Suchergebnisse

Generic frames represent typical layers of contextualization in stories and are broadly applicable to a range of different news topics (i.e., across topics). Examples of generic frames are the human interest or responsibility frames (e.g., Dirikx & Gelders, 2010; Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). Field of application/theoretical foundation: Generic frames are used in different traditions of framing: (a) sociological tradition, such as frames in external news or images (e.g., Entman, 1993; Gamson & Modigliani, 1989), (b) psychological tradition, such as frames in people's minds (e.g., Tversky & Kahneman, 1981), and (3) communication science tradition, such as frame production (communicators or journalists develop frames), frame setting or frame building (journalists adopt frames from communicators) (e.g., Matthes, 2014; see Borah, 2011 for a systematic examination of framing research). References/combination with other methods of data collection: Research has conducted experimental studies to investigate how generic frames (e.g., conflict, morality or economics) affect selective exposure to climate change news (e.g., Feldman & Hart, 2018) or what impact gain and loss frames have on the perception of the threat posed by the consequences of climate change (Bilandzic et al., 2017). Example studies: Bilandzic et al. (2017); Dirikx & Gelders (2010); Feldman & Hart (2018) Information on Dirikx & Gelders (2010) Authors: Astrid Dirikx & Dave Gelders Research question: This study examines the way Dutch and French newspapers frame climate change during the annual United Nations Conferences of the Parties (COPs) Object of analysis: The study analyzed a total of 257 news articles in Dutch and French quality newspapers: De Volkskrant (N = 52) and NRC Handelsblad (N = 61) for the Netherlands and Le Monde (N = 77) and Le Figaro (N = 67) for France. Time frame of analysis: The analysis covers the annual meetings of the United Nations Conferences of the Parties (COPs) from 2001 until 2007 Info about ...

This article introduces the notion of platformed conspiracism to conceptualize reconfigured forms of conspiracy theory communication as a result of the mutual shaping between platform specificities and emergent user practices. To investigate this relational socio-technological shaping, we propose a conceptual platform-sensitive framework that systematically guides the study of platformed conspiracism. To illustrate the application of the framework, we examine how platformed conspiracism unfolds on BitChute and Gab during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings show that both platforms have positioned themselves as technological equivalents to their "mainstream" counterparts, YouTube and Twitter, by offering similar interfaces and features. However, given their specific services, community-based and politically marketed business models, and minimalist approaches to content moderation, both platforms provide conspiracy propagators a fertile refuge through which they can diversify their presence and profit monetarily from their supply of conspiracy theories and active connection with their followers.

Abstract
Possibilities of applying automated content analysis in journalism studies include, for example, machine learning to identify topics in journalistic coverage or measuring news diffusion via automated approaches. But how have computational methods been applied thus far? And what are consequences of the "computational turn" in communication science, especially concerning interdisciplinarity? Based on a systematic literature review, this article summarizes the use of automated content analysis in journalism studies. Results illustrate an increasing use of the method by communication scientists, as yet another indicator of methodological interdisciplinarity in communication science. However, there is little evidence of an increase in theoretical interdisciplinarity: Studies relying on computational methods do not increasingly refer to theories from other disciplines. With respect to practical interdisciplinarity, for instance collaborations, our discipline is by no means becoming more interdisciplinary. Instead, we find a shift in favor of technical disciplines. At least up to now, the "computational turn" in communication science should thus not be equated with an "interdisciplinary turn."

Research on conspiracy theories in digital media has grown considerably in recent years. As a result, the field of research has become more multidisciplinary and diverse. To bridge disciplinary boundaries, identify foci of analysis and research gaps, this study provides an interdisciplinary systematic literature review (2007–2020), analyzing current research on conspiracy theorizing online, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Findings show that the majority of studies lack a definition of conspiracy theories and fail to conceptually delineate conspiracy theories from other forms of deceptive content. We also found that while the field employs a variety of methodological approaches, most studies have focused on individual, "mainstream" social media platforms, "Western" countries, English-language communication, and single conspiracy theories. We use the findings of our review to remedy conceptual and empirical shortcomings and to provide suggestions on how to move forward in research on conspiracy theories online.

In line with the urgency of problems related to climate change, studies on the framing of this issue have flourished in recent years. However, as in framing research overall, a lack of definitions complicates the synthesis of theoretical/empirical insights. This systematic review contrasts trends of framing in climate change communication to those observed in reviews of communication research overall and harnesses framing's power to bridge perspectives by comparing frames across different frame locations (i.e., frame production, frame content, audience frames, and framing effects), as part of the wider cultural framing repository. Combining quantitative and qualitative approaches of content analysis, this review draws on 25 years of peer-reviewed literature on the framing of climate change ( n = 275). Among the findings, we observe that research has not made use of framing's bridging potential. Hence, the conceptual (mis)fit between frame locations will be discussed, and directions for future research will be given.

A follow-up study to Brüggemann et al. (2017), The appeasement effect of a United Nations climate summit on the German public Abstract Heat waves occurring around the world, outspoken warnings from scientists, international climate ac-tivism, and ensuing political debates on climate protection have ensured that climate change has finally caught the public's attention. This comparative analysis of public opinion during three UN climate sum-mits illustrates the awakening of public awareness of and an increased willingness to actively engage with climate change, probably as the cumulative effect of this combination of events. Comparing cli-mate change awareness, communicative engagement, knowledge, attitudes, and climate-friendly be-haviour during the 2015 (n = 1,477), 2018 (n = 1,044) and 2019 (n = 1,000) UN climate summits, we find major and consistently positive changes in various forms of active engagement with the issue. These results indicate that the appeasement effect observed in an earlier study during the 2015 Paris summit is over: the German public is now ready to take decisive steps to tackle the climate problem.

A follow-up study to Brüggemann et al. (2017), The appeasement effect of a United Nations climate summit on the German public Abstract Heat waves occurring around the world, outspoken warnings from scientists, international climate ac-tivism, and ensuing political debates on climate protection have ensured that climate change has finally caught the public's attention. This comparative analysis of public opinion during three UN climate sum-mits illustrates the awakening of public awareness of and an increased willingness to actively engage with climate change, probably as the cumulative effect of this combination of events. Comparing cli-mate change awareness, communicative engagement, knowledge, attitudes, and climate-friendly be-haviour during the 2015 (n = 1,477), 2018 (n = 1,044) and 2019 (n = 1,000) UN climate summits, we find major and consistently positive changes in various forms of active engagement with the issue. These results indicate that the appeasement effect observed in an earlier study during the 2015 Paris summit is over: the German public is now ready to take decisive steps to tackle the climate problem. Note for version 2: In the original version, one of the tables showed values with a wrong signedness.