stories are better able than other kinds of messages to change people’s opinions
There should be a clear “we”—those to whom the injustice is done—and an obvious “they” who are responsible for the injustice (Gamson 1992; Stoecker 1995). Effective frames are “empirically credible,” that is, they are consonant with what their audiences know to be true
To probe the dynamic involved, subjects were asked to circle every “false note” in the story. The more absorbed they were, the less likely they were to see such false notes (Green and Brock 2000). This suggests that when they hear or read stories, audiences suspend their proclivity to counterargue, that is, to raise doubts about the veracity or rele- vance of the information they are hearing
There should be a clear “we”—those to whom the injustice is done—and an obvious “they” who are responsible for the injustice (Gamson 1992; Stoecker 1995). Effective frames are “empirically credible,” that is, they are consonant with what their audiences know to be true
To probe the dynamic involved, subjects were asked to circle every “false note” in the story. The more absorbed they were, the less likely they were to see such false notes (Green and Brock 2000). This suggests that when they hear or read stories, audiences suspend their proclivity to counterargue, that is, to raise doubts about the veracity or rele- vance of the information they are hearing
No comments:
Post a Comment