Debating clean energy: Frames, counter frames, and audiences
Debating clean energy: Frames, counter frames, and audiences
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.03.007
复制
发表时间：
2013-10-01
影响因子：
8.9
通讯作者：
Urpelainen, Johannes
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Aklin, Michael;Urpelainen, Johannes
在美国，无论是学者还是实践者都一再强调“问题框架”对于获得公众对气候变化政策的支持的重要性。然而，争论常常忽略了反框架的重要性。每当气候政策的支持者试图构建框架时，气候政策的反对者就会提出一个反框架。反框架如何影响问题框架作为一种沟通策略的有效性？为了回答这个问题，我们报告了一项针对1000名美国人的全国代表性样本的调查实验结果，该样本涉及清洁能源政策，这是美国气候变化公开辩论中的一个关键政策问题。总体而言，我们发现正负框架的不同组合对支持清洁能源政策的影响非常小。一项以2000名美国人为方便样本的后续在线调查实验表明，反框架对破坏原始框架的效果负有责任。(C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd.版权所有。
In the United States, both scholars and practitioners have repeatedly emphasized the importance of "issue framing" for garnering public support for climate change policy. However, the debate frequently overlooks the importance of counter frames. For every framing attempt by advocates of climate policy, there will be a counter frame by the opponents of climate policy. How do counter frames influence the effectiveness of issue framing as a communication strategy? To answer this question, we report results from a survey experiment on a nationally representative sample of 1000 Americans on clean energy policy, a key policy issue in the public debate on climate change in the United States. Overall, we find that different combinations of positive and negative frames have remarkably little effect on support for clean energy policy. A follow-up on-line survey experiment with a convenience sample of 2000 Americans suggests that the counter frames are responsible for undermining the effects of the original frames. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.