Framing terror: An experimental framing effects study of the perceived threat of terrorism

Critical Studies on Terrorism

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 199-217

  Woods, Joshua ^a  

^a WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Framing; Islam; Media; Social attitudes; Stereotypes; Terrorism

Indexed keywords

EID: 79961033106     PISSN: 17539153     EISSN: 17539161     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17539153.2011.586205     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Altheide, D.L., 2006. Terrorism and the politics of fear. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.
2. Barber, B.R., 1996. Jihad vs. McWorld. New York: Ballantine Books.
3. Benford, R.D. and Snow, D.A., 2000. Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611-639.
4. Bronstein, C., 2005. Representing the third wave: mainstream print media framing of a new feminist movement. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 82 (4), 783-803.
5. Byers, B. and Jones, J., 2007. The impact of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 on anti-Islamic hate crime. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 5 (1), 43-56.
6. Collins, R., 2004. Rituals of solidarity and security in the wake of terrorist attack. Sociological Theory, 22 (1), 53-87.
7. Cooper, H.A., 2001. Terrorism: the problem of definition revisited. American Behavioral Scientist, 44 (6), 881-893.
8. Covello, V.T., 1992. Risk communication: an emerging area of health communication research. In: S. Deetz, ed. Communication yearbook. 15th ed. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
9. Cress, D.M. and Snow, D.A., 2000. The outcomes of homeless mobilization: the influence of organization, disruption, political mediation, and framing. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 1063-1104.
10. D'Angelo, P., 2002. News framing as a multiparadigmatic research program: a response to Entman. Journal of Communication, 52 (4), 870-888.
11. Davis, D.W., 2007. Negative liberty: public opinion and the terrorist attacks on America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
12. Druckman, J.N., 2001. The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23 (3), 225-256.
13. Entman, R.M., 1991. Framing U.S. coverage of international news: contrasts in narratives of the KAL and Iran air incidents. Journal of Communication, 41 (4), 6-27.
14. Entman, R.M., 1993. Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43 (4), 51-58.
15. Entman, R.M., 2004. Projections of power: framing news, public opinion and U.S. foreign policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16. Finucane, M.L., et al., 2000. The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13 (1), 1-17.
17. Fischhoff, B., et al., 1978. How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences, 9, 127-152.
18. Ford, C.A., et al., 2003. Reactions of young adults to September 11, 2001. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 157, 572-578.
19. Ford, T.E., 1997. Effects of stereotypical television portrayals of African-Americans on person perception. Social Psychology Quarterly, 60 (3), 266-275.
20. Fried, A., 2005. Terrorism as a context of coverage before the Iraq War. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 10 (3), 125-132.
21. Gaines, B.J., 2002. Where's the rally? Approval and trust of the President, Cabinet, Congress, and Government since September 11. PS: Political Science and Politics, 35 (3), 530-536.
22. Gamson, W.A., 1992. Talking politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23. Gershkoff, A. and Kushner, S., 2005. Shaping public opinion: the 9/11-Iraq connection in the Bush administration's rhetoric. Perspectives on Politics, 3 (3), 525-538.
24. Gillespie, M., 2001. Terrorism reaches status of Korean and Vietnam Wars as most important problem. Economy ranks a distant second. Gallup News Service, November 19.
25. Gitlin, T., 1980. The whole world is watching: mass media in the making & unmaking of the new left. Berkeley: University of California Press.
26. Greenberg, J. and Pyszczynski, T., 1985. The effects of an overhead ethnic slur on evaluations of the target: how to spread a social disease. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 61-72.
27. Greenberg, M., Craighill, P., and Greenberg, A., 2004. Trying to understand behavioral responses to terrorism: personal civil liberties, environmental hazards, and U.S. resident reactions to the September 11, 2001 attacks. Human Ecology Review, 11 (2), 165-176.
28. Hamill, R. and Lodge, M., 1986. Cognitive consequences of political sophistication In: R.R. Lau and D.O. Sears, eds. Political cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
29. Huddy, L., et al., 2005. Threat, anxiety, and support of antiterrorism policies. American Journal of Political Science, 49 (3), 593-608.
30. Huddy, L., Feldman, S., andWeber, C., 2007. The political consequences of perceived threat and felt insecurity. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 614, 131-153.
31. Huddy, L., Khatib, N., and Capelos, T., 2002. Trends: reactions to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66 (3), 418-450.
32. Huntington, S.P., 2003. The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon & Schuster.
33. Hurwitz, J. and Peffley, M., 2005. Playing the race card in the post-Willie Horton era: the impact of racialized code words on support for punitive crime policy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69 (1), 99-112.
34. Iyengar, S. and Kinder, D.R., 1987. News that matters: television and American opinion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
35. Johnson, E.J. and Tversky, A., 1983. Affect, generalization, and the perception of risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 20-31.
36. Jones, J.M., 2007. Only 4 in 10 Americans satisfied with treatment of immigrants. Gallup News Service, 15 August.
37. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A., 1984. Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 73-103.
38. Kavoori, A.P. and Fraley, T., 2006. Media, terrorism, and theory: a reader. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
39. Kirkland, S.L., Greenberg, J., and Pyszczynski, T., 1987. Further evidence of the deleterious effects of overhead derogatory ethnic labels: derogation beyond the target. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 216-227.
40. Kunda, Z., 1999. Social cognition: making sense of people. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41. Lepre, C.R., Walsh-Childers, K., and Chance, J.C., 2003. Newspaper coverage portrays managed care negatively. Newspaper Research Journal, 24 (2), 6-21.
42. Lewis, C.W., 2005. The clash between security and liberty in the U.S. response to terror. Public Administration Review, 65 (1), 18-30.
43. McCombs, M., Shaw, D.L., and Weaver, D., 1997. Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda-setting theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
44. McNeil, B., et al., 1982. On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. New England Journal of Medicine, 306, 1259-1262.
45. Moeller, S., 2004. Media coverage of weapons of mass destruction. College Park: Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland, University of Maryland.
46. Moore, K.M., 2002. 'United We Stand': American attitudes toward (Muslim) immigration post- September 11th. The Muslim World, 92 (1/2), 39-57.
47. Moskalenko, S., McCauley, C., and Rozin, P., 2006. Group identification under conditions of threat: college students' attachment to country, family, ethnicity, religion and university before and after September 11, 2001. Political Psychology, 27 (1), 77-97.
48. Nacos, B.L., 1994. Terrorism and the media: from the Iran hostage crisis to the world trade center bombing. New York: Columbia University Press.
49. Nacos, B.L. and Torres-Reyna, O., 2003. Framing Muslim-Americans before and after 9/11. In: P. Norris, M. Kern, and M. Just, eds. Framing terrorism: the news media, the government, and the public. New York: Routledge.
50. Nelson, T.E. and Kinder, D.R., 1996. Issue frames and group-centrism in American public opinion. The Journal of Politics, 58 (4), 1055-1078.
51. Newport, F., 2007. Americans have become more negative on impact of immigrants. Gallup News Service, 13 July.
52. New York Times, 2004. The Times and Iraq. New York Times, 26 May.
53. Norris, P., Kern, M., and Just, M., eds., 2003. Framing terrorism: the news media, the government, and the public. New York: Routledge.
54. Panagopoulos, C., 2006. The polls-trends. Arab and Muslim Americans and Islam in the aftermath of 9/11. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70 (4), 608-624.
55. Pape, R., 2005. Dying to win: the strategic logic of suicide terrorism. New York: Random House.
56. Peters, E. and Slovic, P., 1996. The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26 (16), 1427-1453.
57. Peters, E.M., Burraston, B., and Mertz, C.K., 2004. An emotion-based model of risk perception and stigma susceptibility: cognitive appraisals of emotion, affective reactivity, worldviews, and risk perceptions in the generation of technological stigma. Risk Analysis, 24 (5), 1349-1367.
58. Pew Research Center, 2006. No consensus on immigration problem or proposed fixes. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, 30 March.
59. Popkin, S.L., 1994. The reasoning voter: communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
60. Putnam, R.D., 2002. Bowling together. The American Prospect, 11 February.
61. Scheufele, D.A., 1999. Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49, 103-119.
62. Sjoberg, L., 1998. Understanding the process and consequences of risk perception. In: A.Mosleh and R.A. Bari, eds. 4th conference on probabilistic safety assessment and management. New York: Springer.
63. Sjoberg, L., 2000. Factors in risk perception. Risk Analysis, 20 (1), 1-11.
64. Sjöberg, L., 2005. The perceived risk of terrorism. Risk Management: An International Journal, 7, 43-61.
65. Skocpol, T., 2002.Will 9/11 and the war on terror revitalize American civic democracy? PS: Political Science and Politics, 35 (3), 537-540.
66. Slovic, P., 2004. The perception of risk. London: Earthscan.
67. Slovic, P., et al., 2002. The affect heuristic: rational actors or rational fools? Implications of the affect heuristic for behavioral economics. In: D. Griffin, D. Kahneman, and T. Gilovich, eds. Heuristics and biases: the psychology of intuitive judgment. New York: Cambridge University Press.
68. Smith, T.W., Rasinski, K.A., and Toce, M., 2001. America rebounds: a national study of public response to the September 11th terrorist attacks, preliminary findings. Chicago, IL: National Opinion Research Center.
69. Sniderman, P.M. and Theriault, S.M., 2004. The structure of political argument and the logic of issue framing. In: W.E. Saris and P.M. Sniderman, eds. Studies in public opinion: attitudes, nonattitudes, measurement error, and change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
70. Snow, D.A. and Byrd, S.C., 2007. Ideology, framing and the Islamic terrorist movement. Mobilization: An International Quarterly Review, 12 (1), 119-136.
71. Snow, D.A., Vliegenthart, R., and Corrigall-Brown, C., 2007. Framing the French Riots: a comparative study of frame variation. Social Forces, 86 (2), 385-415.
72. Sunstein, C., 2003. Terrorism and probability neglect. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26 (2-3), 121-136.
73. Terkildsen, N. and Schnell, F., 1997. How media frames move public opinion: an analysis of the women's movement. Political Research Quarterly, 50 (4), 879-900.
74. Traugott, M.W. and Brader, T., 2003. Explaining 9/11. In: P. Norris, M. Kern, and M. Just, eds. Framing terrorism: the news media, the government, and the public. New York: Routledge.
75. Woods, J., 2007. What we talk about when we talk about terrorism: elite press coverage of terrorism risk from 1997 to 2005. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12 (3), 3-20.
76. Woods, J., 2011a. Freaking out: a decade of living with terrorism.Washington, DC: Potomac Books.
77. Woods, J., 2011b. The 9/11 effect: toward a social science of the terrorist threat. The Social Science Journal, 48 (1), 1-21.
78. Woods, J., et al., 2008. Terrorism risk perceptions and proximity to primary terrorist targets: how close is too close? Human Ecology Review, 15 (1), 63-70.
79. Yum, Y. and Schenck-Hamlin, W., 2005. Reactions to 9/11 as a function of terror management and perspective taking. Journal of Social Psychology, 145 (3), 265-286.