Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACTRisk and decision‐making are central to human behavior and have been extensively studied across many disciplines. To better understand the factors that influence an individual's risk‐related choices, this paper investigates the influence of frame valence intensity. It does so by comparing predictions from two prominent theories of decision‐making: Prospect theory (PT) and fuzzy‐trace theory (FTT). PT relies on the numerical transformation of subjective value information suggesting that the intensity of the frame should not affect the decision outcome. In contrast, FTT predicts that the level of frame valence should correspond to the intensity of the extracted memory trace and have predictable effects on risky choice. The results demonstrate that risky choice varies across different levels of the frame's valence. For positive frames, increasing valence intensity is associated with decreased risk preference. For negative frames, the relationship is more complex and context‐dependent. These findings extend our understanding of framing effects, suggesting that both the direction and intensity of frame valence influence risk preferences. While broadly aligning with FTT predictions regarding gist extraction, our results also indicate that PT could be extended to account for valence intensity effects, potentially bridging these theoretical perspectives.

We know from the issue-framing literature that politicians 'frame' issues strategically to influence public perceptions and preferences. We also know that there are different framing techniques. What remains poorly understood, though, is what makes a frame persuasive. The proposition put forward in this debate paper is that social psychological research into leadership and persuasion can shed light on this question. Social Identity theorists have shown that influential leaders are crafty 'identity entrepreneurs', whose social influence derives, not from their ability to frame issues, but from their ability to redefine the collective self-understanding. Just how potent this framing technique is becomes visible when examining the way in which radical opposition leaders call the electorate to arms. As will be shown with the help of two examples, by persuading the electorate of an imminent threat to the collective 'us', radical opposition leaders are able to gain considerable control not only over whether an 'issue' becomes regarded as a problem requiring a policy-solution, but also over whose evidence/knowledge counts.

Abstract
This short conceptual article seeks to integrate world-systems theory and degrowth. It suggests that an ecological rendering of world-systems theory can clarify some of the most important quandaries of the degrowth movement in regards to global justice, decolonialism, the excessive material throughput of the Global North, and globalization. The article reframes these concerns from a world-systems framework that recognizes global hierarchies, imperialism, and dependencies, issues that the degrowth movement as a whole has failed to sufficiently address. It argues that while degrowth has made some progress in conceptualizing the kinds of changes that would be necessary for a more sustainable and just global economy, further proposals and research into deeper, world-systemic changes are necessary.

A reply to David A. Snow & Robert D. Benford's comments on the authors' "What a Good Idea! Ideologies and Frames in Social Movement Research" (both, 2000) notes that the article was intended to provoke dialogue & revive theorizing about the relation between ideology & frames. Snow & Benford object to use of the noun frame, rather than the verb framing even though most research in the framing perspective does the same. The noun-verb distinction is at the core of their other criticisms, & it is argued that the noun is an interpretive frame described as a cognitive structure, while the verb describes framing processing as unique entities. The noun moves the framing process forward & does not detract from the knowledge that "all social life is emergent, negotiated, & contextual." The notion that framing as an activity is more observable than ideology is contested, & new methodologies are examined, eg, story grammar analysis, that hold promise for enhancing both the frame/framing & ideology perspectives. 4 References. J. Lindroth

This open access book presents novel theoretical, empirical and experimental work exploring the nature of mental representations that support natural language production and understanding, and other manifestations of cognition. One fundamental question raised in the text is whether requisite knowledge structures can be adequately modeled by means of a uniform representational format, and if so, what exactly is its nature. Frames are a key topic covered which have had a strong impact on the exploration of knowledge representations in artificial intelligence, psychology and linguistics; cascades are a novel development in frame theory. Other key subject areas explored are: concepts and categorization, the experimental investigation of mental representation, as well as cognitive analysis in semantics. This book is of interest to students, researchers, and professionals working on cognition in the fields of linguistics, philosophy, and psychology.

The frame analysis was part of the "cultural turn" that occurred in the early '80s in the sociology of collective action and that included the appreciation of the symbolic dimension of the action instudies of the social construction of the protest, gaining analytical importance the aspects like the symbolic production of movements. While their approaches have been widely appreciated for theirreconsideration of the cultural aspects of collective action, they were the subject of a series of reviews from other theories also attentive to the production of meaning in instances of socialmobilization and political communication. In these pages we will present briefly the idea of "collective frames" and examine the main criticisms of the proposals of the frame analysis fromauthors who promote discourse analysis and narrative of collective action and others french authors influenced by pragmatic theory. From these reviews we aim to provide some considerations to keepin mind to renovate and improve this analytical perspective of the cultural aspects of collective action. ; La teoría del frame analysis formó parte del "giro cultural" que ocurrió a principios de la década del '80 en la sociología de la acción colectiva y que comprendió la revalorización de la dimensiónsimbólica de la acción en los estudios sobre la construcción social de la protesta, cobrando relevancia analítica aspectos como la producción simbólica de los movimientos. Si bien sus planteoshan sido ampliamente valorados por su reconsideración de los aspectos culturales de la acción colectiva, fueron objeto de una serie de críticas provenientes de otras corrientes también atentas ala producción de sentido en instancias de movilización social y de comunicación política. En estas páginas presentaremos sucintamente la idea de "marcos de la acción colectiva" y examinaremos lasprincipales críticas a los planteos del frame analysis provenientes de autores que promueven el análisis discursivo y narrativo de la acción colectiva y de autores franceses con influencias ...