Debates in Frame Analysis
- Goffman, Erving (1974): "Frame Analysis," New York, NY: Harper.
Even though Goffman's seminal work sparked the avalanche of frame analytic over the last three decades, one could reasonably argue that Goffman is today cited mainly for symbolic reasons, as current frame analytic work has little in common with Frame Analysis. One of the first reviews of Goffman's work already anticipated the reason for this development: Frame Analysis is simply too ill-defined to be taught to graduate students. Frame Analysis Goffman-style is a "sociological art form, [&hellip] only certain talented individuals will grasp the underlying principles intuitively and [are] able to perform" (
Gamson 1975: 605) it. Consequently, frame analysis has become far more
systematized, so it is now easier to learn and apply. Goffman still should
be read. But to learn the actual technique, other texts are more suitable,
such as:
- Snow, David A., E. Burke Rochford, Steven K. Worden, and Robert D. Benford (1986):
"Frame
Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation," American Sociological Review
51:
464-481.
At least in social movement studies, this still remains the most quoted article on frame analysis. Its beauty lies in the systemization of frame analysis, which makes the technique more manageable. - Strategic Frame Analysis
A hands-on introduction into frame analysis by the Frame Works Institute, an NGO that tries to bridge scholarly work and civil society action. 
Scheufele,
Dietram A. (1999): "Framing
as
a Theory of Media Effects," Journal of Communication 49 (1): 103-122.
This article systematizes approaches to framing in political communication and attempts to integrate them into a comprehensive model.- Fisher, Kimberly (1997): "Locating Frames in the Discursive Universe," Sociological Research
Online 2 (3),
<http://www.socresonline.org.uk/2/3/4.html>.
"Scholars from a range of disciplines use the term 'frame' to mean a variety of disjointed and incompatible concepts. This paper examines a range of framing literature, from the writings of authors including Erving Goffman, Teun van Dijk, Serge Moscovici, George Lakoff, Alan Johnson, William Gamson, David Snow, Robert Benford and Paolo Donati. Then it develops the theoretical case for defining frames as semi-structured elements of discourse which people use to make sense of information they encounter. Additionally, this paper demonstrates the need to include social system frames, which provide patterns for understanding social relations, among the presently acknowledged frame types. Frames develop in parallel with language, vary across cultures, and shape, but are distinct from other extra-linguistic discourse forms, including myths and ideologies."
Problems & Critiques
- Benford, Robert D. (1997): "An Insider's Critique of the Social Movement Framing
Perspective," Sociological Inquiry 67 (4): 409-30.
As it is not frequently the case, an insider has done a concise critique of the framing perspective. - Oliver,
Pamela E. & Hank Johnston (2000): "What a Good
Idea:
Frames and Ideologies in Social Movements Research"" Mobilization 5 (1): 37-54.
Debunks the overuse and concomitant ambiguity of the framing concept in social movement theory. There also is a response by Snow and Benford and a rejoinder.
Applications
- Triandafyllidou, Anna and Fotiou, Anastasios (1998) "Sustainability and Modernity in the European
Union: A Frame Theory Approach to
Policy-Making," Sociological Research Online, vol. 3, no. 1, <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/3/1/2.html>.
"Frame analysis has been often used by scholars studying New Social Movements to analyze their discourses and their ability to mobilize people. This paper refers to the application of 'frame analysis' to a different context, namely to discourses of both social movements and institutional actors in the context of public policy-making. More particularly, the study is concerned with the discourses of social actors who participate in the making of EU environmental policy. The advantages and limitations of frame analysis as a method for analyzing discourse in an institutional context are discussed. Two case-studies are used to highlight the pros and cons of the method. First, the competing discourses of environmental organizations, business associations, and EU officials with regard to environmental sustainability and the Fifth Action Program are examined. The second case study addresses the issue of Trans- European Transport Networks (TEN-Ts) and examines different types of framing of sustainable mobility developed by policy actors. Conclusions are drawn with regard to the contribution of frame theory in the analysis of policy-making processes. "
Organizations
We have not found any Frame Analysis Research Center.