Incidental framing effects and associative processes: A study of attribute frames in broadcast news stories

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 261-280

  Schneider, Sandra L ^a   Burke, Monica D ^a   Solomonson, Andrew L ^b,d   Laurion, Suzanne K ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^b Right Management Consulting   (United States)

^c FLAGLER COLLEGE   (United States)

^d Right Management Consultants   (United States)

Author keywords

Associative processes; Attribute framing; Incidental evaluation; News broadcast; Realistic context

Indexed keywords

EID: 27544474667     PISSN: 08943257     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bdm.500     Document Type: Review

References (50)

1. Adolphs, R., & Damasio, A. R. (2001). The interaction of affect and cognition: a neurobiological perspective. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Handbook of affect and social cognition (pp. 27-49). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Ashby, F. G., Isen, A. M., & Turken, A. U. (1999). A neuropsychological theory of positive affect and its influence on cognition. Psychological Review, 106, 529-550.
3. Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Beach, L. R., Puto, C. P., Heckler, S. E., Naylor, G., & Marble, T. A. (1996). Differential versus unit weighting of violations, framing, and the role of probability in image theory's compatibility test. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 77-82.
5. Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New York: William Morrow.
6. Combs, B., & Slovic, P. (1979). Causes of death: biased newspaper coverage and biased judgments. Journalism Quarterly, 56, 837-843, 849.
7. Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes' error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Grosset/Putnam.
8. D'Angelo, P. (2002). News framing as a multiparadigmatic research program: a response to Entman. Journal of Communication, 52, 870-888.
9. Donovan, R. J., & Jalleh, G. (1999). Positively and negatively framed product attributes: the influence of involvement. Psychology & Marketing, 16, 613-630.
10. Emby, C. (1994). Framing and presentation mode effects in professional judgment: auditors' internal control judgments and substantive testing decisions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 13(Suppl.), 102-115.
11. Fazio, R. H. (2001). On the automatic activation of associated evaluations: an overview. Cognition & Emotion, 15, 115-141.
12. Gamson, W. A. (1989). News as framing: comments on Graber. American Behavioral Scientist, 33, 157-161.
13. Goldberg, B. (2002). Bias: A CBS insider exposes how the media distort the news. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc.
14. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. 3: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
15. Gunther, A. C. (1998). The persuasive press inference: effects of mass media on perceived public opinion. Communication Research, 25, 486-504.
16. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280-1300.
17. Higgins, E. T. (1999). Self-regulation and quality of life: emotional and non-emotional life experiences. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 244-266). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
18. Hilton, D. J. (1995). The social context of reasoning: conversational inference and rational judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 248-271.
19. Hutchinson E. R. (1986). Writing for mass communication (2nd ed., p. 12). White Plains, NY: Longman Publishers.
20. Isen, A. M., & Labroo, A. A. (2003). Some ways in which positive affect facilitates decision making and judgment. In S. L. Schneider, & J. Shanteau (Eds.), Emerging perspectives on judgment and decision research (pp. 365-393). New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. Johnson, R. D. (1987). Making judgments when information is missing: inferences, biases, and framing effects. Acta Psychologica, 66, 69-82.
22. Kelinson, J. W., & Tate, P. (2000). The 1998-2008 job outlook in brief. Occupational Outlook Quarterly, Spring, 2-39. Retrieved January 25, 2005, from the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics Web site: http://www.bls.gov/opub/ooq/2000/spring/art01.pdf.
23. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
24. Kurtz, H. (1998). Spin cycle: How the White House and the media manipulate the news. New York: Simon and Schuster.
25. Langer, E. (1997). The power of mindful learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
26. Langer, E. J. (2000). Mindful Learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 220-223.
27. Levin, I. P., & Gaeth, G. J. (1988). How consumers are affected by the framing of information before and after consuming the product. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 374-378.
28. Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., Schreiber, J., & Lauriola, M. (2002). A new look at framing effects: distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 88, 411-429.
29. Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: a typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 149-188.
30. Levin, I. P., Schnittjer, S. K., & Thee, S. L. (1988). Information framing effects in social and personal decisions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 520-529.
31. Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., Layman, M., & Combs, B. (1978). Judged frequency of lethal events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 551-578.
32. Marden, R. E., Schneider, S. L., & Holstrum, G. L. (1996). Instructional case: using professional judgment in control environment evaluation. Issues in Accounting Education, 11, 419-441.
33. Marteau, T. M. (1989). Framing of information: its influence upon decisions of doctors and patients. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 89-94.
34. Mather, M., Shafir, E., & Johnson, M. K. (2000). Misremembrance of options past: source monitoring and choice. Psychological Science, 11, 132-138.
35. McKenzie, C. R. M., & Nelson, J. D. (2003). What a speaker's choice of frame reveals: reference points, frame selection, and framing effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 596-602.
36. Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A., & Oxley, Z. M. (1997). Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91, 567-583.
37. O'Clock, P., & Devine, K. (1995). An investigation of framing and firm size on the auditor's going concern decision. Accounting and Business Research, 25, 197-207.
38. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (2001). Framing as a strategic action in public deliberation. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy Jr, & A. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life (pp. 35-65). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1996). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.
40. Price, V., Tweksbury, D., & Powers, E. (1997). Switching trains of thought: the impact of news frames on reader's cognitive responses. Communication Research, 24, 481-506.
41. Pratto, F., & John, O. P. (1991). Automatic vigilance: the attention grabbing power of negative social information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 380-391.
42. Public Relations Society of America. (2000). Public Relations Society of America Code of Ethics. Retrieved January 2005, from the Public Relations Society of America Web site: http://www.prsa.org/_About/ethics/pdf/codeo-fethics.pdf?indent=eth10
43. Radio-Television News Directors Association. (2000). Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct Radio-Television News Directors Association. Retrieved January 25, 2005, from the Radio-Television News Directors Association and Foundation Web site: http://www.rtndf.org/ethics/coe.shtml
44. Schneider, S. L. (1995). Item difficulty, discrimination, and the confidence-frequency effect in a categorical judgment task. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 61, 148-167.
45. Schneider, S. L., & Barnes, M. D. (2003). What do decision makers really want? Goals and motives in decision making. In S. L. Schneider, & J. Shanteau (Eds.), Emerging perspectives on judgment and decision research (pp. 394-427). New York: Cambridge University Press.
46. Schneider, S. L., & Martin, N. (2003). What's in a frame? Cues to social context. Presented at the 44th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Vancouver, BC (November).
47. Sniezek, J. A., Paese, P. W., & Switzer, F. S. (1990). The effect of choosing on confidence in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 46, 264-282.
48. Society of Professional Journalists. (1996). Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics. Retrieved January 25, 2005, from the Society of Professional Journalists Web site: http://www.spj.org/ethics_code.asp
49. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645-726.
50. Stovall, J. G. (2002). Writing for the mass media (5th ed., p. 69). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.