Framing (scienze sociali): differenze tra le versioni

Versione delle 03:13, 14 set 2015

Versione delle 17:34, 4 gen 2016

Riga 4:

== Storia ==

Molti commentatori attribuiscono il concetto di ''framing'' al lavoro di [[Erving Goffman]], ed in particolare al suo ''Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience'' del [[1974]]<ref>Pubblicato in [[Italia]] nel [[2001]]. Vedasi la nota bibliografica.</ref>. Goffman usava l'idea per definire "schemi di interpretazione" che permettono a individui o gruppi di "collocare, percepire, identificare e classificare" eventi e fatti, in tal modo strutturando il significato, organizzando le esperienze, guidando le azioni. La nozione goffmaniana di ''framing'' prende le mosse dal suo ''[[La vita quotidiana come rappresentazione]]'' ([[1959]]), un saggio sul [[prospettiva drammaturgica|controllo espressivo]]. Queste opere, a loro volta, si ispirano marcatamente al concetto di immagine elaborato da [[Kenneth Boulding]] nel [[1956]]. [[George Lakoff]], nella didattica del suo corso di [[scienze cognitive]] presso l'[[Università della California]] in [[Berkeley]], ingiunge agli studenti: <br />

::''«Non pensate a un elefante!»''. <br />

Secondo Lakoff, a quel punto non si può fare a meno di pensare ad un [[elefante]], poiché la mera menzione della ''parola elefante'' evoca inevitabilmente l'''immagine elefante'' (ed un ''frame'' di "accompagnamento").

Riga 28:

== Framing effect nelle decisioni economiche ==

{{quotecitazione|Il termine ''dipendenza da incorniciamento'' significa che il modo in cui si comportano le persone dipende dal modo in cui i loro problemi decisionali sono stati incorniciati.

[[Shefrin]] (2000)}}

Riga 65:

* abbiamo le teorie cognitive della “[[fuzzy trace theory]]” che cerca di spiegare gli effetti incorniciamento cercando di determinare il numero di sforzi di processi cognitivi volti a determinare il valore dei guadagni e delle perdite potenziali.

* La “[[teoria del prospetto]]” (di produzione degli stessi [[Amos Tversky]] e [[Daniel Kahneman]]) che spiega gli effetti incorniciamento in termini funzionali, determinati dalle preferenze per diversi valori percepiti, basato sulle assunzioni che la gente dia un maggior peso alle perdite che ai guadagni equivalenti.

* Le “[[teorie motivazionali]]” che spiegano l’effetto incorniciamento in termini di forze edonistiche che influenzano gli individui, coma la paura e la speranza, basato sulla nozione che le emozioni negative evocate dalle perdite potenziali hanno maggior peso delle emozioni evocate da ipotetici guadagni.

* Le “[[teorie delle relazioni inverse di costi-benefici]]” che incastonano elementi delle teorie motivazionali e cognitive, e postulano che calcolare il valore per un guadagno sicuro richiede sforzi cognitivi minori di quelli richiesti per selezionare un guadagno rischioso.

Riga 92 ⟶ 89:

* Baars, B. (1988), ''A Cognitive Theory of Consciousness'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

* Boulding, Kenneth E. (1956). ''The Image: Knowledge in Life and Society'', Michigan University Press.

* Carruthers, P. (2003), On Fodor's Problem, Mind and Language, vol. 18(5), pp. &nbsp;502–523.

* Clark, A. (1997), ''Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again'', Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

* Cutting, Hunter and Makani Themba Nixon (2006). ''Talking the Walk: A Communications Guide for Racial Justice'', AK Press

Riga 105 ⟶ 102:

* Goffman, E. (1959). ''Presentation of Self in Everyday Life'', New York: Doubleday. (tr. it. ''La vita quotidiana come rappresentazione'', Il Mulino)

* Goodman, N. (1954), ''Fact, Fiction, and Forecast'', Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

* Hanks, S. & McDermott, D. (1987), ''Nonmonotonic Logic and Temporal Projection'', Artificial Intelligence, vol. 33(3), pp. &nbsp;379–412.

* Haselager, Willem F.G. (1997). ''Cognitive science and [[psicologia popolare|folk psychology]]: the right frame of mind''. London: Sage

* Haselager, W.F.G. & Van Rappard, J.F.H. (1998), ''Connectionism, Systematicity, and the Frame Problem'', Minds and Machines, vol. 8(2), pp. &nbsp;161–179.

* Hayes, P.J. (1991), ''Artificial Intelligence Meets David Hume: A Reply to Fetzer'', in Ford & Hayes (1991).

* Heal, J. (1996), ''Simulation, Theory, and Content'', in Theories of Theories of Mind, eds. P. Carruthers & P. Smith, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. &nbsp;75–89.

* Johnson-Cartee, K. (2005), ''News narrative and news framing: Constructing political reality'', Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

*[[Diana Kendall]], ''Sociology In Our Times'', Thomson Wadsworth, 2005, ISBN 0-534-64629-8 [http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0534646298&id=kzU-gtx2VfoC&pg=PA531&lpg=PA531&dq=%22Resource+Mobilization%22&sig=NgTePMtdl2stO7V2FofPqeZuP5I&hl=en Google Print, p.531]

Riga 115 ⟶ 112:

* Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980), ''Metaphors We Live By'', Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

* Leites, N. & Wolf, C., Jr. (1970). ''Rebellion and authority''. Chicago: Markham Publishing Company.

* McAdam, D., McCarthy, J., & Zald, M. (1996). Introduction: Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Framing Processes—Toward a Synthetic, Comparative Perspective on Social Movements. In D. McAdam, J. McCarthy & M. Zald (Eds.), Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements; Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings (pp. &nbsp;1–20). New York: Cambridge University Press.

* Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M., & Clawson, R. A. (1997). ''Toward a psychology of framing effects''. Political Behavior, 19(3), 221–246.

* McCarthy, J. (1986), ''Applications of Circumscription to Formalizing Common Sense Knowledge'', Artificial Intelligence, vol. 26(3), pp. &nbsp;89–116.

* McCarthy, J. & Hayes, P.J. (1969), ''Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence'', in Machine Intelligence 4, ed. D.Michie and B.Meltzer, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. &nbsp;463–502.

* McDermott, D. (1987), ''We've Been Framed: Or Why AI Is Innocent of the Frame Problem'', in Pylyshyn (1987).

* Mithen, S. (1987), ''The Prehistory of the Mind'', London: Thames & Hudson.

* Pan. Z. & Kosicki, G. M. (2001). ''Framing as a strategic action in public deliberation''. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy, Jr., & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world, (pp. &nbsp;35–66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

* Pylyshyn, Z.W. (ed.) (1987), ''The Robot's Dilemma: The Frame Problem in Artificial Intelligence'', Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

* Romania, V. (2008). ''Le cornici dell'interazione'', Napoli: Liguori.

Riga 127 ⟶ 124:

*[[Scheufele]], Dietram A. 1999. Framing as a theory of media effects. ''Journal of Communication, 49''(1), 103–122.

* Shanahan, M.P. (1997), ''Solving the Frame Problem: A Mathematical Investigation of the Common Sense Law of Inertia'', Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

* Shanahan, M.P. (2003), ''The Frame Problem'', in The Macmillan Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science, ed. L.Nadel, Macmillan, pp. &nbsp;144–150.

* Simon, H. (1957), ''Models of Man'', New York: John Wiley.

* Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). ''Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization''. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197–217.

* Snow, D. A., Rochford, E. B., Worden, S. K., & Benford, R. D. (1986). ''Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation''. American Sociological Review, 51, 464–481.

* Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1996), ''Fodor's Frame Problem and Relevance Theory'', Behavioral and Brain Sciences, vol. 19(3), pp. &nbsp;530–532.

* [[Sidney Tarrow|Tarrow, S.]] (1983a). ''Struggling to Reform: social Movements and policy change during cycles of protest''. Western Societies Paper No. 15. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

* Tarrow, S. (1983b). ''Resource mobilization and cycles of protest: Theoretical reflections and comparative illustrations''. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, Detroit, August 31–September 4.

* Tilly, C., Tilly, L., & Tilly, R. (1975). ''The rebellious century, 1830–1930''. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

* Turner, R. H., & Killian, L. M. (1972). ''Collective Behavior''. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

* Wilkerson, W.S. (2001), ''Simulation, Theory, and the Frame Problem', Philosophical Psychology, vol. 14(2), pp. &nbsp;141–153.

* Willard, Charles Arthur ''Liberalism and the Social Grounds of Knowledge'' Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.

== Collegamenti esterni ==

*[{{cita web|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/magazine/17DEMOCRATS.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5070&en=e3e686efd4fa97c5&ex=1183608000 |titolo=The Framing Wars. ''New York Times'' 17 July 2005]}}

*Curry, Tom. 2005. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7640262/page/2/ "Frist chills talk of judges deal (Page 2)."] ''The question in the poll was not '''framed''' as a matter of whether nominee ought to get an up-or-down vote. And that '''framing''' of the issue, Republican strategists believe, is the most advantageous one...'' [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ MSNBC.com.]

* [http://www.ccbi.cmu.edu/reprints/Gonzalez_JOEP2005-decision-making.pdf CMU.edu (pdf)] - 'The Framing effect and risky decision: Examining cognitive functions with fMRI', C. Gonzalez, et al, ''[[Journal of Economic Psychology]]'' (2005)