IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cposxx/v42y2021i1p60-79.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A magic bullet in policy communication? On the ambiguous use of framing in policy research

Author

Listed:
  • Pascal D. König

Abstract

Policy research and particularly social policy analysis have increasingly drawn upon the concept of framing. A number of contributions have demonstrated its usefulness for building explanations of policy change and its consequences. However, the adoption of the concept has also been accompanied by a considerable conceptual ambiguity. It is not only understood in quite different ways, at times its use is also rather vague and far removed from a narrow definition of framing. This paper discusses different ways in which framing is adopted within the field of policy research and the conceptual and epistemological stumbling blocks that follow from them. It argues that the most problematic use occurs where framing is used to characterize policy action and even more so in combination with public opinion changes that framing allegedly brought about. Finally, some ways forward for achieving a more rigorous use of the framing concept in policy research are presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Pascal D. König, 2021. "A magic bullet in policy communication? On the ambiguous use of framing in policy research," Policy Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1), pages 60-79, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:cposxx:v:42:y:2021:i:1:p:60-79
    DOI: 10.1080/01442872.2019.1581153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01442872.2019.1581153
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01442872.2019.1581153?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cposxx:v:42:y:2021:i:1:p:60-79. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cpos .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.