News framing can exert a strong influence on public opinion. Following a media content analysis, this article investigates the effects of news framing on support for membership of Turkey in the European Union. A first experimental study (n = 304) showed a significant difference in the level of support for Turkish membership between respondents who were exposed to a positively valenced news frame and respondents who had received a negative frame. The results of a second survey-embedded experimental study (n = 1,632) corroborated the first study, and tested the hypothesis that frames affect the importance of certain considerations and that the valence of the news frames also directly affects opinion. Negative news frames yielded stronger effects than positive news frames, and high political sophisticates were more affected by positive framing. The study demonstrates that (change in) public approval of Turkish EU membership is contingent on the elites’ and the media’s coverage of the issue in interaction with individual characteristics.
Bilgin, P. ( 2004). A Return to "Civilsational Geopolitics" in the Mediterranean? Changing Geopolitical Images of the European Union in the Post-Cold War Era . Geopolitics, 9, 269-291.
2.
Boomgaarden, H.G., Vliegenthart, R., Schuck, A.R.T., de Vreese, C.H. ( 2010). News on the move: Exogenous events and news coverage of the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 17(4), 506-526.
3.
Cacioppo, J.T., Gardner, W.L., & Bernston, G.G. (1997). Beyond bipolar conceptualizations and measures: The case of attitudes and evaluative space. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 3-25.
4.
Campbell, A., Converse, P.E., Miller, W.E., & Stokes, D.E. ( 1960). The American voter. New York: John Wiley.
5.
Cappella, J.N., & Jamieson, K.H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism. The press and the public good. New York: Oxford University Press.
6.
Carey, S., & Burton, J. ( 2004). The influence of the press in shaping public opinion towards the European Union in Britain. Political Studies, 52, 623-640.
7.
Chong, D., & Druckman, J.N. (2007). A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 99-118.
8.
Cobb, M.D., & Kuklinski, J.H. (1997). Changing minds: Political arguments and political persuasion. American Journal of Political Science, 41(1), 88-121.
9.
Cohen, J. ( 1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G., & Aiken, L.S. ( 2003). Applied multiple regession/correlation analysis for the behavioral Sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
de Vreese, C.H. ( 2002). Framing Europe. Television news and European integration . Amsterdam: Aksant/ Transaction.
12.
de Vreese, C.H. ( 2010). The effects of journalistic news frames. In P. D’Angelo & J. Kuypers (Eds.), Doing Framing Analysis (pp. 187-214). Routledge.
13.
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.
14.
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, 419-436.
15.
de Vreese, C.H., Boomgaarden, H.G., & Semetko, H.A. ( 2008). Hard and soft: Public support for Turkish membership in the EU. European Union Politics, 9, 511-530.
16.
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.
17.
de Vreese, C.H., & Semetko, H.A. ( 2004). Political campaigning in referendums: Framing the referendum issue. London: Routledge.
18.
Druckman, J.N. ( 2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence . Political Behavior, 23, 225-256.
19.
Druckman, J.N., & Nelson, K.R. ( 2003). Framing and deliberation: How citizens’ conversation limit elite influence. American Journal of Political Science , 47, 729-745.
20.
Entman, R. ( 1991). Framing US coverage of international news: Contrasts in narratives of the KAL and Iran air accidents. Journal of Communication, 41(4), 6-27.
21.
Gabel, M. ( 1998). Public support for European integration: An empirical test of five theories. Journal of Politics, 60, 333-354.
22.
Gamson, W.A. ( 1992). Talking politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Guild, E. ( 2003). International terrorism and EU immigration, asylum and borders policy: The unexpected victims of 11 September 2001. European Foreign Affairs, 8, 331-346.
24.
Haider-Markel, D., P., & Joslyn, M.R. (2001). Gun policy, opinion, tragedy, and blame attribution: The conditional influence of issue frames. Journal of Politics, 63, 520-543.
25.
Holbrook, A.L., Krosnick, J.A., Visser, P.S., Gardner, W.L., & Cacioppo, J.T. (2001). Attitudes toward presidential candidates and political parties: Initial optimism, inertial first impressions, and a focus on flaws. American Journal of Political Science , 45, 930-950.
26.
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. ( 2005). Calculation, community and cues public opinion onEuropean integration. European Union Politics, 6, 419-443.
27.
Inglehart, R. ( 1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28.
Iyengar, S. ( 1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29.
Johnson-Cartee, K.S., & Copland, G.A. ( 1991). Negative political advertising: Coming of age. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. ( 1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-292.
31.
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, 369-390.
32.
Kepplinger, H.M., & Weissbecker, H. (1991). Negativität als Nachrichtenideologie [Negativity as news ideology]. Publizistik, 36, 330-342.
33.
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.
34.
Koenig, T., Mihelj, S., Downey, J., & Bek, M.G. ( 2006). Media framing of the issue of Turkish accession to the EU. A European or national process? Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 19, 149-169.
35.
Lau, R.R. ( 1985). Two explanations for negativity effects in political behavior. American Journal of Political Science, 29(1), 119-138.
36.
Lecheler, S., & de Vreese, C.H. (in press). Getting real: The duration of framing effects. Journal of Communication.
37.
Marks, G., & Hooghe, L. ( 2003) National Identity and Support for European Integration . Discussion paper SP IV2003-202. Berlin, Germany: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin fuer Sozialforschung (WZB).
38.
McLaren, L. ( 2007). Explaining opposition to Turkish membership of the EU . European Union Politics, 8, 251-278.
39.
Nabi, R., & Oliver, M.B. ( 2009). The SAGE handbook of media processes and effects. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
40.
Nelson, T.E., Clawson, R.A., & Oxley, Z.M. ( 1997). Media framing of a civil liberty conflict and its effects on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91, 567-583.
41.
Nelson, T.E., & Willey, E.A. ( 2001). Issue frames that strike a value balance: A political psychology perspective. In S. D. Reese , O. H. Gandy, & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life (pp. 245-270). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
Norris, P. ( 2000). A virtuous circle. Political communications in postindustrial societies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
43.
Page, B.I., & Shapiro, R.Y. ( 1992). The rational public: Fifty years of trends in Americans’ policy preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44.
Patterson, T.E. ( 1993). Out of order. New York: Vintage.
45.
Price, V., & Tewksbury, D. ( 1997). News values and public opinion. A theoretical account of media priming and framing. In G. Barnett & F. J. Boster (Eds.), Progress in communication science (pp. 173-212). Greenwich, CT: Abiex.
46.
Scheufele, D. ( 1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), p. 103-122.
47.
Scheufele, D. ( 2000). Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication and Society, 3, 297-316.
48.
Schneider, T.R., Salovey, P., Apanovitch, A.M., Pizarro, J., McCarthy, D., Zullo, J., et al. (2001). The effects of message framing and ethnic targeting on mammography use among low-income women. Health Psychology, 20, 256-266.
49.
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), 5-32.
50.
Schuck, A.R.T., & de Vreese, C.H. (2009). Reversed mobilization in referendum campaigns: How positive news framing can mobilize the skeptics . International Journal of Press/ Politics, 1, 40-66.
51.
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.
52.
Shah, D., Kwak, N., Schmierbach, M., & Zubric, J. ( 2004). The interplay of news frames on cognitive complexity . Human Communication Research, 30(1), 102-120.
53.
Slater, M.D. ( 2004). Operationalizing and analyzing exposure: The foundation of media effects research. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 81, 168-183.
54.
Slothuus, R. ( 2008). More than weighting cognitive importance: A dual-process model of issue framing effects. Political Psychology, 29, 1-28.
55.
Slothuus, R., & de Vreese, C.H. (2010). Political parties, motivated reasoning and framing effects. Journal of Politics, 72, 630-645.
56.
Sniderman, P., & Theriault, S.M. (2004). The structure of political arguments and the logic of issue framing. In W. E. Saris & P. Sniderman (Eds.), Studies in public opinion-Attitudes, nonattitudes, measurement error, and change (pp. 133-166). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
57.
Sobel, M.E. ( 1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982 (pp.290-312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
58.
Soroka, S.N. ( 2006). Good news and bad news: Asymmetric responses to economic information. Journal of Politics, 68, 372-385.
59.
Terkildsen, N., & Schnell, F. ( 1997). How media frames move public opinion. An analysis of the women’s movement. Political Research Quarterly, 50, 879-900.
60.
Valentino, N.A., Beckmann, M.N., & Buhr, T.A. ( 2001). A spiral of cynicism for some: The contingent effects of campaign news frames on participation and confidence in government. Political Communication, 18, 347-367.
61.
Van der Eijk, C., & Franklin, M. ( 1996). Choosing Europe? The European electorate and national politics in the face of union. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
62.
Wessler, B., Peters, B., Sifft, A., Bruggeman, M., & van Konigslow, K. (2008). Transnationalization of public spheres. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
63.
Zaller, J. ( 1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
