r ou gh th e
N E X I S el ectr on i c databas e. S peci fi cal l y, th i s r es ear ch l ook ed at th e con ten t of 1 9
di ffer en t n ew s paper s : th e A tl an ta Jou r n al Con s ti tu ti on , B os ton Gl obe, Ch i cago T r i bu n e, D al l as M or n i n g N ew s , H ou s ton Ch r on i cl e, K an s as Ci ty S tar , L os A n gel es
F r am i n g an d th e P u bl i c A gen da
2 11
T i m es , M i n n eapol i s S tar T r i bu n e, N ew O r l ean s T i m es P i cay u n e, N ew Y or k T i m es ,
P h oen i x Gaz ette, R ock y M ou n tai n N ew s (D en v er ), S acr am en to B ee, S an D i ego
U n i on T r i bu n e, S eattl e T i m es , S an F r an ci s co Ch r on i cl e, S t. P eter s bu r g T i m es , W as h i n gton P os t, an d W as h i n gton T i m es . T h e l ar ge n u m ber of n ew s paper s w as ch os en
to av oi d an y bi as es th at m i gh t be pr es en t i n a s i n gl e paper . N ew s paper s w er e
s el ected to r efl ect th e i n for m ati on con tai n ed i n l eadi n g n ew s s ou r ces fr om al l r egi on s of th e cou n tr y an d fr om v ar i ou s pol i ti cal per s pecti v es .
T h e N E X I S databas e w as s ear ch ed for an y s tor i es per tai n i n g to th e feder al
bu dget defi ci t th at appear ed betw een N ovem ber 8 , 1 9 9 4 (1 day after m i dter m el ecti on s u s h er ed i n a R epu bl i can m aj or i ty i n th e H ou s e an d S en ate), an d A pr i l 2 0 , 1 9 9 6
(n ear l y a m on th after th e fi n al con ti n u i n g r es ol u ti on ). T h e or i gi n al s ear ch i den ti fi ed
4 2 ,6 9 5 s tor i es r el ated to th e feder al bu dget defi ci t. 1 A r an dom n u m ber gen er ator
w as th en u s ed to r etr i ev e 1 0 ,0 0 0 s tor i es as a s am pl e fr om th e or i gi n al s ear ch . T ex t
w as r etr i ev ed w i th i n a 5 0 -w or d w i n dow s u r r ou n di n g th e tagged con ten t.
Com pu t er Co n t en t A n al ysi s
A com pu ter m eth od w as u s ed to an al y z e s tor i es (F an , 1 9 8 8 , 1 9 9 4 ). 2 T h e codi n g
u n i t for th i s s tu dy w as th e par agr aph . Con v en ti on s of n ew s paper j ou r n al i s m di ctate
th at th e par agr aph h as th e s m al l es t u n i t of m ean i n g. T h e s en ten ce ty pi cal l y r el i es
on th e con tex t of th e par agr aph for i ts m ean i n g. T h e par agr aph m ay con tai n s ever al
i deas , an d each i s coded i n di v i du al l y .
T h e con ten t an al y s i s w as di v i ded i n to tw o s teps w h er ei n var i ou s con ten t an al ys i s r u l es w er e appl i ed to th e tex t (s ee A ppen di x ). 3 W h en w e com par ed th e com pu ter con ten t an al ys i s w i th ou r h an d codi n g of r an dom l y s el ected par agr aph s , w e
ach i ev ed an agr eem en t s cor e of appr ox i m atel y 9 0 per cen t (1 3 7 ou t of 1 5 1 par agr aph s ). I t i s i m por tan t to n ote th at al l par agr aph s th at r em ai n ed after th e i n i ti al
fi l ter w er e i n cl u ded i n th e r el i abi l i ty ch eck , n ot s i m pl y th e par agr aph s th at ch ar acter i z ed th e feder al bu dget defi ci t con tr ov er s y . E ven after cor r ecti on for ch an ce, codi n g r el i abi l i ty w as 8 6 per cen t (S cott, 1 9 5 5 ).
M ean i n g of F r am es
B ecau s e w e ar gu e th at fou r fr am es captu r e th e pr i m ar y ch ar acter i z ati on s of th e
di s cou r s e s u r r ou n di n g th e bu dget i s s u e, i t i s i m por tan t to el abor ate on th e con ceptu al i z ati on of each fr am e. O per ati on al l y, al l fou r fr am es w er e defi n ed by ph r as es
an d w or d com bi n ati on s r efl ected by th e w or ds or w or d fr agm en ts “bu dget,” “defi ci t, ” “pol i ti c,” or “fi s cal ,” i n com bi n ati on w i th oth er w or ds deter m i n i n g par ti cu l ar
fr am es categor i z ati on s . F i r s t, ou r defi n i ti on of th e tal k fr am e con cer n ed n on con fr on tati on al com m u n i cati on betw een th e pol i ti cal l eader s h i p i n v ol v ed i n attem pts
to r es ol ve th e bu dget i s s u e. T h i s fr am e w as defi n ed by th e pr ecedi n g gen er al defi ci t
ph r as es i n com bi n ati on w i th “tal k ,” “n egoti at, ” “debat,” “r es ol v ,” “agr eem en t, ” “di s cu s s ,” “con s u l t,” “deal ,” or “con fer .” W or d fr agm en ts w er e u s ed i n or der to captu r e
al l i n s tan ces of th e w or d en di n g i n di ffer i n g s u ffi x es . A n occu r r en ce of th e tal k
fr am e can be s een i n th e fol l ow i n g ex cer pt fr om a N ew Y or k T i m es ar ti cl e:
R epu bl i can l eader s i n Con gr es s ar e tr y i n g to fi n d a r ou te to a bal an ced
bu dget by m ak i n g a deal w i th m i ddl e-of-th e-r oad D em ocr ats . (N ew Y or k
T i m es , Jan u ar y 1 1 , 1 9 9 6 , p. B 8 )
2 12
A m y E . Jas per s on et al .
D eal captu r es th e di s cu s s i on occu r r i n g on th e bu dget. T h i s fr am e does n ot i n di cate
an y gr eat i n ten s i ty ov er th e n atu r e or ton e of th e bu dget debate bu t, r ath er , s i m pl y
r epor ts th at di s cu s s i on i s h appen i n g.
T h e s eco n d fr am e i n ou r an al y s i s , fi gh t, di ffer ed fr om th e tal k ch ar acter i z ati on
i n th at th e ton e of th e debate w as m or e i n ten s e, s i gn i fy i n g a m or e i m m edi ate
co n cer n abou t th e bu dget co n fl i ct. O per ati on al l y , th i s fr am e w as defi n ed by
th e gen er al defi ci t w or ds or w or d fr agm en ts i n com bi n ati on w i th “fi gh t, ” “di s pu t,”
“battl ,” “s k i r m i s h ,” “w ar ,” “con tes t, ” “s tr u ggl ,” “con fl i ct, ” “con fr on t, ” “w r an gl ,” or
“cl as h .”
Jus t a day after s u spendi ng bu dget tal k s w i th w or ds of opti m i s m , Pr esi den t
Cl i n ton an d R epu bl i can l eader s of Con gr es s w er e s ou n di n g m or e con fr on tati onal an d tal k i n g abou t fi ghti ng ou t thei r di ffer en ces i n the N ovem ber el ecti on . (N ew Y or k T i m es , Jan u ar y 2 2 , 1 9 9 6 , p. A 1 )
T h i s ex am pl e dem on s tr ates h ow th e ch ar acter i z ati on of th e bu dget debate i n ter m s
of tal k s m oves bey on d a pl aci d des cr i pti on of th e attem pts to r each a com pr om i s e
to a m or e con fl i ctu al on e. B ecau s e of th e ph r as e “bu dget tal k s ,” th i s par agr aph
w ou l d be coded as con tai n i n g both a tal k an d a fi gh t fr am e. T h e fi gh t fr am e
el ev ates the i nten s i ty of th e i s su e, i ncr eas i n g th e negati v e ton e of th e con fl i ct. T h er efor e, i t s h ou l d h ave a gr eater i m pact on pu bl i c opi n i on th an a s tr ai gh tfor w ar d ch ar acter i z ati on of bu dget tal k s .
T h e th i r d fr am e, i m pas s e, i n di cates a fu r th er s tage i n th e bu dget di s cu s s i on s . I t
i s di s ti n ct fr om th e fi gh t fr am e i n th at i t en com pas s es th e i dea th at fi gh ti n g h as
r each ed a tem por ar y br eak i n g poi n t, an d tal k s can n ot pr oceed. Y et, attach ed to th e
i m pas s e fr am e i s a s i m i l ar s en s e of u r gen cy abou t th e bu dget i s s u e as ex i s ts w i th
th e fi gh t fr am e. I m pas s e fr am es w er e oper ati on al i z ed by th e gen er al defi ci t w or ds
or w or d fr agm en ts i n com bi n ati on w i th “i m pas s e,” “s tan doff, ” “gr i dl ock ,” “s tal em ate, ” “br ok e dow n ,” “br eak dow n ,” or “s tal l .”
T h e pol i ti cal s tan doff h as tu r n ed fi s cal pol i cy ti gh ter , s ays T i m T ay l or ,
edi tor of th e Jou r n al of E con om i c P er s pecti v es i n M i n n eapol i s (R ock y
M ou n tai n N ew s , A pr i l 8 , 1 9 9 6 )
F i n al l y, th e cr i s i s fr am e captu r es a fou r th com pon en t ch ar acter i z i n g di s cu s s i on
of th e bu dget i s s u e. T h e cr i s i s fr am e s i gn i fi es th e m edi a’s por tr ay al of th e i s s u e as
deter i or ati n g i n to ch aos . T h i s fr am e goes bey on d a s i m pl e r epor ti n g of di s cu s s i on s ;
i t con s tr u cts th e m eani n g of th e i s s u e by focu s i n g on th e i n abi l i ty of pol i ti cal l eader s h i p to tak e acti on to r es ol ve th e pr obl em . O per ati on al l y , th i s fr am e w as defi n ed
by th e gen er al defi ci t w or ds or w or d fr agm en ts i n com bi nati on w i th “cr i s i s,” “chaos ,”
“em er gen cy ,” or “fi r e.”
T h e cu r r en t bu dget cr i s i s i n th e feder al gov er n m en t on ce agai n pr ov es
th at “i n s i de th e bel tw ay ” i s total l y r otten an d cor r u pt. (P h oen i x Gaz ette,
D ecem ber 2 7 , 1 9 9 5 )
I n al l of th es e s tor i es , i t i s appar en t th at th e s pi n , or fr am e, of a s tor y i s n ot
au tom ati c. I n s tead, th e fr am i n g r efl ects el i te s ou r ces or j ou r n al i s ts ’ ch oi ces of h ow
to ch ar acter i z e th e ev en ts th at occu r .
F r am i n g an d th e P u bl i c A gen da
2 13
U si n g I n f oT r en d t o M odel O pi n i on
A total of 4 ,1 5 8 par agr aph s con tai n ed at l eas t on e of th es e fr am es . T h e r es u l ts
i n di cate th at th e m edi a w er e m os t l i k el y to r epor t th e bu dget i s s u e i n ter m s of th e
tal k fr am e (6 1 per cen t of th e par agr aph s ), fol l ow ed by th e fi gh t fr am e (2 2 .5 . per cen t), th e i m pas s e fr am e (9 .5 per cen t), an d th e cr i s i s fr am e (6 .9 per cen t).
U s i n g th e I n foT r en d pr ogr am to m odel th e i m pact of s u ch s tor i es on pu bl i c
opi n i on , th e cu m u l ati ve i m pact of al l n ew s par agr aph s w as pl otted ev er y 2 4 h ou r s ,
w i th th e v al u e of an y gi v en par agr aph ex pon en ti al l y decr eas i n g over ti m e. P l ots
w er e cr eated for each of th e fou r fr am es ex am i n ed h er e. Each pl ot y i el ded a
per s u as i ve for ce fu n cti on . T h e per s u as i v e for ce fu n cti on i n di cates th e am ou n t of
i n for m ati on r egar di n g a par ti cu l ar fr am e av ai l abl e at a gi v en ti m e to i n fl u en ce pu bl i c opi n i on . T h e r es u l t i s fou r per s u as i v e for ce fu n cti on s , on e each for tal k (F T ,t),
fi gh t (F F ,t) i m pas s e (F I ,t), an d cr i s i s (F C,t) (t i n each fu n cti on r efer s to ti m e). E ach
fu n cti on F for ti m e t i s th e s u m of th e n u m ber of par agr aph s i n n ew s m edi a cov er age of a par ti cu l ar fr am e, w i th each on e gi v en i ts m ax i m al v al u e on th e s tor y date
fol l ow ed by an ex po n en ti al decay w i th a 1 -day h al f-l i fe. T h i s ex po n en ti al decay
r ate h as been appl i ed i n m or e th an 5 0 pr i or s tu di es of th e i m pact of th e pr es s on
opi n i on . I t pr ov i des a goo d fi t for th e r el ati on s h i p betw een m edi a cov er age an d
pu bl i c opi n i on pol l s (D om k e et al ., i n pr es s ; F an , 1 9 8 8 , 1 9 9 6 ; F an & T i m s , 1 9 8 9 ;
F an et al ., 1 9 9 4 ; H er tog & F an , 1 9 9 5 ). 4
O ver al l , th e am ou n t of atten ti on to th e bu dget i s s u e i n m edi a cov er age i n cr eas ed as k ey even ts took pl ace (s ee F i gu r e 2 ). P ar ti cu l ar l y n oti ceabl e i s th e dr am ati c j u m p i n cov er age i n th e w eek s fol l ow i n g O ctober 3 0 , 1 9 9 5 . F or ex am pl e,
n ew s paper cover age of th e tal k fr am e i n cr eas ed gr eatl y after the w eek of N ov em ber
6 , 1 9 9 5 , i n pr epar ati on for th e N ov em ber 1 3 m i dn i gh t deadl i n e befor e th e gov er n m en t s h u tdow n , an d i t r em ai n ed h i gh u n ti l th e en d of th e s h u tdow n on N ov em ber
2 0 . T al k cover age al s o s u r ged befor e th e s econ d s h u tdow n , w i th th e ex cepti on
of th e per i od ar ou n d D ecem ber 2 5 , th e Ch r i s tm as h ol i day. F i n al l y , tal k cov er age
peak ed agai n ar ou n d Jan u ar y 6 , 1 9 9 6 , th e en d of th e s econ d gov er n m en t s h u tdow n . A l th ou gh qu an ti ty of cov er age v ar i ed ov er ti m e, i t di d n ot do s o equ al l y for
al l fr am es ; di ffer en t fr am es w er e u s ed m or e or l es s at di ffer en t poi n ts i n ti m e.
T o get a cl ear er pi ctu r e of th e i m pact of th es e ch ar acter i z ati on s , each fr am e’s
par agr aph scor es w er e enter ed i nto the i deody nam i c m odel (F an, 1 9 8 8 , 1 9 9 5 ; H er tog
& F an , 1 9 9 5 ). F or th e com pu tati on , al l fou r per s u as i ve for ce fu n cti on s i n F i gu r e 2
w er e as s u m ed to con tr i bu te to pu bl i c opi n i on th at th e bu dget cr i s i s i s an i m por tan t
pr obl em . H ow ev er , i t w as pos s i bl e th at th e fou r ty pes of i n for m ati on h ad di ffer en t
w ei gh ts , as s u gges ted by fr am i n g s tu di es . T h er efor e, a total per s u as i v e for ce fu n cti on F T F I C,t fav or i n g th e i m por tan ce of th e bu dget cr i s i s on th e n ati on al agen da
w as con s tr u cted as th e s u m of th e i n di v i du al for ces , w i th each for ce h avi n g i ts ow n
w ei gh t s peci fi ed by a per s u as i bi l i ty con s tan t k s o th at
F T F I C,t =
k T (F T ,t) +
k F (F F ,t) +
k I (F I ,t) +
k C (F C,t).
T h i s equ ati on s i m pl y s tates th at th e per s u as i v e for ce of al l of th e fr am es tak en
togeth er i s th e s u m of each i n di vi du al fr am e w ei gh ted acco r di n g to i ts i m pact r el ati v e to th e oth er fr am es . I n addi ti on , th er e w as al s o as s u m ed to be a di s tr acti n g
per s u as i ve for ce F D w i th n o ti m e var i abl e becau s e th e di s tr acti n g i n for m ati on w as
as s u m ed to be con s tan t over ti m e.
2 14
A m y E . Jas per s on et al .
F i gu r e 2 . P r es s par agr aph s cov er i n g fou r di ffer en t fr am es of th e bu dget debate.
F r am i n g an d th e P u bl i c A gen da
2 15
T h es e per s u as i v e for ces w er e en ter ed i n to th e fol l ow i n g i deody n am i c m odel :
B B ,t – B B ,t – 1 =
F T F l C,t (1 – B B ,t – 1 ) – F D B B ,t – 1 .
I n th i s equ ati on , B B i s th e bel i ef or opi n i on th at th e bu dget cr i s i s i s th e cou n tr y’s
m os t i m por tan t pr obl em . T h i s equ ati on i s a m ath em ati cal ex pr es s i on of th e ar gu m en t th at a ch an ge ov er ti m e i n opi n i on th at th e bu dget i s th e m os t i m por tan t
pr obl em (B B ) i s du e to tw o ph en om en a (gi ven by th e tw o ter m s on th e r i gh t s i de of
th e equ ati on ). T h e fi r s t ter m on th e r i gh t r efl ects th e total per s u as i v e for ce affecti n g
th os e w h o do n ot y et bel i ev e th e bu dget cr i s i s i s th e cou n tr y ’s m os t i m por tan t
pr obl em . T h e per s u as i v e for ce ter m , F T F I C,t, i s m u l ti pl i ed by th e per cen tage of
peopl e w h o ar e n ot y et i n agr eem en t th at th e bu dget i s th e m os t i m por tan t pr obl em (1 – B B ,t – 1 ). Con v er s i on can occu r on l y i f th er e i s per s u as i v e i n for m ati on
(F T F I C,t), an d i t can ch an ge on l y th os e w h o ar e n ot yet per s u aded (1 – B B ,t – 1 ).
T h e s econ d ter m on th e r i gh t i s di s tr acti n g i n for m ati on (F D ) affecti n g th os e
w h o w er e pr ev i ou s l y i n agr eem en t th at th e bu dget i s th e m os t i m por tan t pr obl em
(B B ,t – 1 ), s o th i s ter m h as th e s am e for m as th e fi r s t ter m bu t i s pr eceded by a
m i n u s s i gn to i n di cate per s u as i on aw ay fr om th e opi n i on th at th e bu dget i s th e
m os t i m por tan t pr obl em .
T h e u s u al m eth od for i m pl em en ti n g th i s equ ati on w ou l d be to u s e em pi r i cal
v al u es of opi n i on on th e bu dget at t – 1 to pr edi ct opi n i on at t. H ow ev er , w e w er e
abl e to u s e a di ffer en t m eth od. A fter th e fi r s t pu bl i c opi n i on pol l poi n t u s ed to
i n i ti al i z e th e com pu tati on , th e en ti r e ti m e tr en d i s dr i v en by per s u as i v e i n for m ati on
al on e, s o th er e i s n o con s tr ai n t th at th er e be opi n i on m eas u r em en ts at each cal cu l ati on ti m e i n ter val . F u r th er m or e, el i m i n ati on of pu bl i c opi n i on pol l s fr om th e com pu tati on m ean s th at th e R 2 v al u e accu r atel y gi ves th e i m pact of th e per s u as i ve
i n for m ati on . T h e r ati on al e an d s tati s ti cs of th e com pu tati on ar e gi v en i n F an et al .
(1 9 9 4 ), H er tog an d F an (1 9 9 5 ), an d F an (1 9 9 5 ).
T h e par am eter s of th e m odel ar e th e di s tr acti n g i n for m ati on , F D , an d th e r el ati v e s tr en gth s of th e tal k , fi gh t, i m pas s e, an d cr i s i s par agr aph s (k T , k F , k I , an d k C).
I deody n am i cs w as u s ed to pr edi ct opi n i on for tw o h y poth es es . T h e fi r s t w as a pu r e
agen da-s etti n g m odel i n w h i ch al l r el evan t ty pes of per s u as i v e i n for m ati on w er e
gi v en th e s am e w ei gh t k s o th at k =
kT =
kF =
k I = k C. T h e s econ d h y poth es i s
w as a com bi n ed agen da-s etti n g/fr am i n g m odel i n w h i ch k T , k F , k I , an d k C cou l d
al l h av e di ffer en t w ei gh ts . T h i s m odel r ecogn i z ed th e fr am i n g co n di ti on th at di ffer en t types of i n for m ati on cou l d h ave di ffer en t per s u as i v e pow er s .
F i n di n gs
T est of H ypot h esi s 1
T h e fi r s t h ypoth es i s pr edi cted an agen da-s etti n g effect on pu bl i c opi n i on . A s j u s t
s tated, th e fou r ty pes of fr am es w er e gi v en th e s am e w ei gh t k to tes t th i s h y poth es i s . T h e r es u l ti n g par am eter s w er e k =
0 .2 0 (0 .1 5 , 0 .2 5 ) an d F D =
3 1 .6 (2 3 .1 ,
4 5 .1 ), w i th th e n u m ber s i n par en th es es r epr es en ti n g th e 9 5 per cen t con fi den ce
i n ter v al s i n th e n on l i n ear r egr es s i on . B oth con s tan ts ar e s i gn i fi can t, r efl ecti n g th e
fact th at i n for m ati on abou t th e bu dget i n cr eas ed th e i s s u e’s i m por tan ce w h i l e di s tr acti n g i n for m ati on decr eas ed th e i s s u e’s i m por tan ce.
T h e ti m e tr en d pr edi cted w i th th es e con s tan ts i s s h ow n i n F i gu r e 3 . T h e per -
2 16
A m y E . Jas per s on et al .
F i gur e 3 . T es t of H ypoth esi s 1 : tr adi ti on al agen da s etti n g. T h e top four fr am es ar e pl otted as
i n F i gu r e 2 , an d the bottom fr am e i s pl otted as i n F i gu r e 1 .
F r am i n g an d th e P u bl i c A gen da
2 17
cen tage of th e pu bl i c con s i der i n g th e bu dget defi ci t th e m os t i m por tan t i s s u e w as
s et at 1 2 per cen t on Jan u ar y 1 6 , 1 9 9 5 , s i n ce th i s w as th e v al u e pr ov i ded by th e
fi r s t av ai l abl e pol l .
T h e top fou r pan el s of F i gu r e 3 pr ov i de th e per s u as i v e for ce fu n cti on s for th e
fou r fr am e categor i es , al l m u l ti pl i ed by th e s am e w ei gh t k . T h es e pan el s ar e th e
s am e as th os e i n F i gu r e 2 , ex cept th at al l fr am es h av e th e s am e v er ti cal s cal e. T h e
bottom pan el gi v es th e fi n al pr edi cti on of opi n i on th at th e bu dget i s th e m os t
i m por tan t pr obl em bas ed on th e tw o es ti m ated par am eter s an d com par es i t w i th
th e con fi den ce i n ter v al for each of th e av ai l abl e pol l s . A cr os s th e pol l s , th e i deo dy n am i c m odel r epr es en ti n g agen da-s etti n g effects accou n ted for 8 5 per cen t of
v ar i an ce i n pu bl i c opi n i on (R 2 =
.8 5 ).
T est of H ypot h esi s 2
T h e s econ d h y poth es i s , th e co m bi n ed agen da-s etti n g/fr am i n g per s pecti ve, as s u m ed
th at th e ch ar acter i z ati on of an i s s u e can h ave di ffer en ti al effects on pu bl i c as s es s m en ts of th e n ati on ’s m os t i m por tan t pr obl em . T h e s am e pol l data w er e u s ed to
tes t th i s h ypoth es i s as w er e u s ed to tes t H ypoth es i s 1 . T h e es ti m ated par am eter s
(an d th ei r 9 5 per cen t con fi den ce i n ter v al s ) w er e k T =
0 .0 0 (0 , 0 .1 3 ), k F =
1 .6 6
(1 .2 3 , 2 .1 1 ), k I = 0 .0 6 (0 , 0 .7 5 ), k C = 0 .0 0 (0 , 1 .4 5 ), an d k D = 5 6 .0 (4 3 .3 , 7 6 .5 ).
T h es e data s h ow th at th e on l y n ew s con ten t s i gn i fi can tl y co n tr i bu ti n g to
ch an ge i n pu bl i c opi n i on w as th e fi gh t fr am e, s i n ce i t w as th e on l y type of fr am e
s i gn i fi can tl y di ffer en t fr om z er o. T h e di s tr acti on con s tan t w as al s o s i gn i fi can t. T h u s ,
fi gh t fr am es abou t th e bu dget i n cr eas ed th e i s s u e’s i m por tan ce, w h i l e di s tr acti n g
i n for m ati on decr eas ed th e i s s u e’s i m por tan ce. T h e fi n al pr edi cti on i s pr es en ted i n
F i gu r e 4 .
T h e top fou r pan el s of F i gu r e 4 pr ov i de th e per s u as i v e for ce fu n cti on s for th e
fou r fr am e categor i es , al l of w h i ch w er e gi v en at i n di vi du al w ei gh ti n g con s tan ts (as
s tated ear l i er ). T h e botto m pan el gi v es th e fi n al pr edi cti on of opi n i on th at th e bu dget i s th e m os t i m por tan t pr obl em bas ed on th e fi v e es ti m ated par am eter s . T h e
equ ati on accou n ted for 9 2 per cen t of var i an ce i n pu bl i c opi n i on (R 2 =
.9 2 ).
D i scussio n
T h e fi n di n gs of ou r s tu dy dem on s tr ate th at con s i der i n g both th e w ay i n w h i ch an
i s s u e i s fr am ed an d th e fr equ en cy of cov er age add to th e abi l i ty to pr edi ct i s s u e
i m por tan ce i n th e m i n d of th e pu bl i c. O u r data s h ow th at th e r i s e of th e bu dget as
th e m os t i m por tan t i s s u e i n l ate 1 9 9 5 an d ear l y 1 9 9 6 can be m odel ed v i a s h i fts i n
h ow th e n ew s abou t bu dget pol i ti cs w as fr am ed. B y con s i der i n g on l y th e total
am ou n t of cov er age th e bu dget r ecei v ed, r es ear ch m ay m i s s th e i m por tan t i m pact
of m edi a ch ar acter i z ati on of an i s s u e on pu bl i c opi n i on . W h i l e th e pr es en ce of al l
of th e fr am es i n cr eas ed i n th e m edi a ov er ti m e, on l y th e fi gh t fr am e h ad a s i gn i fi can t i m pact on pu bl i c opi n i on , cau s i n g th e bu dget i s s u e to r i s e dr am ati cal l y to th e
top of th e pu bl i c’s l i s t of th e n ati on ’s m os t i m por tan t pr obl em s . T h i s occu r r ed even
th ou gh th e s tatu s of th e bu dget defi ci t i ts el f n ev er ch an ged. W h at s h i fted w as th e
pol i ti cs s u r r ou n di n g th e i s s u e an d, m or e i m por tan t, h ow th e m edi a fr am ed th e
pol i ti cal effor ts of Con gr es s an d th e pr es i den t.
O u r fi n di n gs i n di cate th at th e agen da-s etti n g appr oach i s abl e to ex pl ai n 8 5
per cen t of th e v ar i an ce i n th e 1 2 pol l poi n ts an al yz ed, i n di cati n g th at fi r s t-l ev el
2 18
A m y E . Jas per s on et al .
F i gu r e 4 . T est of H y poth esi s 2 : agen da setti n g an d fr am i n g. A l l fr am es ar e pl otted as i n
F i gu r e 3 .
F r am i n g an d th e P u bl i c A gen da
2 19
agen da s etti n g h as s tr on g ex pl an ator y pow er i n pr edi cti n g opi n i on . T h e com bi n ed
appr oach , h ow ev er , i s abl e to accou n t for 9 2 per cen t of th e var i an ce v i a a th eor eti cal l y r i ch er av en u e of u n der s tan di n g m edi a effects becau s e i t i n cor por ates th i s
“s econ d l evel .” S peci fi cal l y, ou r r es u l ts i n v ol v e tw o i n ter es ti n g poi n ts . F i r s t, i t i s n ot
th e m os t pl en ti fu l type of bu dget con ten t— tal k fr am es (6 1 .1 per cen t of par agr aph s
coded)— th at i s pr edi cti v e. I n s tead, th e m or e dr am ati c an d con fl i ctu al fi gh t fr am es
(2 2 .5 per cen t of th e par agr aphs coded) bes t ex pl ai n ch an ges i n pu bl i c opi ni on . T h i s
fi n di n g i n di cates th at al l fr am es or ch ar acter i z ati on s of th e i s s u e ar e n ot equ al l y
pow er fu l i n ter m s of per s u as i v e con ten t. W h en an i s s u e i s i m por tan t en ou gh to
cau s e fi gh ti n g am on g el i tes , i ts s al i en ce w i l l be h ei gh ten ed. T h er efor e, th e cu es
pr es en ted to th e pu bl i c by pol i ti cal el i tes pl ay an i m por tan t r ol e i n i n fl u en ci n g
pu bl i c opi n i on (G r aber , 1 9 8 8 ). T h i s fi n di n g i s s i m i l ar to r es ear ch by oth er s ch ol ar s
r egar di n g th e i m por tan ce of con fl i ct i n edi tor s ’ cr i ter i a for ch oos i n g a n ew s s tor y
(G r aber , 1 9 9 3 ) an d i n i n cr eas i n g th e s al i en ce of par ti cu l ar i s s u es i n th e pu bl i c m i n d
(M acK u en & Coom bs , 1 9 8 1 ; W an ta & H u , 1 9 9 3 ). Con fl i ct am on g el i tes h el ps to
r ai s e r eader i n ter es t an d, as a r es u l t, al s o r ai s es th e per cei v ed i m por tan ce of th e
con ten t of th e con fl i ct.
S econ d, th e fact th at i m pas s e fr am es an d cr i s i s fr am es do n ot s i gn i fi can tl y con tr i bu te to ch an ge i n pu bl i c opi n i on i s al s o an i m por tan t fi n di n g. W h i l e th e per s u as i v e con ten t of th es e fr am es m ay be gr eater th an a tal k fr am e i n ter m s of con fl i ct,
th e fr equ en cy w i th w h i ch each w as u s ed by th e m edi a w as n ot gr eat en ou gh to
s h i ft opi n i on on th e bu dget. I n addi ti on , th e qu an ti ty of th e fi gh t fr am es m ay h ave
ov er s h adow ed th e qu an ti ty of i m pas s e an d cr i s i s fr am es , th er eby defl ati n g th e r el ati v e con tr i bu ti on s of th es e fr am es i n ex pl ai n i n g th e ov er al l v ar i an ce. T h i s fi n di n g
r eas s er ts th e i m por tan ce of qu an ti ty i n ou r ex am i n ati on an d r ei n for ces th e i m por tan ce of fi r s t-l ev el agen da s etti n g i n ex pl an ati on s of m edi a i n fl u en ce on pu bl i c
opi n i on . I n addi ti on , i t m ay be th at th es e fr am es , i n ter m s of con ten t, ar e too
con fl i ctu al , as s u gges ted by dr i v e-r edu cti on m odel s of fear appeal s (H ov l an d et
al ., 1 9 5 3 ; Jan i s , 1 9 6 7 ; M cG u i r e, 1 9 6 9 ). T h es e fi n di n gs s u gges t th at th e n oti on
th at con fl i ct cau s es th e gr eates t i n cr eas e i n i m por tan ce for th e bu dget defi ci t i s s u e
r equ i r es fu r th er cl ar i fi cati on . T h e m os t ex tr em e l ev el s of co n fl i ct do n ot cau s e th e
gr eates t i n cr eas e i n i m po r tan ce. R ath er , m es s ages co n tai n i n g l ow to m oder ate
l ev el s of con fl i ct ar e l i k el y to i n cr eas e per s u as i v e i m pact, w h i l e h i gh l y con fl i ctu al
m es s ages “s ti m u l ate defen s i ve beh av i or s an d th er efor e r edu ce per s u as i on ” (E agl y &
Ch ai k en , 1 9 9 3 , p. 4 3 6 ). T h e r el ati on s h i p betw een con fl i ctu al m es s ages an d per s u as i on m ay be n on m on oton i c. T h u s , w h en th e i n ten s i ty of th e debate i s n ot ar ou s i n g
en ou gh (tal k ) or too ar ou s i n g (i m pas s e, cr i s i s ), th e effect on th e s al i en ce of an i s s u e
i s di m i n i s h ed.
T h i s s tr on gl y s u gges ts the i m por tan ce of adopti n g a th eor y th at con s i der s m edi a
i n fl u en ce both i n ter m s of (a) th e qu an ti ty of cov er age an d (b) th e ch ar acter i z ati on
of th e i s s u e, or th e attr i bu tes th at j ou r n al i s ts ch oos e to m ak e s al i en t i n th ei r cov er age. I n th i s w ay , both qu an ti ty (agen da s etti n g) an d qu al i ty (fr am i n g) ar e i m por tan t
pi eces of a com pr eh en s i ve ex pl an ati on of m edi a i n fl u en ce on aggr egate opi n i on on
th e budget i s s u e. F u r th er m or e, i s s u es m ay n ot be s i m pl y s tati c “types ,” as th ey h ave
been cl as s i fi ed i n pas t r es ear ch . I s s u es m ay be dyn am i c, as w el l , i n th e w ays th at
el i tes an d m edi a s ou r ces ch oos e to pr es en t th em to th e pu bl i c. O v er al l , ou r fi n di n gs s h ow th at on l y a par ti cu l ar l ev el of el i te cu e gi vi n g i n ter m s of con ten t an d
fr equ en cy w i l l tr i gger th e pu bl i c to ev al u ate th e pr obl em as i m por tan t.
2 20
A m y E . Jas per s on et al .
Con clu sio n
E m pi r i cal s tu di es of m edi a effects m ay pr ofi t by m ov i n g bey on d fi r s t-l ev el agen das etti n g th eor y tow ar d an appr oach th at i n cor por ates th e n atu r e, or fr am i n g, of i s s u e
cov er age. A s a th eor y of m edi a effects , “fi r s t-l ev el ” agen da s etti n g m ay l ack a
cer tai n s peci fi ci ty r egar di n g m edi a i n fl u en ce on pu bl i c opi n i on , gi v en ou r k n ow l edge of ps y ch ol ogi cal an d m as s com m u n i cati on s r es ear ch on the i ntr i caci es of new s
pr es en tati on an d v i ew er s el ecti vi ty. T h e “s econ d l evel ” of agen da s etti n g, or th e
fr am i n g con cept, addr es s es th e m u l ti faceted w ay s an i s s u e can be cov er ed. I t ex pl ai n s h ow th e s al i en ce of par ti cu l ar attr i bu tes can be r ai s ed, th er eby affecti n g th e
w ay th e pu bl i c u n der s tan ds an d pr i or i ti z es th e i s s u e. B y atten di n g to h ow an i s s u e
i s cov er ed, th i s appr oach con s i der s th e pol i ti cal con tex t i n w h i ch i s s u es ex i s t, th e
m an y w ay s i s s u es can h av e m ean i n g, an d th e s tr u ggl e ov er h ow i s s u es ar e con s tr u cted by th e m edi a an d con v eyed to th e pu bl i c.
O u r fi n di n gs ex pl ai n h ow a h y br i d m odel of agen da s etti n g an d fr am i n g can
better i l l u str ate th e m edi a’s effect on pu bl i c opi ni on. F utu r e em pi r i cal r esear ch s houl d
tr eat th e agen da-s etti n g an d fr am i n g appr oach es n ot as com peti n g th eor i es bu t as
com pl em en tar y on es , as pu t for th th eor eti cal l y i n r ecen t l i ter atu r e (M cCom bs &
B el l , 1 9 9 6 ; M cCom bs & E s tr ada, 1 9 9 7 ; G h an em & E vatt, 1 9 9 5 ; M cCom bs , 1 9 9 7 ).
O u r ar ti cl e s er v es as an em pi r i cal tes t l i n k i n g th e fi r s t an d s econ d l ev el s of agen da
s etti n g w i th the pu r pos e of offer i n g a r i cher u nder s tandi n g of how the pu bl i c agenda
i s deter m i n ed.
D eter m i n i n g h ow th e m edi a affect pu bl i c opi n i on i s i m por tan t. A gen da s etti n g
h as been cr i ti cal i n es tabl i s h i n g th at th e m edi a do pl ay a r ol e. N ow th eor i es th at
offer a r i ch er ps ych ol ogi cal ex pl an ati on of th e w ays i n w h i ch m edi a cov er age i n fl u en ce pol i ti cal atti tu des s h ou l d be ex pl or ed at both th e aggr egate an d i n di v i du al
l ev el s . T h e com bi n ed per s pecti v e pu t for th i n th i s ar ti cl e offer s a par s i m on i ou s an d
ps y ch ol ogi cal l y con vi n ci n g ex pl an ati on for ch an ges i n pu bl i c opi n i on . T h e s tu dy of
h u m an cogn i ti on h as cl ear l y es tabl i s h ed th e r ol e s i m pl e h eu r i s ti cs an d ex ter n al
cu es pl ay i n th e for m ati on an d m ai n ten an ce of atti tu des . A m or e co n cer ted effor t
n eeds to be m ade i n i n cl u di n g thes e con s i der ati on s i n fu tu r e as s es s m en ts of ch an ge
i n pu bl i c opi n i on .
A ppen di x: Co m pu t er I n st r u ct i on s
I n th e fi r s t s tep, com pu ter i n s tr u cti on s w er e i m pl em en ted to s el ect feder al bu dget
s tor i es fr om th e or i gi n al N E X I S dow n l oad. R oot for m s or w or d fr agm en ts ar e often
u s ed i n pl ace of fu l l w or ds i n th e I n foT r en d con ten t an al ys i s r u l es to captu r e a
w i der r an ge of r el ev an t w or ds an d ph r as es . T h er efo r e, s tor i es i n w h i ch “s ch ool ,”
“cou n ty ,” “ci ty ,” “s tate, ” “com pan y ,” “cor por at, ” “oper ati on al ,” “h os pi tal ,” “h ou s eh ol d,” or “r en t a car ” appear ed w i th i n 2 0 ch ar acter s of “bu dget” w er e el i m i n ated.
O f th e or i gi n al 1 0 ,0 0 0 s tor i es , 8 ,7 4 2 con tai n ed n ew s cov er age of th e feder al bu dget. H ow ev er , m an y of th es e r em ai n i n g s tor i es m en ti on ed th e bu dget defi ci t on l y
i n pas s i n g or as a s i n gl e i s s u e am on g a l au n dr y l i s t of topi cs . S u ch s tor i es w er e
r em ov ed du r i n g th i s n ex t s tage of an al y s i s s o th at on l y r el ev an t par agr aph s r em ai n ed.
T h e n ex t fi l ter an al y z ed th e r em ai n i n g tex t on th e bas i s of th e fou r fr am es
ou tl i n ed (m edi a cov er age of bu dget r es ol u ti on effor ts i n ter m s of tal k , fi gh t, i m pas s e, or cr i s i s ). E x am pl es of s om e oper ati on al defi n i ti on s of th e fr am e categor i es
F r am i n g an d th e P u bl i c A gen da
2 21
fol l ow . R u l es w er e cr eated to addr es s th e poten ti al for a par agr aph to con tai n m u l ti pl e fr am es ; i n s u ch i n s tan ces , each fr am e w as i n di vi du al l y cou n ted an d u s ed i n
s u bs equ en t an al y s i s . F u r th er m or e, w h en fr am es w er e n egated by s u ch w or ds as
“n o” an d “n ot, ” codi n g r u l es w er e des i gn ed to fi l ter th em ou t. T h er efor e, on l y
par agr aph s th at focu s ed ex pl i ci tl y on on e of th e fou r fr am es w er e an al y z ed.
“T al k ” fr am es w er e con cei v ed of as par agr aph s of n ew s s tor i es con tai n i n g r efer en ce to bu dget r es ol u ti on effor ts ch ar acter i z ed i n ter m s of m eas u r ed di s cu s s i on s
am on g W as h i n gton el i tes . O per ati on al l y , th ey w er e defi n ed by ph r as es an d w or d
com bi n ati on s i n di cati n g s u ch ch ar acter i z ati on s as r efl ected by th e w or ds or w or d
fr agm ents “budget,” “defi ci t,” “pol i ti c,” or “fi scal ,” i n com bi nati on w i th “tal k ,” “negoti at,”
“debat,” “r es ol v ,” “agr eem en t, ” “di s cu s s ,” “con s u l t,” “deal ,” or “con fer .” R u l es w er e
cr eated to el i m i n ate par agr aphs con tai n i ng phr as es s u ch as “good deal ,” “gr eat deal ,”
“n ew s con fer en ce, ” “pr es s con fer en ce,” “tal k r adi o,” an d “tal k s h ow .”
“F i gh t” fr am es w er e co n cei v ed of as par agr aph s of n ew s s tor i es con tai n i n g r efer en ce to bu dget r es ol u ti on effor ts ch ar acter i z ed i n ter m s of h eated di s pu tes am on g
W as h i n gton el i tes . O per ati onal l y , th ey w er e defi n ed by ph r as es an d w or d com bi n ati on s i n di cati n g s u ch ch ar acter i z ati on s by th e u s e of th e w or ds or w or d fr agm en ts
“budget,” “defi ci t,” “pol i ti c,” or “fi s cal ,” i n com bi nati on w i th “fi gh t,” “di s pu t,” “battl ,”
“s k i r m i s h ,” “w ar ,” “con tes t, ” “s tr u ggl ,” “con fl i ct, ” “w r an gl ,” or “cl as h .” R u l es w er e
cr eated to el i m i n ate par agr aph s con tai n i n g ph r as es s u ch as “s tar w ar s ” or “G u l f
W ar .”
“I m pas s e” fr am es w er e defi n ed as par agr aph s of n ew s s tor i es con tai n i n g r efer en ce to bu dget r es ol u ti on effor ts ch ar acter i z ed i n ter m s of a br eak dow n i n com m u n i cati ons am on g W as h i n gton el i tes . I m pass e fr am es w er e oper ati on al i z ed by phr ases
an d w or d com bi n ati on s i n di cati n g s u ch ch ar acter i z ati on s , i n cl u di n g th e w or ds or
w or d fr agm en ts “bu dget, ” “defi ci t, ” “po l i ti c,” or “fi s cal ,” i n com bi n ati on w i th “i m pas s e, ” “s tan doff,” “gr i dl ock ,” “s tal em ate,” “br ok e dow n ,” “br eak dow n ,” or “s tal l .”
F i n al l y, “cr i s i s ” fr am es w er e par agr aph s i n n ew s s tor i es con tai n i ng r efer ences to
bu dget r es ol u ti on effor ts ch ar acter i z ed i n ter m s of con fu s i on an d di s or der am on g
W as h i n gton el i tes . O per ati onal l y , th ey w er e defi n ed by ph r as es an d w or d com bi n ati on s i n di cati n g s u ch ch ar acter i z ati on s by th e u s e of th e w or ds or w or d fr agm en ts
“budget,” “defi ci t,” “pol i ti c,” or “fi s cal ,” i n com bi nati on w i th “cr i s i s ,” “ch aos,” “em er gen cy,” or “fi r e.”
N ot es
1 . T h es e stor i es w er e s el ected on th e bas i s of a gen er al s ear ch s tr i ng. T h i s s tr i n g s el ected al l s tor i es di scu ss i n g (a) “bu dget” w i th i n tw o w or ds of “defi ci t” or “feder al ” or “W as h i ngton” or “cu t!” or “bal an c!” or “r edu c!” or (b) “defi ci t” w i thi n tw o w or ds of “cu t!” or
“r edu c!” (! denotes an y ex ten si on of a w or d [e. g., cu tti n g, bal an ci n g, bal an ced, r educi n g,
r edu ced, etc.).
2 . U n l i k e a n u m ber of oth er com pu ter m eth ods i n w h i ch both the i npu t and an al ys i s
tech n i qu es ar e pr es et (an d th er efor e l i m i ted) by th e s oftw ar e s ear ch s tr ategi es , the I n foT r en d
s ys tem i s actu al l y a h i gh -l evel pr ogr am m i n g l an gu age i n w h i ch th e r esear ch er enter s w or ds ,
w or d r el ati on s h i ps , and ph r as es to ex tr act m ean i ng fr om th e tex t. U ser -defi n ed di cti on ar i es
ar e us ed to l ocate w or ds i n th e tex t, an d th en the m ach i n e i m pl em en ts a s er i es of u ser defi n ed deci si on r u l es to ex tr act i deas bas ed on w or d r el ati on sh i ps , n ot si m pl y w or d cou n ts .
A n oth er str en gth of th e I n foT r en d sy s tem i s th e abi l i ty to “l ay er ” su cces si v e fi l ter s to s el ect
r el evant tex t. Par agr aph s i den ti fi ed as con tai n i ng on e s et of i deas can be u sed as th e i n pu t
for a separ ate set of i n str u cti on s to ex tr act a s econ d gr ou p of i deas . T h e r es ear ch er i s abl e to
2 22
A m y E . Jas per s on et al .
obtai n a l ev el of detai l an d s peci fi ci ty ty pi cal l y as s oci ated w i th h an d codi n g an d yet i s abl e
to an al y z e l ar ge am ou n ts of data th at w ou l d oth er w i s e be ti m e or cos t pr ohi bi ti v e. T he
I nfoT r en d pr ogr am al l ow s r esear ch er s to w or k th r ou gh a s er i es of i n du cti v e and deducti ve
cy cl es i n on -s cr een tes ts to r efi n e th e di cti on ar i es of w or d r el ati on s hi p r u l es . I n thi s w ay, the
r ul es ar e tes ted par agr aph by par agr aph by th e h um an coder for accur acy an d con tex tu al
r el evan ce. T h i s i n ter acti v e s ty l e of dev el opi n g com pu ter i n s tr ucti on s al l ow s for m edi a con ten t to gu i de the con s tr u cti on of the r u l es r ath er th an content codi n g bei n g bas ed on the
r es ear ch er ’s ad h oc as su m pti on s .
3 . W e w an ted th e sear ch s tr i n g to be i n cl u s i v e r ath er th an ex cl us i ve, si n ce w e cou l d
par e dow n th e stor i es to di s pos e of i r r el ev ant on es u s i n g fi l ter i n g; th er efor e, w e u s ed a
s ear ch s tr i n g th at cr eated a r ath er br oad cach e of s tor i es (4 2 , 6 9 5 or i gi n al s tor i es). A s des cr i bed ear l i er , 1 0 ,0 0 0 stor i es w er e th en r andom l y sel ected. W e w er e s ti l l l eft w i th a r ath er
br oad gr oup of s tor i es, m an y i r r el ev an t to ou r i n ves ti gati on. B ecau se of th i s, w e fi l ter ed
m or e con ten t to get r i d of ex tr an eou s stor i es . F or ex am pl e, ou r fi l ter r u l es r em ov ed tex t
deal i n g w i th school bu dgets , ci ty bu dgets , cor por ate bu dgets , and i n ter n ati on al bu dget
or defi ci t di s cu ss i on s . S om e s tor i es w er e deem ed i r r el ev ant becau se th ey m enti on ed the
bu dget i s su e i n pas s i ng, as par t of a l au ndr y l i s t of oth er i ss u es. Al s o, som e s tor i es deal t
w i th th e defi ci t bu t n ot w i th th e effor ts tow ar d defi ci t r es ol u ti on (i .e., som e di s car ded
s tor i es focu s ed on v ar i ou s bu dget pr ov i si ons as oppos ed to effor ts to r esol ve th e debate).
S i n ce ou r focu s w as on th e bu dget r esol uti on effor ts , n ot th e pr os an d con s of the con ten t
of th e bu dget pr ov i s i on s , w e ex cl u ded th es e s tor i es . T h e 4 ,1 5 8 par agr aph s anal y z ed i n the
en d al l con tai n ed on e of th e fr am es th at w e i den ti fi ed as r el ev an t to th e topi c of bu dget
r esol u ti on .
4 . T h e decay r ate for m u l ati on r epor ted i n th ese s tu di es di ffer s fr om th e agen da-s etti ng
decay r ate di scu s s ed by W att et al . (1 9 9 3 ) i n tw o si gn i fi can t w ay s : F i r st, th ei r s tu dy as s u m es
that, as i nfor m ati on h i ts , i t i m m edi atel y i n fl u en ces th e agenda. T h at i s, i n for m ati on acts
i n s tan tan eou s l y w i th n o l ag ti m e. I f th e per su as i v e i n fl u en ce of i n for m ati on decay s ex pon en ti al l y , th ei r m odel as s u m es a h al f-l i fe of z er o. I n for m ati on does n ot per su ade on l ater dates .
T h e i deodyn am i c m odel u sed i n th i s ar ti cl e r ecogn i z es th at per s u as i on can occu r over a
m eas u r abl e ti m e per i od, as tw o-s tep fl ow th eor i es of m edi a i nfl uen ce con ten d. T hi s m odel
tak es i nto accou n t th i s secon dar y i n fl u en ce by es ti m ati n g th at th e per s u as i v e i n fl u en ce of
i n for m ati on h as a h al f-l i fe of one day . S econ d, W att et al . (1 9 9 3 ) ar e m ai n l y concer ned w i th
h ow qu i ck l y i deas go off th e agenda. T h ey attr i bu te th i s to an ex pon en ti al r ate of for getti ng
the or i gi n al per s uas i ve i n for m ati on . I n contr as t, th e i deody n am i c m odel m ak es no su ch
as su m pti on . R ath er , i t as s um es th at n ew i n for m ati on m us t di str act or di r ect pu bl i c opi n i on
tow ar d a n ew agen da for ch an ge to occu r . T h u s, th e m odel u s ed h er e con s i der s th e dy nam i cs w i th i n th e i n for m ati on en v i r on m en t.
R ef er en ces
A l l en , B ar bar a, O ’L ou gh l i n , Pau l a, Jas per son , A m y E ., & S u l l i v an , Joh n L . (1 9 9 4 ). T h e m edi a
an d th e gu l f w ar : P r i m i n g, fr am i n g, an d th e s pi r al of s i l en ce. P ol i ty, 2 , 2 5 5 – 2 8 4 .
A tw ater , T on y, S al w en , M i ch ael B . , & A n der s on , R on al d B . (1 9 8 5 ). M edi a agen da-s etti ng
w i th env i r on m en tal i s su es . Jou r n al i s m Q u ar ter l y, 6 , 3 9 3 – 3 9 7 .
B al l -R ok each , S an dr a, & R ok each , M i l ton . (1 9 8 7 ). T h e fu tu r e s tudy of pu bl i c opi ni on : A
s ym pos i u m . P u bl i c O pi n i on Q u ar ter l y , 5 1 , 1 8 4 – 1 8 5 .
Coh en , B er n ar d C. (1 9 6 3 ). T h e pr es s and for ei gn pol i cy . Pr i n ceton , N J: P r i n ceton U ni v er si ty
P r ess .
D om k e, D av i d, F an , D av i d P . , F i bi son , M i chael , S h ah , D h avan V ., S m i th , S tev e S ., & W atts ,
M ar k D . (i n pr es s). N ew s m edi a, can di dates an d i ss u es , an d publ i c opi ni on i n th e 1 9 9 6
pr es i den ti al cam pai gn . Jou r n al i s m an d M as s Com m u n i cati on Q u ar ter l y , 7 4 , 7 1 8 – 7 3 7 .
E agl y, A l i ce, & Ch ai k en , S hel l y . (1 9 9 3 ). T he ps ych ol ogy of atti tudes . H ar cou r t B r ace Jov an ov i ch, I n c.
F r am i n g an d th e P u bl i c A gen da
2 23
E n tm an , R ober t M . (1 9 9 3 ). F r am i n g: T ow ar d cl ar i fi cati on of a fr actur ed par adi gm . Jou r n al of
Com m u ni cati on , 4 1 , 5 1 – 5 8 .
F an , D avi d P . (1 9 8 8 ). P r edi cti on s of pu bl i c opi n i on fr om the m as s m edi a. W es tpor t, CT :
G r een w ood Pr ess .
F an , D avi d P . (1 9 9 4 ). I n for m ati on pr oces s i n g an al y s i s sy s tem for s or ti n g and s cor i n g text.
U . S . P aten t 5 ,3 7 1 ,6 7 3 .
F an , D av i d P . (1 9 9 5 ). P r edi cti on s of th e B u s h -Cl i n ton -P er ot pr es i den ti al r ace fr om th e pr es s .
P ol i ti cal A n al y si s, 6 , 6 7 – 1 0 5 .
F an , D av i d P . (1 9 9 6 ). N ew s m edi a fr am i ng sets pu bl i c opi n i on that dr u gs i s th e cou n tr y ’s
m os t i m por tan t pr obl em . S u bs tan ce U s e and M i s u se, 3 , 1 4 1 3 – 1 4 2 1 .
F an , D avi d P ., B r os i u s , H an s-B er n d, & K eppl i n ger , H an s M ath i as . (1 9 9 4 ). P r edi cti on s of the
pu bl i c agen da fr om tel ev i s i on cov er age. Jou r n al of B r oadcas ti ng an d El ectr oni c M edi a,
38, 163–177.
F an , D avi d P ., & T i m s , Al ber t. (1 9 8 9 ). T h e i m pact of n ew s m edi a on pu bl i c opi n i on : A m er i can pr es i denti al el ecti ons , 1 9 8 7 – 1 9 8 8 . I nter nati on al Jour nal of Pu bl i c O pi ni on R esear ch ,
1, 151– 163.
G am s on , W i l l i am A . (1 9 8 5 ). G offm an ’s l egacy to pol i ti cal s oci ol ogy. T h eor y an d S oci ety ,
14, 605– 622.
G am s on , W i l l i am A . (1 9 9 2 ). T al k i n g pol i ti cs . Cam br i dge, E n gl an d: Cam br i dge U n i v er si ty
P r ess .
G h an em , S al m a, & E v att, D i x i e. (1 9 9 5 ). M edi a cov er age an d pu bl i c con cer n abou t cr i m e:
A n expl or ati on of the s econ d di m ens i on of agen da setti n g. P aper pr es en ted at th e m eeti n g of th e W or l d A s soci ati on for P u bl i c O pi ni on R esear ch , T h e H ague, th e N ether l ands .
G i tl i n , T odd. (1 9 8 0 ). T h e w h ol e w or l d i s w atch i ng: M as s m edi a i n th e m ak i n g an d u n m ak i n g of th e n ew l eft. B er k el ey : U n i v er si ty of Cal i for n i a P r es s .
G r aber , D or i s. (1 9 8 8 ). P r oces si n g th e n ew s : H ow peopl e tam e th e i n for m ati on ti de (2 n d
ed.). N ew Y or k : L on gm an .
G r aber , D or i s . (1 9 8 9 ). Con ten t an d m ean i n g: W h at’s i t al l about? A m er i can B eh avi or al S ci en ti s t, 3 3 , 1 4 4 – 1 5 2 .
G r aber , D or i s. (1 9 9 3 ). M as s m edi a an d A m er i can pol i ti cs (4 th ed.). W as h i n gton, D C: Con gr es si on al Q u ar ter l y P r es s .
H ager , G eor ge. (1 9 9 5 , D ecem ber 2 ). P r obl em s i n th e open i ng r ou nd cou l d s i gn al bi gger
w oes . Con gr ess i on al Q uar ter l y W eek l y R epor t, pp. 3 6 3 5 – 3 6 4 0 .
H al l , S tu ar t, Cr i tch er , C., Jeffer son , T ., Cl ar k e, J. , & R ober s, B . (1 9 7 8 ). P ol i ci n g the cr i si s :
M u ggi n g, th e s tate, an d l aw an d or der . N ew Y or k : H ol m es & M ei er .
H er tog, Jam es K . , & F an, D av i d P . (1 9 9 5 ). T h e i m pact of pr es s cover age on s oci al bel i efs :
T h e cas e of H I V tr an sm i s si on . Com m u n i cati on R es ear ch , 2 2 , 5 4 5 – 5 7 4 .
H ov l an d, C. I . , Jani s , I . L ., & K el l ey, H . H . (1 9 5 3 ). Com m u n i cati on an d per s u as i on : Ps y ch ol ogi cal stu di es of opi ni on ch an ge. N ew H av en , CT : Y al e U n i v er s i ty P r es s .
I yen gar , S h an to. (1 9 9 1 ). I s an y one r es pon s i bl e? H ow tel evi s i on fr am es pol i ti cal i s su es . Ch i cago: U n i v er s i ty of Ch i cago P r es s .
I yen gar , S h anto, & K i n der , D on al d. (1 9 8 7 ). N ew s th at m atter s : T el ev i s i on an d Am er i can
opi n i on . Ch i cago: U n i v er si ty of Ch i cago P r es s .
I yen gar , S hanto, P eter s, M ar k D ., & K i n der , D on al d R . (1 9 8 2 ). E x per i m ental dem on s tr ati on s
of th e not-s o-m i n i m al pol i ti cal con s equ en ces of m as s m edi a. A m er i can P ol i ti cal S ci ence
R ev i ew , 7 6 , 8 4 8 – 8 5 8 .
Jani s , I r v i n g L . (1 9 6 7 ). Effects of fear ar ou sal on atti tu de ch an ge: R ecen t devel opm en ts i n
theor y an d ex per i m ental r esear ch . I n L . B er k ow i tz (E d. ), A dv an ces i n ex per i m en tal s oci al ps y chol ogy (V ol . 3 , pp. 1 6 6 – 2 2 4 ). S an D i ego, CA : A cadem i c P r es s .
K i n der , D onal d R . , & S an der s, L y n n. (1 9 9 0 ). M i m i ck i n g pol i ti cal debate w i th s u r v ey qu esti on s :
T h e cas e of W hi te opi n i on on affi r m ati v e acti on for B l ack s . S oci al Cogn i ti on , 8 , 7 3 – 1 0 3 .
K osi ck i , G er al d M . (1 9 9 3 ). P r obl em s and oppor tun i ti es i n agen da-s etti n g r es ear ch . Jour nal of
Com m u ni cati on, 4 3 , 1 0 0 – 1 2 7 .
2 24
A m y E . Jas per s on et al .
M acK u en , M i ch ael B ., & Coom bs , S tev en L . (1 9 8 1 ). M or e th an n ew s: M edi a pow er i n
pu bl i c affai r s . B ever l y H i l l s, CA : S age.
M cCl osk y , H er ber t, & Z al l er , Joh n . (1 9 8 4 ). T h e A m er i can ethos : P ubl i c atti tu des tow ar d
capi tal i s m an d dem ocr acy. Cam br i dge, M A : H ar v ar d U n i v er s i ty P r es s .
M cCom bs , M ax w el l . (1 9 9 2 ). Ex pl or er s an d su r v eyor s : Ex pan di n g str ategi es for agenda-s etti ng
r es ear ch . Jou r n al i s m Q u ar ter l y, 6 9 , 8 1 3 – 8 2 4 .
M cCom bs , M ax w el l . (1 9 9 4 ). T h e fu tu r e agenda for agen da-s etti ng r esear ch . Jour n al of M as s
Com m u n i cati on S tu di es , 4 5 , 1 8 1 – 2 1 7 .
M cCom bs , M ax w el l . (1 9 9 7 , A u gu s t). N ew fr onti er s i n agen da-s etti n g: A gen das of attr i bu tes
an d fr am es . P aper pr es ented at th e m eeti n g of the A s soci ati on for E du cati on i n Jou r n al i sm and M as s Com m u n i cati on , Ch i cago.
M cCom bs , M ax w el l , & B el l , T am ar a. (1 9 9 6 ). T h e agen da-s etti n g r ol e of m as s com m u n i cati on . I n M i ch ael B . S al w en & D on W . S tack s (E ds . ), A n i n tegr ated appr oach to com m u n i cati on th eor y an d r esear ch. H i l l sdal e, N J: E r l baum .
M cCom bs , M ax w el l , & Es tr ada, G eor ge. (1 9 9 7 ). T he n ew s m edi a an d th e pi ctur es i n ou r
h eads . I n S h an to I y en gar & R i ch ar d R eev es (E ds . ), D o th e m edi a gover n ?: P ol i ti ci an s ,
v oter s an d r epor ter s i n A m er i ca. T h ous an d O ak s , CA : S age.
M cCom bs , M ax w el l E. & S h aw , D on al d L . (1 9 7 2 ). T h e agenda-s etti n g fun cti on of m as s
m edi a. P u bl i c O pi n i on Q u ar ter l y , 3 6 , 1 7 6 – 1 8 7 .
M cCom bs , M ax w el l E ., & S h aw , D on al d L . (1 9 9 3 ). T he ev ol uti on of agenda-s etti ng r es ear ch :
T w en ty -fi ve y ear s i n th e m ar k etpl ace of i deas . Jou r n al of Com m un i cati on , 4 3 , 5 8 .
M cG u i r e, W i l l i am J. (1 9 6 9 ). T h e n atu r e of atti tudes and atti tu de change. I n G . L i n dz ey & E .
A r on s on (E ds. ), H an dbook of s oci al ps ych ol ogy (2 n d ed., V ol . 3 , pp. 1 3 6 – 3 1 4 ). R eadi ng, M A : A ddi son -W es l ey .
P age, B en j am i n , & S h api r o, R ober t Y . (1 9 9 2 ). T h e r ati on al pu bl i c: F i fty y ear s of opi n i on
tr en ds . Ch i cago: U ni v er s i ty of Chi cago P r es s .
P atter s on , T h om as . (1 9 9 4 ). O u t of or der . N ew Y or k : R an dom H ou s e.
Q u attr one, G eor ge A ., & T v er s k y, A m os. (1 9 8 8 ). Con tr as ti n g r ati on al an d ps y ch ol ogi cal
an al y s es of pol i ti cal ch oi ce. A m er i can P ol i ti cal S ci en ce R ev i ew , 8 2 , 7 1 9 – 7 3 6 .
S cott, W i l l i am A . (1 9 5 5 ). R el i abi l i ty of con ten t an al y s i s : T h e cas e of n om i nal s cal e codi n g.
P u bl i c O pi n i on Q u ar ter l y, 1 9 , 3 2 1 – 3 2 5 .
S h ah , D havan V ., D om k e, D av i d, & W ack m an , D an i el . (1 9 9 6 ). “T o th i ne ow n sel f be
tr u e”: V al u es, fr am i n g an d v oter deci si on -m ak i n g str ategi es. Com m u n i cati on R esear ch ,
23, 509.
S h ah , D h av an V . , D om k e, D av i d, & W ack m an , D an i el B . (1 9 9 7 ). V al u es and th e vote:
L i n k i n g i s s u e i n ter pr etati on s to th e pr oces s of can di date ch oi ce. Jou r n al i sm an d M as s
Com m u n i cati on Q u ar ter l y , 7 4 , 3 5 7 – 3 8 7 .
S ti m s on , Jam es . A . (1 9 9 1 ). P u bi c opi n i on i n A m er i ca: M oods , cy cl es , an d s w i n gs . B ou l der ,
CO : W estv i ew P r es s .
W an ta, W ay n e, & H u , Y u-W ei . (1 9 9 3 ). T h e agen da-s etti n g effects of i n ter n ati on al n ew s
cov er age: A n ex am i nati on of di ffer i n g n ew s fr am es . I n ter nati onal Jour n al of Pu bl i c
O pi ni on R esear ch , 5 , 2 5 0 – 2 6 4 .
W att, Jam es H . , M az z a, M ar y , & S n y der , L es l i e. (1 9 9 3 ). A gen da-s etti ng effects of tel ev i s i on
n ew s cover age and th e effects decay cur v e. Com m u n i cati on R es ear ch , 2 0 , 4 0 8 – 4 3 5 .
Y agade, A i l een , & D oz i er , D avi d. (1 9 9 0 ). T h e m edi a agenda-s etti ng effect of con cr ete ver s u s
abs tr act i s su es. Jou r n al i s m Q u ar ter l y, 6 7 , 3 – 1 0 .
Z al l er , Joh n . (1 9 9 2 ). T h e n atu r e an d or i gi n of m as s opi ni on . Cam br i dge, E n gl and: Cam br i dge U n i ver si ty P r es s .
Z al l er , Joh n . (1 9 9 4 ). El i te l eader s h i p of m as s opi n i on : N ew ev i den ce fr om th e gu l f w ar . I n
W . L an ce B en n ett & D av i d L . P al etz (E ds .), T ak en by s tor m . Ch i cago: U n i v er s i ty of
Ch i cago P r es s .