Activación de encuadres en red. Un modelo para repensar la circulación de sentidos en el nuevo entorno mediático

Palabras clave: Framing, Activación en cascada, Redes sociales, Covid-19, Riesgo, Experimento de tweets apareados, Atención selectiva, Twitter, Activación de encuadres en red, Cámaras de eco

Resumen

Este trabajo propone un nuevo modelo de activación de encuadres llamado network activated frames (NAF) (activación de encuadres en red). El NAF busca actualizar el estudio del framing como resultado de la activación de encuadres por parte de los usuarios en una red conectada. Con este objetivo en mente, reconstruyo las distintas nociones de frame y framing en la bibliografía en comunicación política y presento sus limitaciones. La activación de encuadres en redes sociales se constata experimentalmente utilizando tweets apareados (conjoint experiment), una técnica que rota aleatoriamente una variedad de elementos de encuadre (frame elements) y evalúa la intención de compartir el contenido. Los resultados proporcionan evidencia concluyente de la propensión de los usuarios de redes sociales a activar distintos elementos de encuadre en distintas regiones de una red social.

Referencias

Anderson, John-Robert (1983). The architecture of cognition. Harvard University Press. ISBN: 978 0 805822335

Ardèvol-Abreu, Alberto (2015) “Framing o teoría del encuadre en comunicación. Orígenes, desarrollo y panorama actual en España”. Revista latina de comunicación social, n. 70, pp. 423-450. https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2015-1053

Aruguete, Natalia (2018). “#2X1: Diálogos al costado de la grieta”. Intersecciones en comunicación, n. 12, pp. 35-48. https://www.ridaa.unicen.edu.ar/xmlui/handle/123456789/2313

Aruguete, Natalia (2019). “Network-activated frames (NAF), redefining framing in a new digital era”. Encyclopedia of educational innovation. Singapore: Springer Nature. ISBN: 978 981 13 2262 4 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2262-4_55-1

Aruguete, Natalia; Calvo, Ernesto (2018). “Time to #protest: Selective exposure, cascading activation, and framing in social media”. Journal of communication, v. 68, n. 3, pp. 480-502. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy007

Aruguete, Natalia; Calvo, Ernesto (2020) “Coronavirus en Argentina: Polarización partidaria, encuadres mediáticos y temor al riesgo”. Revista SAAP, v. 14, n. 2, pp. 281-310. https://doi.org/10.46468/rsaap.14.2.A2

Aruguete, Natalia; Calvo, Ernesto; Ventura, Tiago (2020). “News sharing, gatekeeping, and polarization: A study of the #Bolsonaro Election”. Digital journalism, v. 9, n. 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1852094

Bakshy, Eytan; Messing, Solomon; Adamic, Lada-Adriana (2015). “Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook”. Science, v. 348, n. 6239, pp. 1130-1132. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1160

Barberá, Pablo (2015). “Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data”. Political analysis, v. 23, n. 1, pp. 76-91. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpu011

Barberá, Pablo; Rivero, Gonzalo (2012). “¿Un tweet, un voto? Desigualdad en la discusión política en Twitter”. En: I Congreso Internacional en Comunicación Política y Estrategias de Campaña, pp. 200-220.

Bateson, Gregory (2000). Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. University of Chicago Press. ISBN: 978 0 226039053

Bennett, W. Lance (1990). “Toward a theory of press-state”. Journal of communication, v. 40, n. 2, pp. 103-127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1990.tb02265.x

Bennett, W. Lance (1996). “An introduction to journalism norms and representations of politics”. Political communication, v. 13, n. 4, pp. 373-384. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.1996.9963126

Bechtel, Michael M.; Scheve, Kenneth F. (2013). “Mass support for global climate agreements depends on institutional design”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 110, n. 34, pp. 13763-13768. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1306374110

Bechtel, Michael M.; Hainmueller, Jens; Margalit, Yotam (2014). “Preferences for international redistribution: The divide over the Eurozone bailouts”. American journal of political science, v. 58, n. 4, pp. 835-856. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12079

Berger, Peter-Ludwig; Luckmann, Thomas (1991). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Penguin Uk. ISBN: 978 0 140135480

Calvo, Ernesto; Aruguete, Natalia (2020). Fake news, trolls y otros encantos. Cómo funcionan (para bien y para mal) las redes sociales. Siglo XXI.

Calvo, Ernesto; Ventura, Tiago (2020). “Will I get Covid-19? Partisanship, social media frames, and perceptions of health risk in Brazil”. Latin American politics and society, v. 63, n. 1. https://doi.org/10.1017/lap.2020.30

Cardenal, Ana S.; Aguilar-Paredes, Carlos; Cristancho, Camilo; Majó-Vázquez, Silvia (2019). “Echo-chambers in online news consumption: Evidence from survey and navigation data in Spain”. European journal of communication, v. 34, n. 4, pp. 360-376. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323119844409

Chong, Dennis; Druckman, James N. (2007). “A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments”. Journal of communication, v. 57, n. 1, pp. 99-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00331.x

D’Angelo, Paul (2002). “News framing as a multiparadigmatic research program: A response to Entman”. Journal of communication, v. 52, n. 4, pp. 870-888. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02578.x

D’Angelo, Paul (2012). “Studying framing in political communication with an integrative approach”. American behavioral scientist, v. 56, n. 3, pp. 353-364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426332

Feld, Scott L. (1991). “Why your friends have more friends than you do?”. American journal of sociology, v. 96, n. 6, pp. 1464-1477. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2781907

Entman, Robert-Mathew (1993). “Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm”. Journal of communication, v. 43, n. 4, pp. 51-58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x

Entman, Robert-Mathew (2003). “Cascading activation: Contesting the White House’s frame after 9/11”. Political communication, v. 20, n. 4, pp. 415-432. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600390244176

Entman, Robert-Mathew (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and US foreign policy. University of Chicago Press. ISBN: 978 0226210728

Entman, Robert-Mathew; Usher, Nikki (2018). “Framing in a fractured democracy: Impacts of digital technology on ideology, power and cascading network activation”. Journal of communication, v. 68, n. 2, pp. 298-308. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy028

Festinger, Leon (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance (v. 2). Stanford University Press. ISBN: 978 0 804709118

Franchino, Fabio; Zucchini, Francesco (2015). “Voting in a multi-dimensional space: A conjoint analysis employing valence and ideology attributes of candidates”. Political science research and methods, v. 3, n. 2, p. 221-241. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2014.24

Gitlin, Todd (2003). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making and unmaking of the new left. University of California Press. ISBN: 978 0 520239326

Goffman, Erving (2006). Frame analysis. Los marcos de la experiencia. Madrid: CIS. ISBN: 978 84 74764116

Green, Paul E.; Krieger, Abba M.; Wind, Yoram (2001). “Thirty years of conjoint analysis: Reflections and prospects”. Informs. Journal on applied analytics, v. 31, n. 3_supplement, pp. 56-73. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.31.3s.56.9676

James, William (1869). “The perception of reality”. In: James, William. Principles of psychology, v. 2. Dover Publications, pp. 283-324. ISBN: 978 0 486203812

Habermas, Jürgen (2002). Teoría de la acción comunicativa. II: Crítica de la razón funcionalista. Taurus. ISBN: 978 84 30603404

Hainmueller, Jens; Hopkins, Daniel J. (2014). “Public attitudes toward immigration”. Annual review of political science, v. 17, pp. 225-249. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-102512-194818

Hainmueller, Jens; Hopkins, Daniel J.; Yamamoto, Teppei (2014). “Causal inference in conjoint analysis: Understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments”. Political analysis, v. 22, n. 1. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpt024

Hastie, Reid; Park, Bernadette (1986). “The relationship between memory and judgment depends on whether the task is memory-based or on-line”. Psychological review, v. 93, n. 3, pp. 258-268. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.258

Himelboim, Itai; Smith, Marc; Shneiderman, Ben (2013). “Tweeting apart: Applying network analysis to detect selective exposure clusters in Twitter”. Communication methods and measures, v. 7, n. 3-4, pp. 195-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2013.813922

Horiuchi, Yusaku; Smith, Daniel M.; Yamamoto, Teppei (2017). “Measuring voters’ multidimensional policy preferences with conjoint analysis: Application to Japan’s 2014 election”. Political analysis, v. 26, n. 2, pp. 190-209. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.2

Iyengar, Shanto; Lelkes, Yphtach; Levendusky, Matthew; Malhotra, Neil; Westwood, Sean J. (2019). “The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States”. Annual review of political science, v. 22, pp. 129-146. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034

Kahneman, Daniel (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan. ISBN: 978 0 374533557

Koziner, Nadia-Sabrina (2015). “El framing: un programa investigación para el estudio de las comunicaciones mediáticas”. Animus. Revista interamericana de comunicação midiática, v. 14, n. 28, pp. 22-45. https://doi.org/10.5902/2175497720203

López-Rabadán, Pablo; Vicente-Mariño, Miguel (2013). “Propuestas de consolidación teórica y analítica para los estudios de framing en la investigación sobre comunicación política”. En: Estudios sobre comunicación política. Libro del año 2012. Madrid: Tecnos, pp. 239-259. ISBN: 978 84 309 5530 5 https://doi.org/10.5209/ESMP.58022

Lord, Charles-George; Ross, Lee; Lepper, Mark-Roger (1979). “Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence”. Journal of personality and social psychology, v. 37, n. 11, pp. 2098-2109. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098

Mason, Liliana (2013). “The rise of uncivil agreement: Issue versus behavioral polarization in the American electorate”. American behavioral scientist, v. 57, n. 1, pp. 140-159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764212463363

Mason, Liliana (2015). “I disrespectfully agree: The differential effects of partisan sorting on social and issue polarization”. American journal of political science, v. 59, n. 1, pp. 128-145. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12089

Matthes, Jörg (2012). “Framing politics: An integrative approach”. American behavioral scientist, v. 56, n. 3, pp. 247-259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426324

Matthes, Jörg; Kohring, Matthias (2008). “The content analysis of media frames: Toward improving reliability and validity”. Journal of communication, v. 58, n. 2, pp. 258-279. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00384.x

Pariser, Eli (2011). The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. Penguin UK. ISBN: 978 0 241954522

Price, Vincent; Tewksbury, David (1997). “News values and public opinion: A theoretical account of media priming and framing”. In: Barnet, George A.; Boster, Franklin J. Progress in communication sciences, v. 13, pp. 173-212. ISBN: 978 1 567503609 https://doi.org/10.1177/009365097024005002

Reese, Stephen (2007). “The framing project: A bridging model for media research revisited”. Journal of communication, v. 57, n. 1, pp. 148-154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00334.x

Rojas, Hernando; Barnidge, Matthew; Abril, Eulàlia P. (2016). “Egocentric publics and corrective action”. Communication and the public, v. 1, n. 1, pp. 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057047315619421

Sádaba, Teresa (2008). Framing: el encuadre de las noticias: el binomio terrorismo-medios. La Crujía. ISBN: 978 987 6010283

Theocharis, Yannis; Barberá, Pablo; Fazekas, Zoltán; Popa, Sebastián-Adrián (2020). “The dynamics of political incivility on Twitter”. Sage open, v. 10, n. 2, pp. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020919447

Tuchman, Gaye (1983). La producción de la noticia. Estudio sobre la construcción social de la realidad. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.

Wojcieszak, Magdalena; Bimber, Bruce; Feldman, Lauren; Stroud, Natalie-Jomini (2016). “Partisan news and political participation: Exploring mediated relationships”. Political communication, v. 33, n. 2, pp. 241-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2015.1051608

Yang, Jung-Hwan; Rojas, Hernando; Wojcieszak, Magdalena; Allberg, Toril; Coen, Sharon; Curran, James; Hayashi, Kaori; Iyengar, Shanto; Jones, Paul K.; Mazzoleni, Gianpietro; Papathanassopoulos, Stylanos; Rhee, June-Woong; Rowe, David; Soroka, Stuart; Tiffen, Rodney (2016). “Why are ‘others’ so polarized? Perceived political polarization and media use in 10 countries”. Journal of computer-mediated communication, v. 21, n. 5, pp. 349-367. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12166

Yang, Tian; Majó-Vázquez, Silvia; Nielsen, Rasmus K.; González-Bailón, Sandra (2020). “Exposure to news grows less fragmented with increase in mobile access”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, online first. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2006089117

Zunino, Esteban (2016). “The assessment of political news in the media agenda: a methodological proposal for more extensive content analysis”. Communication & society, v. 29, n. 4, pp. 235-254. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.29.4.sp.235-254

Zunino, Esteban (2019). “¿Quién define la agenda? Las fuentes de información en la prensa digital argentina”. Comunicación y sociedad, año 16, e7394. https://doi.org/10.32870/cys.v2019i0.7394

Publicado
2021-04-05
Cómo citar
Aruguete, N. (2021). Activación de encuadres en red. Un modelo para repensar la circulación de sentidos en el nuevo entorno mediático. Profesional De La Información, 30(2). https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.mar.18
Sección
Artículos de investigación / Research articles

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.