grad-framing
用框架理論分析選擇與強調如何影響人們對議題的詮釋
中文翻譯
---
name: "grad-framing"
description: "用框架理論分析選擇、強調與排除如何塑造對議題的詮釋。當使用者需要解構媒體或組織的框架、評估不同框架如何影響受眾的認知與決策，或設計策略性的溝通框架時，就用這個 skill，即使他們說的是「這個議題是怎麼被描繪的」「為什麼大家看法不一樣」或「這則訊息該怎麼框」。"
metadata:
category: "WP-33 傳播/教育/公共行政"
tags: ["communication", "framing", "media-effects", "persuasion"]
---
# Framing Theory
## Overview
框架理論研究資訊的呈現方式，也就是透過選擇、強調與排除，如何塑造受眾對議題的詮釋與反應。同樣的事實，用不同的框架呈現，會導致系統性不同的判斷與決策。
## When to Use
**觸發條件：**
- 分析媒體或組織如何呈現議題來塑造詮釋
- 比較同一個議題上互相競爭的框架
- 設計有特定詮釋目標的策略性溝通
**When NOT to use：**
- 研究哪些議題會被注意（改用議題設定）
- 分析長期累積的媒體效果（用涵化理論）
- 研究個人的認知處理（用雙歷程理論）
## Assumptions
```
IRON LAW: Framing Is About SELECTION and SALIENCE
The same facts presented in different frames lead to different
interpretations and decisions. A frame:
1. SELECTS some aspects of perceived reality
2. Makes them MORE SALIENT in communication
3. Promotes a particular problem definition, causal interpretation,
moral evaluation, or treatment recommendation (Entman, 1993)
There is no "unframed" message — all communication involves framing choices.
```
## Methodology
### Step 1: Identify Frames
用歸納式（從資料中浮現）或演繹式（套用既有類型學）的框架分析。常見的通用框架：衝突、人情趣味、經濟後果、道德、責任。
### Step 2: Analyze Frame Elements
針對每個框架，找出：問題定義、因果歸因、道德判斷，以及建議的處置方式（Entman 的四個功能）。
### Step 3: Compare Frame Effects
評估不同框架如何影響受眾：詮釋、責任歸屬、情緒反應、政策偏好。
### Step 4: Evaluate Frame Competition
分析哪些框架佔主導、誰在推動它們，以及反框架在公共論述中如何運作。
## Output Format
```markdown
# Frame Analysis: {Issue/Topic}
## Identified Frames
| Frame | Problem Definition | Causal Attribution | Moral Judgment | Treatment |
|-------|-------------------|-------------------|----------------|-----------|
| {Frame A} | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| {Frame B} | ... | ... | ... | ... |
## Dominant Frame
- Frame: {which frame dominates}
- Promoted by: {actors/sources}
- Evidence: {frequency, prominence, resonance}
## Frame Effects
- On interpretation: {how audiences read the issue}
- On attribution: {who/what is blamed}
- On policy preference: {what solutions are favored}
## Counter-Frames
{Alternative frames, their sponsors, and competitive dynamics}
```
## Gotchas
- **等價框架 vs 強調框架**：等價框架用不同方式呈現邏輯上相同的資訊（例如 90% 存活率 vs 10% 死亡率）。強調框架則凸顯議題的不同面向。不要把這兩種不同的機制混為一談。
- **框架 ≠ 偏見**：框架存在於所有溝通中。找出一個框架，不代表這則訊息有偏見，只代表有人對該強調什麼做了選擇。
- **框架共鳴很重要**：框架的效果取決於文化共鳴，和既有文化敘事一致的框架，比全新的框架更有力。
- **個人層級的差異**：受眾不是被動的框架接收者。先備知識、價值觀和人際討論會調節框架效果。
- **框架建構 vs 框架設定**：框架建構是框架如何進入媒體論述（消息來源、記者）。框架設定是媒體框架如何影響受眾。這是兩個分開的過程。
## References
- 想了解 Entman 的串接激活模型，見 `references/cascading-activation.md`
- 想了解框架分析的編碼方法，見 `references/frame-coding.md`英文原文
---
name: "grad-framing"
description: "Apply framing theory to analyze how selection, emphasis, and exclusion shape interpretation of issues. Use this skill when the user needs to deconstruct media or organizational frames, evaluate how different frames affect audience perception and decision-making, or design strategic communication frames — even if they say 'how is this issue being portrayed', 'why do people see this differently', or 'how should we frame this message'."
metadata:
category: "WP-33 傳播/教育/公共行政"
tags: ["communication", "framing", "media-effects", "persuasion"]
---
# Framing Theory
## Overview
Framing theory examines how the presentation of information — through selection, emphasis, and exclusion — shapes how audiences interpret and respond to issues. The same facts, framed differently, lead to systematically different judgments and decisions.
## When to Use
**Trigger conditions:**
- Analyzing how media or organizations present issues to shape interpretation
- Comparing competing frames on the same issue
- Designing strategic communication with specific interpretive goals
**When NOT to use:**
- When studying which issues get attention (use agenda-setting instead)
- When analyzing long-term cumulative media effects (use cultivation theory)
- When studying individual cognitive processing (use dual-process theory)
## Assumptions
```
IRON LAW: Framing Is About SELECTION and SALIENCE
The same facts presented in different frames lead to different
interpretations and decisions. A frame:
1. SELECTS some aspects of perceived reality
2. Makes them MORE SALIENT in communication
3. Promotes a particular problem definition, causal interpretation,
moral evaluation, or treatment recommendation (Entman, 1993)
There is no "unframed" message — all communication involves framing choices.
```
## Methodology
### Step 1: Identify Frames
Use inductive (emerge from data) or deductive (apply existing typology) frame analysis. Common generic frames: conflict, human interest, economic consequence, morality, responsibility.
### Step 2: Analyze Frame Elements
For each frame, identify: problem definition, causal attribution, moral judgment, and recommended treatment (Entman's four functions).
### Step 3: Compare Frame Effects
Assess how different frames affect audience: interpretation, attribution of responsibility, emotional response, policy preference.
### Step 4: Evaluate Frame Competition
Analyze which frames dominate, who promotes them, and how counter-framing operates in public discourse.
## Output Format
```markdown
# Frame Analysis: {Issue/Topic}
## Identified Frames
| Frame | Problem Definition | Causal Attribution | Moral Judgment | Treatment |
|-------|-------------------|-------------------|----------------|-----------|
| {Frame A} | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| {Frame B} | ... | ... | ... | ... |
## Dominant Frame
- Frame: {which frame dominates}
- Promoted by: {actors/sources}
- Evidence: {frequency, prominence, resonance}
## Frame Effects
- On interpretation: {how audiences read the issue}
- On attribution: {who/what is blamed}
- On policy preference: {what solutions are favored}
## Counter-Frames
{Alternative frames, their sponsors, and competitive dynamics}
```
## Gotchas
- **Equivalency vs emphasis framing**: Equivalency frames present logically identical information differently (e.g., 90% survival vs 10% mortality). Emphasis frames highlight different aspects of an issue. Don't conflate these two distinct mechanisms.
- **Frame ≠ bias**: Framing is inherent in ALL communication. Identifying a frame does not mean the message is biased — it means choices were made about what to emphasize.
- **Frame resonance matters**: A frame's effectiveness depends on cultural resonance — frames that align with existing cultural narratives are more powerful than novel frames.
- **Individual-level variation**: Audiences are not passive frame recipients. Prior knowledge, values, and interpersonal discussion moderate frame effects.
- **Frame-building vs frame-setting**: Frame-building is how frames enter media discourse (sources, journalists). Frame-setting is how media frames affect audiences. These are separate processes.
## References
- For Entman's cascading activation model, see `references/cascading-activation.md`
- For frame analysis coding methodology, see `references/frame-coding.md`