To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Junk-food marketing contributes significantly to childhood obesity, which in turn imposes major health and economic burdens. Despite this, political priority for addressing junk-food marketing has been weak in many countries. Competing interests, worldviews and beliefs of stakeholders involved with the issue contribute to this political inertia. An integral group of actors for driving policy change are parliamentarians, who champion policy and enact legislation. However, how parliamentarians interpret and portray (i.e. frame) the causes and solutions of public health nutrition problems is poorly understood. The present study aimed to understand how Australian parliamentarians from different political parties frame the problem of junk-food marketing.
Framing analysis of transcripts from the Australian Government’s Parliamentary Hansard, involving development of a theoretical framework, data collection, coding transcripts and thematic synthesis of results.
Parliamentarian framing generally reflected political party ideology. Liberal parliamentarians called for minimal government regulation and greater personal responsibility, reflecting the party’s core values of liberalism and neoliberalism. Greens parliamentarians framed the issue as systemic, highlighting the need for government intervention and reflecting the core party value of social justice. Labor parliamentarians used both frames at varying times.
Parliamentarians’ framing was generally consistent with their party ideology, though subject to changes over time. This project provides insights into the role of framing and ideology in shaping public health policy responses and may inform communication strategies for nutrition advocates. Advocates might consider using frames that resonate with the ideologies of different political parties and adapting these over time.
Recent research on morality policy has focused on policy change, morality framing and the presence of favourable cultural opportunity structures (COSs). The resulting literature describing various aspects of morality policy has failed to discuss the impact of multilevel dynamic in this field. This contribution examines gambling policy in Italy, applying a multilevel approach to detect the presence of favourable COSs, and whether policymakers frame policies morally. Italy offers a particularly fertile field for the study of morality policy, featuring a liberal national approach versus local restrictive policy. By applying a methodology based on semistructured interviews and secondary sources, we examine the national and local political spheres, demonstrating that morality framing, when detected, is more likely to be found at the local level where the influence of experts and interest groups on legislators may result in the transformation of a health policy based on paternalistic considerations.
How does the framing of immigration influence support for the welfare state? Drawing on research from psychology, specifically the notion of negativity bias and the sequencing of negative and positive information, this article argues that negative immigration frames undermine welfare support, while positive frames have little or no effect. Individuals take less notice of positive frames, and the effect of such frames is further undermined by the previous exposure to negative frames, which tend to stick longer in people's minds. The findings, based on survey experiments on over 9,000 individuals in Germany, Sweden and the UK, show that negative framing of immigration has a strong and pervasive effect on support for welfare. The article also finds some evidence that this effect is further amplified for people who hold anti-immigrant and anti-welfare attitudes or feel economically insecure. The effect of positive framing is considerably weaker and does not strengthen welfare support in any of the three countries.
Behavioral paternalists accept the neoclassical standard of rationality for normative purposes, even while questioning its descriptive accuracy. However, these standards do not have a strong normative justification. There are many perfectly reasonable ways the neoclassical norms can be violated without hurting the interests of individuals. Redescribing preferences or actions to fit the well-behaved mold is essentially arbitrary and without, in itself, any normative significance. Even demonstrating that individuals have inconsistent preferences does not tell us which preferences are better or represent “true preferences.” Behavioral paternalists commit a non sequitur when they use inconsistency to justify privileging some preferences over others.
Behavioral paternalists often distinguish their views from harder forms of paternalism by emphasizing the moderate character of their proposals. Insights from the academic literature on slippery slopes suggest that behavioral paternalist policies are particularly vulnerable to expansion, which makes the claim to moderation unsustainable. This is true even if policymakers are rational (in the neoclassical sense), but the slippery-slope threat is even greater if policymakers share the behavioral and cognitive biases attributed to the people their policies are supposed to help. Rational slope mechanisms include altered incentive slopes, authority and simplification slopes, and expanding justification slopes. Behavioral slope mechanisms include action bias, overconfidence, confirmation bias, present bias, availability and salience effects, framing and extremeness aversion, and affect and prototype heuristics. The theoretical and empirical vagueness of behavioral paternalism creates gradients that encourage the gradual expansion of policies. Finally, the particular way in which leading behavioral paternalists have framed the issue of paternalism gives rise to an inherently expansionist dynamic, which we call the paternalism-generating framework.
Political scientists often distinguish between two types of issues: moral versus non-moral issues or social-cultural versus economic issues. The implication is that these types of issues trigger different types of reasoning: while economic issues rely on pragmatic, consequentialist reasoning, social-cultural issues are said to be dependent on principles and deontological reasoning. However, it is not known whether this distinction is as clear-cut from a citizen's perspective. Scholars agree that understanding the morality of voters’ political attitudes has implications for their political behaviour, such as their willingness to compromise and openness to deliberation. However, few studies have analysed whether citizens reason in principled or pragmatic ways on different issues. This study takes an exploratory approach and analyses the determinants of principled versus pragmatic reasoning in direct democracy, in which citizens make direct policy decisions at the ballot box. Using a unique dataset based on thirty-four ballot decisions in Switzerland, it explores the justifications voters give for their ballot decisions in open-ended survey answers. It distinguishes between pragmatic (or consequentialist) arguments and principled (or value-based) arguments. The analysis shows that principled justifications are not tied to particular issues. Voters use both types of justifications almost equally frequently. Moral justifications are more likely when an issue is personally relevant, as well as when a proposition is accepted, while pragmatic justifications prevail when a proposition is rejected. Furthermore, right-wing voters more often argue in pragmatic terms. Finally, the framing of the issue during the campaign significantly affects moral versus pragmatic justifications.
Chapter 2 – Sense-making analysis – discusses the study’s theoretical and methodological foundations from the perspective of dialogical communication theory and the literature on sense-making resources. The chapter discusses the roles of narratives, framing, categorization and metaphors in sense-making. The book’s different empirical materials are described: peer reviewed research literature, policy documents, international media texts and focus group interviews.
Chapter 5 presents the argument for why and how the United States should reimagine the EITC. Drawing on social science research, it argues that the framing of social benefit programs matters, both to recipients and to the general public. It makes the case for splitting the EITC into two distinct parts, as other scholars and policy makers have proposed in the past: (1) a work-support credit to offset the regressive nature of payroll or self-employment taxes; and (2) a family-support credit to offset poverty. It proposes decoupling EITC delivery from the tax return filing process. Drawing upon ideas from Canada and New Zealand, the chapter also proposes more radical changes, such as determining income based on household composition rather than marital status, allowing parents who share custody to share the credits, and adjusting the size of the credits regionally or locally according to cost of living.
This study examines the extent to which priming voters on the trustworthiness of candidates or that of their parties elicits candidatecentric or partycentric attitudes. The analysis provides evidence of the trade-off for voters between mavericks and party insiders in presidential elections. It shows that voters are sensitized to the risks of electing a candidate with no party support, but in the particular case of Argentina, they still consider the candidates’ qualities to be more important than those of their parties. The results show that priming on the trustworthiness of candidates elicits stronger responses from low-income voters, who already have prior candidatecentric inclinations. The findings also reveal statistical differences in vote choice when respondents are primed with party- or candidatecentric frames.
This chapter focuses on mindfulness as a tool to build creativity in research. Researchers tend to be busy, rarely stopping to take the time to notice how they go about their research and why. This chapter argues that you can be more productive if you pay explicit attention to the behaviors, thoughts, and attitudes that comprise your research practice. By developing the ability to notice and accept what is happening, you can develop the ability to act more intentionally.
This chapter focuses on problem solving as a tool for creativity in research. While researchers have sophisticated analytic strategies for solving problems, research can stall because you are unclear what problem needs to be solved or are trying to solve the wrong problem. This chapter explores tools for identifying and framing tractable problems. It also discusses how you can become more comfortable with ambiguity, i.e., not knowing how you’ll move forward in a given situation.
A firm’s managers have the most intimate understanding of the firm’s business, customers, processes, and capabilities. The managers’ decisions are influenced not only by institutional forces, stakeholders, and organizational governance and leadership but also by their personal values toward sustainability, attitudes toward their roles in solving environmental sustainability challenges, cognitive frames, and interpretations of environmental issues as threats or opportunities. Managers remain locked into everyday routines, patterns of thinking, and cognitive biases that may stifle creativity.Firms that develop successful PES strategies create the opportunities for employees to apply fresh ideas and strategic thinking to address sustainability challenges by enabling them to overcome their biases and everyday routines. Family firms have some unique features that influence strategic decision-making by managers (which includes the family members) differently as compared to non-family firms. Managers in family firms that aim for trans-generational continuity of their enterprise will make decisions differently when addressing environmental issues.
Although propaganda is typically thought of as something created through tangible words or images, it can also occur via the absence of such stimuli. This chapter illustrates how such “propaganda-by-omission” can be created. The particular focus is on “topical silences,” those cases where failure to include information relevant to a certain topic can skew the recipient’s understanding of that topic in a propagandistic way. Such selectivity constitutes a type of “framing” driven by ideology including sociopolitical myths. Using as a case study the current diplomatic tension between the United States and North Korea, the chapter lays out a step-by-step procedure for analyzing such propagandistic silences. The discussion includes important caveats about “truth” and authorial intent and ends with practical advice for researchers and citizen activists.
compares cosmopolitan vs communitarian issue positions of national, European and global elites. It is important to go beyond the national elite focus since the prototypical members of a cosmopolitan elite are thought to be no longer attached to one national context but to have an entire region or even the ‘global village’ as their point of reference. Our empirical analysis supports this expectation: The positions of European-level elites turn out to be even more strongly cosmopolitan than those of national elites, which indicates that a particularly large gap exists between the cosmopolitanism of European elites and the more communitarian orientation of mass publics. Cultural explanations - measured by embeddedness in transnational networks - have the greatest explanatory power. Those elites who have more transnational contacts and travel experience are more cosmopolitan with regard to trade, immigration and supranational integration. However, economic explanations help us to explain within-elite variance in cosmopolitanism. In particular, we find that business and labour union elites diverge strongly in their positions on international trade and supranational integration.
offers a comprehensive analysis of political claims-making in the age of globalization, investigating issue positions of collective actors across countries and polity levels and distinguishing between economic, cultural and political dimensions of globalization. The cultural dimension is centred on migration, human rights and climate change, and the economic dimension is centred on international trade. Positions on political globalization vary between NAFTA members Mexico and the USA, where it is a trade issue, and EU members Germany and Poland, where it is part of the cultural dimension. Global actors (mostly NGOs and UN orgs) take cosmopolitan positions. Among domestic actors there is a marked differentiation between predominantly cosmopolitan executive and administrative state actors and experts, and legislative and civil society actors with more strongly communitarian leanings. On trade and regional integration issues, we find more classic economic-interest explanations. Here, labour unions and farmers are found on the communitarian side, whereas business associations and representatives of large firms strongly favour free international trade and regional integration.
Framing is a crucial skill for connecting problem and solution spaces in the creative design process, both for individuals and teams. Frames are implicit in individuals’ cognitive thinking, but the creation of shared frames plays a vital role in collaborative design. Many studies have attempted to describe the framing process, but little is still known about how to support designers in framing, specifically in teams. This paper addresses this gap, by exploring the connection between sketching and framing within interdisciplinary teams. Following a qualitative and explorative approach, we have investigated the process and outcome of five interdisciplinary teams. We identified that sketching assists in the creation and elaboration of frames. Furthermore, in tandem with discussion and reflection, sketching helps increase the chance of a frame to survive within the design process. Our findings have practical and educational implications for improving the creative design process in interdisciplinary teams.
This article contributes to both the scholarly debates on the controversies over gender quotas and the body of knowledge on framing effects through an investigation of whether national elites, individuals in top positions across 10 sectors of Norwegian society, are susceptible to positive framing of corporate board gender quotas (CBQs). Elites are thought to be more resistant to framing, and their predispositions are found to be stronger and more consistent than those of the general public. However, few, if any, studies have empirically investigated framing effects on national elites. We report on an experiment embedded in a comprehensive survey of Norwegian national elites. The results clearly indicate that elites are susceptible to framing. When exposed to frames highlighting both male dominance among the business elite and the success of CBQs in achieving gender balance on corporate boards, elites were significantly more likely to support gender quotas. Framing effects were primarily found among men, not women, and contrary to expectation, effects were stronger among the business elite. Thus, we should direct our attention to how the framing of issues also influences key stakeholders, and policy makers should consider opposition to gender equality measures as something that has the propensity to change.
Concerns over food safety in China not only direct public attention to negative
incidents, but also trigger the government's scrutiny of implicated
firms, particularly MNCs. The question of how to repair legitimacy after media
coverage of negative incidents has become a critical issue for MNCs. Although
the factors for MNCs’ public crises have been identified, how local
contexts and mechanisms shape repair approaches remain unclear. To address this
research gap, we conducted a study of Walmart China's approaches
associated with two negative incidents across two regions. We found that the
negative incidents can be framed differently depending on the local
environment's unfavorability for MNCs. Specifically, the negative
framing gave rise to varying degrees of legitimacy loss and offered different
leeway for MNCs to repair their legitimacy. We also identified the varied
outcomes of different repair approaches. By revealing the linkages among local
context, framing, legitimacy repair, and its outcomes, our study contributes to
research on MNCs’ legitimacy management under institutional
complexity and underscores the China context for legitimacy maintenance. We also
offer insights that advance the institutional approach to legitimacy repair in
this context. Last, we reflect on the techniques for conducting qualitative
research in China.
Maximising synergies and minimising conflicts (i.e. building policy coherence) between trade and nutrition policy is an important objective. One understudied driver of policy coherence is the alignment in the frames, discourses and values of actors involved in the respective sectors. In the present analysis, we aim to understand how such actors interpret (i.e. ‘frame’) nutrition and the implications for building trade–nutrition policy coherence.
We adopted a qualitative single case study design, drawing on key informant interviews with those involved in trade policy.
We focused on the Australian trade policy sub-system, which has historically emphasised achieving market growth and export opportunities for Australian food producers.
Nineteen key informants involved in trade policy spanning the government, civil society, business and academic sectors.
Nutrition had low ‘salience’ in Australian trade policy for several reasons. First, it was not a domestic political priority in Australia nor among its trading partners; few advocacy groups were advocating for nutrition in trade policy. Second, a ‘productivist’ policy paradigm in the food and trade policy sectors strongly emphasised market growth, export opportunities and deregulation over nutrition and other social objectives. Third, few opportunities existed for health advocates to influence trade policy, largely because of limited consultation processes. Fourth, the complexity of nutrition and its inter-linkages with trade presented difficulties for developing a ‘broader discourse’ for engaging the public and political leaders on the topic.
Overcoming these ‘ideational challenges’ is likely to be important to building greater coherence between trade and nutrition policy going forward.