Thoughts on agenda setting, framing, and priming

Journal of Communication

Volumn 57, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 142-147

  Weaver, David H ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITION; COMMUNICATION;

EID: 33847324431     PISSN: 00219916     EISSN: 14602466     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00333.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Callaghan, K., & Schnell, F. (2001). Assessing the democratic debate: How the news media frame elite policy discourse. Political Communication, 18, 183-212.
2. Cohen, B. C. (1963). The press and foreign policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3. de Vreese, C. H., Peter, J., & Semetko, H. A. (2001). Framing politics at the launch of the Euro: A cross-national comparative study of frames in the news. Political Communication, 18, 107-122.
4. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43 (4), 51-58.
5. Gamson, W. A. (1992). Talking politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
6. Ghanem, S. (1997). Filling in the tapestry: The second level of agenda setting. In M. McCombs, D. L. Shaw, & D. Weaver (Eds.), Communication and democracy (pp. 3-14). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News that matters: Television and American opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8. Matthes, J. (2006). The need for orientation towards news media: Revising and validating a classic concept. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 422-444.
9. McCombs, M. (1997). New frontiers in agenda setting: Agendas of attributes and frames. Mass Comm Review, 24 (1&2), 32-52.
10. McCombs, M. (2005). A look at agenda-setting: Past, present and future. Journalism Studies, 6, 543-557.
11. 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.
12. Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication & Society, 3, 297-316.
13. Takeshita, T. (2006). Current critical problems in agenda-setting research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 275-296.
14. Tankard, J., Hendrickson, L., Silberman, J., Bliss, K., & Ghanem, S. (1991, August). Media frames: Approaches to conceptualization and measurement. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Boston, MA.
15. Weaver, D. (1991). Issue salience and public opinion: Are there consequences of agenda-setting? International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 3, 53-68.
16. Weaver, D. (1997 -1998, Winter). Framing should not supplant agenda-setting. Communication Theory & Methodology (CT&M) Concepts, 27 (2), 3.
17. Weaver, D., McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. L. (2004). Agenda-setting research: Issues, attributes, and influences. In L. L. Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp. 257-282). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Weaver, D. H. (1977). Political issues and voter need for orientation. In D. L. Shaw & M. E. McCombs (Eds.), The emergence of American political issues: The agenda-setting function of the press (pp. 107-119). St. Paul, MN: West. Also reprinted in D.L. Protess & M. McCombs (Eds.). (1991). Agenda setting (pp. 131-139). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. Weaver, D. H., McCombs, M. E., & Spellman, C. (1975). Watergate and the media: A case study of agenda-setting. American Politics Quarterly, 3, 458-472.
20. Willnat, L. (1997). Agenda setting and priming: Conceptual links and differences. In M. McCombs, D. L. Shaw, & D. Weaver (Eds.), Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda-setting theory (pp. 51-66). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.