The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Agenda-Setting, Priming, and Framing Revisited: Another Look at Cognitive Effects of Political Communication
Abstract
Agenda-setting, priming, and framing research generally has been examined under the broad category of cognitive media effects. As a result, studies often either examine all 3 approaches in a single study or employ very similar research designs, paying little attention to conceptual differences or differences in the levels of analysis under which each approach is operating. In this article, I revisit agenda-setting, priming, and framing as distinctively different approaches to effects of political communication. Specifically, I argue against more recent attempts to subsume all 3 approaches under the broad concept of agenda-setting and for a more careful explication of the concepts and of their theoretical premises and roots in social psychology and political psychology. Consequently, it calls for a reformulation of relevant research questions and a systematic categorization of research on agenda-setting, priming, and framing. An analytic model is developed that should serve as a guideline for future research in these areas.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm
Entman, R. M. (1993) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x · Cited by 16,203
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984 · cited 1×
“According to a memory-based model, judgments and attitude formation are directly correlated with “the ease in which instances or associations could be brought to mind” (Tversky & Kahneman, 1973, p. 208).”
BackgroundAn Experimental Study of Apparent Behavior
Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1416950 · Cited by 3,340
Cited by
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054 · Cited by 3,071
A Theory of Framing and Opinion Formation in Competitive Elite Environments
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00331.x · Cited by 1,159
The End of Framing as we Know it … and the Future of Media Effects
Cacciatore, M. A., Scheufele, D. A., & Iyengar, S. (2016) · Mass Communication and Society · doi:10.1080/15205436.2015.1068811 · Cited by 704
Self-citationHow to Run Surveys: A Guide to Creating Your Own Identifying Variation and Revealing the Invisible
Stantcheva, S. (2023) · Annual Review of Economics · doi:10.1146/annurev-economics-091622-010157 · Cited by 354
Balmas, M. (2014) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650212453600 · Cited by 325
Metadata
- Authors
- Scheufele, D. A.
- Venue
- Mass Communication and Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2000-08
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 2-3
- Pages
- 297-316
- ISSN
- 1520-5436 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7825
- OpenAlex
- W1973082961
- Cited by
- 1,170
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 16.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Agenda-Setting, Priming, and Framing Revisited: Another Look at Cognitive Effects of Political Communication. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327825mcs0323_07
- The paper
- Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Agenda-Setting, Priming, and Framing Revisited: Another Look at Cognitive Effects of Political Communication. Mass Communication and Society. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327825mcs0323_07
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.