Framing Serbia: The effects of news framing on public support for EU enlargement

European Political Science Review

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 73-93

  Lecheler, Sophie ^a   de Vreese, Claes H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

EU enlargement; EU public opinion; framing effects; media; Serbia

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011436327     PISSN: 17557739     EISSN: 17557747     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1755773909990233     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Anderson C.J., Reichert M.S. (1996), ‘Economic benefits and support for membership in the European Union: a cross-national analysis’, Journal of Public Policy 15(3): 231–249.
2. Berinsky A.J., Kinder D.R. (2006), ‘Making sense of issues through media frames: understanding the Kosovo Crisis’, Journal of Politics 68(3): 640–656.
3. Bullock J.G. (2006), ‘Party cues and policy information: real and perceived effects’. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 31–September 3, Philadelphia.
4. Cappella J.N., Jamieson K.H. (1997), Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good, New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Chong D., Druckman J.N. (2007a), ‘Framing public opinion in competitive democracies’, American Political Science Review 101(4): 637–655.
6. Chong D., Druckman J.N. (2007b), ‘Framing theory’, Annual Review of Political Science 10: 103–126.
7. Delli Carpini M.X., Keeter S. (1993), ‘Measuring political knowledge: putting first things first’, American Journal of Political Science 37(4): 1179–1206.
8. de Vreese C.H. (2002), Framing Europe: Television News and European Integration, Amsterdam: Aksant Academic Publishers.
9. de Vreese C.H. (2007), ‘A spiral of Euroskepticism: the media's fault?’, Acta Politica 42: 271–286.
10. De Vreese C.H. (2004), ‘The effects of frames in political television news on audience perceptions of routine political news’, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 81(1): 36–52.
11. de Vreese C.H., Boomgaarden H.G. (2005), ‘Projecting EU referendums: fear of immigration and support for european integration’, European Union Politics 6(1): 59–82.
12. De Vreese C.H., Boomgaarden H.G. (2006), ‘Media effects on public opinion about the enlargement of the European Union’, Journal of Common Market Studies 44(2): 419–436.
13. de Vreese C.H., Boomgaarden H.G., Semetko H.A. (2006), ‘Effects of issue news framing on public support for Turkish membership in the EU’. Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association, June 19–23, Dresden, Germany.
14. 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(2): 107–122.
15. Doyle O., Fidrmuc J. (2006), ‘Who favors enlargement? Determinants of support for EU membership in the candidate countries’ referenda’, European Journal of Political Economy 22(2): 520–543.
16. Druckman J.N. (2001), ‘On the limits of framing effects: who can frame?’, Journal of Politics 63(4): 1041–1066.
17. Druckman J.N., McDermott R. (2008), ‘Emotion and the framing of risky choice’, Political Behaviour 30(3): 297–321.
18. Druckman J.N., Nelson K.R. (2003), ‘Framing and deliberation: how citizens’ conversations limit elite influence’, American Journal of Political Science 47(4): 729–745.
19. Entman R.M. (2004), Projections of Power: Framing News, Public Opinion, and US Foreign Policy, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20. Entman R.M. (1993), ‘Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm’, Journal of Communication 43(4): 51–58.
21. European Commission (2005a), Eurobarometer 63, Brussels: DG Press and Communication, European Commission.
22. European Commission (2005b), Eurobarometer 64, Brussels: DG Press and Communication, European Commission.
23. European Commission (2006), Eurobarometer 66, Brussels: DG Press and Communication, European Commission.
24. Gabel M. (1998), ‘Public support for European integration: an empirical test of five theories’, Journal of Politics 60(2): 333–354.
25. Gabel M., Palmer H.D. (1995), ‘Understanding variation in public support for European integration’, European Journal of Political Research 27(1): 3–19.
26. Gaines B.J., Kuklinski J.H., Quirk P.J. (2007), ‘The logic of the survey experiment reexamined’, Political Analysis 15(1): 1–20.
27. Gerhards J. (1993), ‘Westeuropäische Integration und die Schwierigkeiten der Entstehung einer Europäischen Öffentlichkeit’, Zeitschrift für Soziologie 22(2): 96–110.
28. Hayes A.F., Krippendorff K. (2007), ‘Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data’, Communication Methods and Measures 1(1): 77–89.
29. Hix S. (2002), Linking National Politics to Europe, London: Foreign Policy Centre.
30. Hobolt S.B. (2007), ‘Taking cues on Europe? Voter competence and party endorsements in referendums on European integration’, European Journal of Political Research 46(2): 151–182.
31. Hooghe L. (2003), ‘Elite versus public opinion on European integration’, European Union Politics 4(3): 281–304.
32. Hooghe L., Marks G. (2004), ‘Does identity or economic rationality drive public opinion on European integration?’, PS: Political Science and Politics 37(3): 415–420.
33. Hooghe L., Marks G. (2005), ‘Calculation, community and cues: public opinion on European integration’, European Union Politics 6(4): 419–443.
34. Hooghe L., Marks G. (2007), ‘Crossvalidating data on party positioning on European integration’, Electoral Studies 26(1): 23–38.
35. Iyengar S. (1991), Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
36. Jones E., van der Bijl N. (2004), ‘Public opinion and enlargement: a gravity approach’, European Union Politics 5(3): 331–351.
37. Kaltenthaler K.C., Anderson C.J. (2001), ‘Europeans and their money: explaining public support for the common European currency’, European Journal of Political Research 40(2): 139–170.
38. Karp J.A., Bowler S. (2006), ‘Broadening and deepening or broadening versus deepening: the question of enlargement and Europe's hesitant Europeans’, European Journal of Political Research 45(3): 369–390.
39. Karp J., Banducci S.A., Bowler S. (2003), ‘To know it is to love it? Satisfaction with democracy in the European Union’, Comparative Political Studies 36(3): 271–292.
40. Kinder D.R., 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.
41. Kiousis S., McCombs M. (2004), ‘Agenda-setting effects and attitude strength. Political figures during the 1996 Presidential Election’, Communication Research 31(1): 36–57.
42. Krosnick J.A., Brannon L.A. (1993), ‘The impact of the Gulf War on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: multidimensional effects of political involvement’, American Political Science Review 87(4): 963–975.
43. Krosnick J.A., Boninger D.S., Chuang Y.C., Berent M.K., Carnot C.G. (1993), ‘Attitude strength: one construct or many related constructs?’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65(6): 1132–1151.
44. Lecheler S., de Vreese C.H., Slothuus R. (2009), ‘Issue importance as a moderator of framing effects’, Communication Research 36(3): 400–425.
45. Lombard M., Snyder-Duch J., Campanella Bracken C. (2002), ‘Content analysis in mass communication. Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability’, Human Communication Research 28(4): 587–604.
46. Maier J., Rittberger B. (2008), ‘shifting Europe's boundaries: mass media, public opinion and the enlargement of the EU’, European Union Politics 9(2): 243–267.
47. Matthes J. (2007), ‘Beyond accessibility? Toward an on-line and memory-based model of framing effects’, Communications 32(1): 51–78.
48. McCombs M.E., Shaw D.L. (1972), ‘The agenda-setting function of mass media’, Public Opinion Quarterly 36(2): 176–187.
49. McDermott R. (2002), ‘Experimental methodology in Political Science’, Political Analysis 10(4): 325–342.
50. McLaren L. (2007), ‘Explaining opposition to Turkish membership of the EU’, European Union Politics 8(2): 251–278.
51. McLeod D.N., Detenber B.H. (1999), ‘Framing effects of television news coverage of social protest’, Journal of Communication 49(3): 3–23.
52. Meyer C. (1999), ‘Political legitimacy in the invisibility of politics: exploring the European Union's communication deficit’, Journal of Common Market Studies 37(4): 617–639.
53. Nelson T.E., Oxley Z.M. (1999), ‘Issue framing effects on belief importance and opinion’, The Journal of Politics 61(4): 1040–1067.
54. Nelson T.E., Oxley Z.M., Clawson R.A. (1997), ‘Toward a psychology of framing effects’, Political Behavior 19(3): 221–246.
55. Norris P. (2000), A Virtuous Circle. Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
56. Peter J, de Vreese C.H. (2004), ‘In search of Europe. A cross-national comparative study of the European Union in national television news’, The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 9(4): 3–24.
57. Petty R.E., Cacioppo J.T. (1981), Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches, Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown.
58. Price V., Tewkbury D., Powers E. (1997), ‘switching trains of thought: the impact of news frames on readers’ cognitive responses’, Communication Research 24(5): 481–506.
59. Princen S., Rhinard M. (2006), ‘Crashing and creeping: agenda-setting dynamic in the European Union’, Journal of European Public Policy 13(7): 1119–1132.
60. Scheufele D.A. (2000), ‘Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: another look at cognitive effects of political communication’, Mass Communication and Society 3(2): 297–316.
61. Schuck A.R.T., de Vreese C.H. (2006), ‘Between risk and opportunity: news framing and its effects on public support for EU enlargement’, European Journal of Communication 21(1): 5–23.
62. Schuck A.R.T., de Vreese C.H. (2009), ‘When good News is bad news: explicating the moderated mediation dynamics behind the reversed mobilization effect’. Paper presented to the Etmaal voor de Communicatiewetenschap, 12–13 February 2009, Nijmegen.
63. Semetko H.A., Valkenburg P.M. (2000), ‘Framing European politics: a content analysis of press and television news’, Journal of Communication 50(2): 93–109.
64. Shah D., Kwak N., Schmierbach M., Zubric J. (2004), ‘The interplay of news frames on cognitive complexity’, Human Communication Research 30(1): 102–120.
65. Shen F., Edwards H.H. (2005), ‘Economic individualism, humanitarianism, and welfare reform: a value-based account of framing effects’, Journal of Communication 55(4): 795–809.
66. Slothuus R. (2008), ‘More than weighting cognitive importance: a dual-process model of issue framing effects’, Political Psychology 29(1): 1–28.
67. Smith J. (2005), Reinvigorating the European Elections. The Implications of Electing the European Commission, London: RIIA.
68. Sniderman P.M., 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, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 133–165.
69. Tao C.C., Bucy E. (2007), ‘Conceptualizing media stimuli in experimental research: psychological versus attribute-based definitions’, Human Communication Research 33(4): 397–426.
70. Valkenburg P.M., Semetko H.A., de Vreese C.H. (1999), ‘The effects of news frames on readers’ thoughts and recall’, Communication Research 26(5): 550–569.
71. Walgrave S., Soroka S., Nuytemans M. (2008), ‘The mass media's political agenda-setting power’, Comparative Political Studies 41(6): 814–836.
72. Zaller J.R. (1992), The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
73. Zaller J., Feldman S. (1992), ‘A simple theory of the survey response. Answering questions versus revealing preferences’, American Journal of Political Science 36(3): 579–616.