Identifying frames: A comparison of research methods

Interest Groups and Advocacy

Volumn 3, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 188-201

  Boräng, Frida ^a   Eising, Rainer ^b   Klüver, Heike ^c   Mahoney, Christine ^d   Naurin, Daniel ^a   Rasch, Daniel ^b   Rozbicka, Patrycja ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^b RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BAMBERG   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

European Union; Framing; Interest groups; INTEREURO; Interviews; Text analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 84924273312     PISSN: 20477414     EISSN: 20477422     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/iga.2014.12     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Althaus, S.L. and Kim, Y.M. (2006) Priming effects in complex information environments: Reassessing the impact of news discourse on presidential approval. Journal of Politics 68(4): 960-976.
2. Baumgartner, F.R., Berry, J.M., Hojnacki, M., Kimball, D.C. and Leech, B.L. (2009) Lobbying and Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
3. Baumgartner, F.R. and Mahoney, C. (2008) The two faces of framing-Individual-level framing and collective issue definition in the European Union. European Union Politics 9(3): 435-449.
4. Bailey, A. and Schonhardt-Bailey, C. (2008) Does deliberation matter in FOMC monetary policymaking? The volcker revolution of 1979. Political Analysis 16(4): 404-427.
5. Benford, R.D. and Snow, A.D. (2000) Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology 26: 611-639.
6. Beyers, J. et al (2014a) The INTEREURO project: Logic and structure. Interest Groups & Advocacy 3(2): 126-140.
7. Beyers, J., Dür, A., Marshall, D. and Wonka, A. (2014b) Policy-centred sampling in interest group research: Lessons from the INTEREURO project. Interest Groups & Advocacy 3(2): 160-173.
8. Brewer, C.A. and Gross, L.J. (2003) Training Ecologists to think with uncertainty in mind. Ecology 84(6): 1412-1414.
9. Daviter, F. (2009) Schattschneider in Brussels: How policy conflict reshaped the biotechnology agenda in the European Union. West European Politics 32(6): 1118-1139.
10. Daviter, F. (2012) Framing Biotechnology Policy in the European Union. ARENA Working Paper No. 5, June 2012.
11. Druckman, J.N. (2001) On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? Journal of Politics 63(4): 1041-1066.
12. Entman, R. (1993) Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43(4): 51-58.
13. Goffman, E. (1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14. Hall, P.A. and Soskice, D. (eds.) (2001) Varieties of Capitalism. The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. New York: Oxford University Press.
15. Kinder, D.R. and Sanders, L.M. (1990) Mimicking political debate with survey questions: The case of white opinion on affirmative action for blacks. Social Cognition 8(1): 73-103.
16. Klüver, H. (2009) Measuring interest group influence using quantitative text analysis. European Union Politics 10(4): 535-549.
17. Klüver, H. and Mahoney, C. (2012) Framing Policy Debates in the European Union: New Techniques to Answer Old Questions. Paper prepared for the 6th ECPR SGEU Pan European Conference on EU Politics; Tampere,13-15 September 2012.
18. Kohler-Koch, B. and Eising, R. (eds.) (1999) The Transformation of Governance in the European Union. London: Routledge.
19. Kumlin, S. (2011) Claiming blame and giving credit? Unintended effects of how government and opposition frame the europeanization of welfare. European Union Politics 12(4): 575-95.
20. Lancia, F. (2009) T-LAB Pro, Tools for Text Analysis, Version 6.1. http://www.tlab.it, accessed 4 May 2009.
21. Lancia, F. (2012) The logic of the T-Lab tool explained. Working Paper.
22. Lijphart, A. (1999) Patterns of Democracy. Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
23. Mahoney, C. (2008) Brussels versus the beltway: Advocacy in the United States and the European Union. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
24. Miller, M.M. (1997) Frame mapping and analysis of news coverage of contentious issues. Social Science Computer Review 15(4): 367-378.
25. Peffley, M. and Hurwitz, J. (2007) Persuasion and resistance: Race and the death penalty in America. American Journal of Political Science 51(4): 996-1012.
26. Riker, W. (1986) The Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
27. Riker, W. (1996) The Strategy of Rhetoric: Campaigning for the American Constitution. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
28. Quinn, K.M., Monroe, B., Colaresi, M., Crespin, M. and Radev, D. (2010) How to analyze political attention with minimal assumptions and costs. American Journal of Political Science 54(1): 209-228.
29. Scharpf, F.W. and Schmidt, V.A. (2000) Welfare and Work in the Open Economy Vol. 1. From Vulnerability to Competitiveness. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
30. Schattschneider, E.E. (1960) The Semi-Sovereign People. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
31. Schonhardt-Bailey, C. (2005) Measuring ideas more effectively: An analysis of Bush and Kerry's national security speeches. PS: Political Science & Politics 38(4): 701-711.
32. Schonhardt-Bailey, C. (2008) The congressional debate on partial-birth abortion: Constitutional gravitas and moral passion. British Journal of Political Science 38(3): 383-410.
33. Shah, D.V., Watts, M.D.W., Domke, D.D. and Fan, D.P. (2002) News framing and cueing of issue regimes: Explaining clinton's public approval in spite of scandal. Public Opinion Quarterly 66(3): 339-370.
34. Schreier, M. (2012) Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
35. Slapin, J.B. and Proksch, S.-O. (2008) A scaling model for estimating time-series party positions from texts. American Journal of Political Science 52(3): 705-722.
36. Sniderman, P.M. and Theiault, 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.
37. Steinbach, M., Karypis, G. and Kumar, V. (2000) A comparison of document clustering techniques. Technical Report #00-034, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota.
38. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481): 453-458.
39. De Vreese, C. (2005) News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal & Document Design 13(1): 51-62.
40. Verloo, M. (2005) Mainstreaming gender equality in Europe. A critical frame analysis approach. The Greek Review of Social Research 117: 11-34.