The interplay of news frames on cognitive complexity

Human Communication Research

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 102-120

  Shah, Dhavan V ^a   Kwak, Nojin ^b   Schmierbach, Mike ^a   Zubric, Jessica ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 4043114236     PISSN: 03603989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/hcr/30.1.102     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Acton, W. H., Johnson, P. J., & Goldsmith, T. E. (1994). Structural knowledge assessment: Comparison to referent structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 303-311.
2. Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3. Cappella, J. N., & Jamieson, K. H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and public good. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Carley, K. A. (1986). An approach for relating social structure to cognitive structure. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 12, 137-189.
5. Carley, K., & Palmquist, M. (1992). Extracting, representing, and analyzing mental models. Social Forces, 70, 601-636.
6. Feldman, S. (1982). Economic self-interest and political behavior. American Journal of Political Science, 26, 446-466.
7. Hale, J. L., & Dillard, J.P. (1995). Fear appeals in health promotion campaigns: Too much, too little, or just right? In E. Maibach & R. L. Parrott (Eds.) Designing health messages: Approaches from communication theory and public health practice (pp. 65-80). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible?: How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9. Jones, E. (1990). Interpersonal perception. New York: Freeman.
10. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choice, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-350.
11. Keppel, G. (1991). Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
12. Kim, S. I., & Van Dusen, L. M. (1998). The role of prior knowledge and elaboration in text comprehension and memory: A comparison of self-generated elaboration and text provided elaboration, The American Journal of Psychology, 3, 353-378.
13. Kinder, D. R., & Kiewiet, D. R. (1981). Sociotropic politics. British Journal of Political Science, 11, 129-161.
14. Kosicki, G. M., & McLeod, J. M. (1990). Learning from political news: Effects of media images and information-processing strategies. In S. Kraus (Ed.), Mass communication and political information processing (pp. 69-83). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Krause, G. A. (1997). Voters, information heterogeneity, and the dynamics of aggregate economic expectations. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 1170-1200.
16. Langston, W., & Kramer, D. C. (1998). The representation of space in mental models derived from text. Memory & Cognition, 26, 247-262.
17. Lazo, J. K., Kinnel, J., Bussa, T., Fisher, A., & Collamer, N. (1999). Expert and lay mental models of ecosystems: Inferences for risk communication. Risk: Health, Safety, and the Environment, 20(1), 45-64.
18. Marcus, G. E. (1988). The structure of emotional response: 1984 presidential candidates. American Political Science Review, 82, 735-761.
19. Marcus, G. E., Sullivan, J. L., Theiss-Morse, E., & Wood, S. L. (1995). With malice toward some: How people make civil liberties judgments. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20. McLeod, J. M., Zubric, J., Kwak, N., Powell, M. Zhang, W., & Deshpande, S. (2000, August) Cognitive structure as a mediator of the influence of communication. Paper presented to the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Phoenix, AZ.
21. rd Ed.). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
22. Neuman, W. R. (1981). Differentiation and integration: Two dimensions of political thinking, American Journal of Sociology, 86(6), 1236-1267.
23. Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 20, 55-76.
25. Price, V., & Tewksbury, D. (1997). News values and public opinion: A theoretical account of media priming and framing. In G. Barnett & F. Boster (Eds.) Progress in communication sciences (pp. 173-212). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
26. Quattrone, G. A., & Tversky, A. (1988). Contrasting rational and psychological analyses of political choice. The American Political Science Review, 82, 719-737.
27. Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.) Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 177-221). New York: Academic Press.
28. Rye, J. A., & Rubba, P. A. (1998). An exploration of the concept map as an interview tool to facilitate the externalization of students' understandings about global atmospheric change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 521-546.
29. Shah, D. V. (2001). The collision of convictions: Value-framing and value judgments. In R. P. Hart & D. Shaw (Eds.), Communication and U.S. elections: New agendas (pp. 55-74). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
30. Shah, D. V., Domke, D., & Wackman, D. B. (1996). To thine own self be true': Values, framing and voter decision-making strategies. Communication Research, 23, 1996.
31. Shah, D. V., Domke, D., & Wackman, D. B. (2001). The effects of value-framing on political judgment and reasoning. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy, Jr., & A. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life. (pp. 227-244). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
33. Wallace, J. D., & Mintzes, J. (1990). The concept map as a research tool: Exploring conceptual change in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 27, 1033-1052.