Origin of Dialogue: A Model of Frame Building

  • Regula HänggliEmail author
Part of the Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century book series (CDC)


This chapter develops on the various stages in the construction, promotion, edition, and effects of frames with the theoretical “Model of Frame Building”. This model offers an elegant and rich framework for studying the framing processes in an integrated way and helps to organize a large body of research literature and to bridge different fields of study that are typically not closely linked. In doing so, it highlights that to fully understand how political communication matters for democracy we need to consider both how political actors develop and push different arguments in debate, how the news media select and communicate these arguments, and how they ultimately influence citizens’ democratic decisions. The chapter also introduces key concepts needed for generalizability, such as channel typology, campaign typology, and different political communication cultures.


Model of frame building Frame construction Frame promotion Frame edition Debate typology Political communication cultures 


  1. Bennett, W. L. (1990). Toward a Theory of Press-State Relations. Journal of Communication, 40(2), 103–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennett, W. L., Lawrence, R., & Livingston, S. (2007). When the Press Fails: Political Power and the News Media from Iraq to Katrina. Chicago: University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bennett, W. L., Pickard, V. W., Iozzi, D. P., Schroeder, C. L., Lagos, T., & Caswell, E. C. (2004). Managing the Public Sphere: Journalistic Construction of the Great Globalization Debate. International Communication Association, 54(3), 437–455. Google Scholar
  4. Bentele, G. (2005). Intereffikationsmodell. In G. Bentele, R. Fröhlich, & P. Szyszka (Eds.), Handbuch der Public Relations: Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen und berufliches Handeln (pp. 209–222). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bentele, G., Liebert, T., & Seeling, S. (1997). Von der Determination zur Intereffikation. Ein integriertes Modell zum Verhältnis von Public Relations und Journalismus. In G. Bentele & M. Haller (Eds.), Aktuelle Entstehung von Öffentlichkeit. Akteure-Strukturen-Veränderungen (pp. 225–250). Konstanz: UVK.Google Scholar
  6. Brandenburg, H. (2002). Who Follows Whom? The Impact of Parties on Media Agenda Formation in the 1997 British General Election Campaign. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 7(34), 34–54.Google Scholar
  7. Brewer, P. R., & Gross, K. (2005). Values, Framing, and Citizens’ Thoughts About Policy Issues: Effects on Content and Quality. Political Psychology, 26, 929–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bowler, S., & Donovan, T. (2006). Direct Democracy and Political Parties in America. Party Politics, 12(5), 649–669.Google Scholar
  9. Budge, I. (1996). The New Challenge of Direct Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cook, T. (1989). Making Laws and Making News. Media Strategies in the U.S. House of Representatives. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  11. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007a). Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies. American Political Science Review, 101(4), 637–656.Google Scholar
  12. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007b). A Theory of Framing and Opinion Formation in Competitive Elite Environments. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 99–118.Google Scholar
  13. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007c). Framing Theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103–126.Google Scholar
  14. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2013). Counterframing Effects. The Journal of Politics, 75, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cobb, R. W., & Elder, C. D. (1971). Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of Agenda-Building. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Cohen, B. C. (1963). The Press and Foreign Policy. Princeton: University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Cronin, T. E. (1989). Direct Democracy: The Politics of Initiative, Referendum, and Recall. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. De Vreese, C. H. (2004). The Effects of Frames in Political Television News on Issue Interpretation and Frame Salience. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(1), 36–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. De Vreese, C. (2005). News Framing: Theory and Typology. Information Design Journal + Document Design, 13(1), 51–62.Google Scholar
  20. Druckman, J. N. (2001). The Implications of Framing Effects for Citizen Competence. Political Behavior, 23, 225–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Druckman, J. N. (2009). What’s It All About? Framing in Political Science. In G. Keren (Ed.), Perspectives on Framing. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  22. Druckman, J. N., & Holmes, J. W. (2004). Does Presidential Rhetoric Matter? Priming and Presidential Approval. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 34, 755–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Edelman, M. J. (1993). Contestable Categories and Public Opinion. Political Communication, 10, 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Entman, R. M. (1989). Democracy Without Citizens: Media and the Decay of American Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Entman, R. M. (2003). Cascading Activation: Contesting the White House’s Frame After 9/11. Political Communication, 20, 415–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of Power Framing News, Public Opinion, and U.S. Foreign Policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  29. Galtung, J., & Ruge, M. H. (1965). The Structure of Foreign News. Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gamson, W. A., Croteau, D., Hones, W., & Sasson, T. (1992). Media Images and the Social Construction of Reality. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 373–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1987). The Changing Culture of Affirmative Action. In R. D. Braungart (Ed.), Research in Political Sociology (pp. 137–177). Greenwich: JAI.Google Scholar
  32. Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A Constructionist Approach. The American Journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding What’s News: A Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  34. Gitlin, T. (2003 [1980]). The Whole World Is Watching: Mass Media in the Making and Unmaking of the New Left. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  35. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Graber, D. A. (2001). Processing Politics: Learning from Television in the Internet Age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Habermas, J. (1996). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. New Baskerville: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Hall, Stuart. (1973). Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse. Birmingham: Centre of Contemporary Cultural Studies, University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
  39. Helbling, M., Höglinger, D., & Wüest, B. (2009). Public Debates Over Globalization. In H. Kriesi, E. Grande, M. Dolezal, M. Helbling, S. Hutter, D. Höglinger, & B. Wüest (Eds.), Restructuring Political Conflict in the Age of Globalization. Zurich: Unpublished Manuscript.Google Scholar
  40. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News That Matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  41. Iyengar, S., & McGrady, J. A. (2007). Media Politics: A Citizen’s Guide. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  42. Jacobs, L. R., & Shapiro, R. Y. (2000). Politicians Don’t Pander. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  43. Jasper, J. M. (2006). Getting Your Way: Strategic Dilemmas in the Real World (Vol. 9). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  44. Jerit, J. (2008). Issue Framing and Engagement: Rhetorical Strategy in Public Policy Debates. Political Behaviour, 30, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Jerit, J. (2009). How Predictive Appeals Shape Policy Opinions. American Journal of Political Science, 53(2), 411–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kinder, D. R. (1998). Communication and Opinion. Annual Review of Political Science, 1, 167–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kinder, D. R. (2003). Communication and Politics in the Age of Information. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 357–393). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Klinger, U. (2013). Mastering the Art of Social Media. Information, Communication & Society, 16(5), 717–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 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, 73–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kiousis, S., Mitrook, M., Wu, X., & Seltzer, T. (2006). First- and Second-Level Agenda-Building and Agenda-Setting Effects: Exploring the Linkages Among Candidate News Releases, Media Coverage, and Public Opinion During the 2002 Florida Gubernatorial Election. Journal of Public Relations Research, 18(3), 265–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Koopmans, R. (2004). Movements and Media: Selection Processes and Evolutionary Dynamics in the Public Sphere. Theory and Society, 33(3/4), 367–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kriesi, H. (2010). The Role of Predispositions. In H. Kriesi (Ed.), Enlightening or Manipulating? (pp. 143–167). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kriesi, H., Bernhard, L., & Hänggli, R. (2009). The Politics of Campaigning—Dimensions of Strategic Action. In F. Marcinkowski & B. Pfetsch (Eds.), Politik in der Mediendemokratie. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  54. Kriesi, H., Fossati, F., & Bernhard, L. (2019). The Political Contexts of the National Policy Debates. In L. Bernhard, F. Fossati, R. Hänggli, & Hp. Kriesi (Eds.), Debating Unemployment Policy: Political Communication and the Labour Market in Western Europe (pp. 43–70). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Matthes, J. (2009). What’s in a Frame? A Content Analysis of Media Framing Studies in the World’s Leading Communication Journals 1990–2005. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(2), 349–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mazzoleni, G. (1987). Media Logic and Party Logic in Campaign Coverage: The Italian General Election of 1983. European Journal of Communication, 2, 81–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Mermin, J. (1999). Debating War and Peace: Media Coverage of U.S. Intervention in the Post-Vietnam Era. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Nelson, T. E. (2004). Policy Goals, Public Rhetoric, and Political Attitudes. The Journal of Politics, 66(2), 581–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Norris, P., Curtice, J., Sanders, D., Scammell, M., & Semetko, H. A. (1999). On Message: Communicating the Campaign. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  61. O’Keefe, D. J. (2002). Persuasion (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  62. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing Analysis: An Approach to News Discourse. Political Communication, 10(1), 55–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pfetsch, B. (2003). Politische Kommunikationskultur; ein theoretisches Konzept zur vergleichenden Analyse politischer Kommunikationssysteme. In F. Esser & B. Pfetsch (Eds.), Politische Kommunikation im internationalen Vergleich; Grundlagen, Anwendungen, Perspektiven (pp. 393–418). Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
  64. Price, V., & Tewksbury, D. (1997). News Values and Public Opinion: A Theoretical Account of Media Priming and Framing. In G. A. Barnett & F. J. Boster (Eds.), Progress in Communication Sciences: Advances in Persuasion (Vol. 13, pp. 173–212). Greenwich, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
  65. Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a Theory of Media Effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Agenda-Setting, Priming, and Framing Revisited: Another Look at Cognitive Effects of Political Communication. Mass Communication and Society, 2&3(3), 297–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schulz, W. (1976). Die Konstruktion von Realität in den Nachrichtenmedien. Freiburg and München: Verlag Karl Alber.Google Scholar
  68. Schumpeter, J. A. (1976 [1942]). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  69. Selb, P. (2003). Agenda-Setting Prozesse im Wahlkampf. Bern: Haupt.Google Scholar
  70. Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. D. (1996). Mediating the Message: Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
  71. Sides, J. (2006). The Origins of Campaign Agendas. British Journal of Political Science, 36(3), 407–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sigal, L. (1973). Reporters and Officials. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.Google Scholar
  73. Smith, G. (1976). The Functional Properties of the Referendum. European Journal of Political Research, 4(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2001). The Initiative to Party: Partisanship and Ballot Initiatives in California. Party Politics, 7, 738–757.Google Scholar
  75. Smith, D. A., & Tolbert, C. (2004). Educated by Initiative: The Effects of Direct Democracy on Citizens and Political Organizations in the American States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  76. Sniderman, P. M., & Theriault, S. M. (2004). The Structure of Political Argument and the Logic of Issue Framing. In P. M. Sniderman & S. M. Theriault (Eds.), Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error and Change (pp. 133–165). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Tilly, C. (1978). From Mobilization to Revolution. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  78. Tilly, C. (1986). The Contentious French. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  79. Tilly, C. (1995). Popular Contention in Great Britain, 1758–1834. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Tuchman, G. (1978). Making News a Study in the Construction of Reality. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  81. Wolfsfeld, G. (1997). Media and Political Conflict: News from the Middle East (Reprint ed.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Zaller, J. R. (2003). A New Standard of News Quality: Burglar Alarms for the Monitorial Citizen. Political Communication, 20, 109–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zaller, J. R. (2005 [1992]). The Nature and Origin of Public Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mass Media and Communication ResearchUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations