5 research outputs found

    How combining framing strategies affects human rights micromobilization

    No full text
    Human rights organizations (HROs) frame advocacy campaigns in order to shape individuals’ values and mobilize them to act. While previous work has examined some commonly used HRO frames, we know little about how they work as most often utilized—in combination. In this experiment, participants were randomly assigned either to a control group or to treatment groups shown campaigns against sleep deprivation during interrogation featuring frames used alone or in combination. We find that effects of personal frames on action mobilization are not mitigated by the inclusion of other frames, and that human rights campaigns with multiple frames yield outcomes that are neither better nor worse than a single personal narrative of human suffering. HROs should be able to use multiple frames in combination as needed without concern

    Replication Data for: "How Combining Framing Strategies Affects Human Rights Micromobilization"

    No full text
    Human Right Organizations [HROs] frame advocacy campaigns in order to shape individuals’ values and mobilize them to act. While previous work has examined some commonly used HRO frames, we know little about how they work as most often utilized – in combination. In this experiment, participants were randomly assigned to a control group, or to treatment groups shown campaigns against sleep deprivation during interrogation featuring frames used alone or in combination. We find that effects of personal frames on action mobilization are not mitigated by the inclusion of other frames, and that human rights campaigns with multiple frames yield outcomes that are neither better nor worse than a single personal narrative of human suffering. HROs should be able to use multiple frames in combination as needed without concern. This research was performed under College of Wooster Human Subjects Research Committee Approval HSRC 2014/04/002

    Human Rights Organizations as Agents of Change: An Experimental Examination of Framing and Micromobilization Human Rights Organizations as Agents of Change: An Experimental Examination of Framing and Micromobilization

    No full text
    ABSTRACT: Human Right Organizations [HROs] attempt to shape individuals' values and mobilize them to act. Yet little systematic research has been done evaluating the efficacy of these efforts. We identified the three most common messaging techniques: (1) informational frames; (2) personal frames; and (3) motivational frames. We tested their efficacy using an experimental research design in which participants were randomly assigned to the control group (shown no campaign materials) or one of the treatment groups shown a campaign against sleep deprivation featuring one of these framing strategies. We then surveyed participants regarding their attitudes and their willingness to act. Results demonstrate that all three framing strategies are more effective at mobilizing consensus than action. Personal narratives are the most consistently successful, increasing individuals' sense of knowledge on the issue and their emotional reaction to the issue, leading them to reject the practice and participate in a campaign to demand its cessation

    Human Rights Organizations as Agents of Change: An Experimental Examination of Framing and Micromobilization

    No full text
    Human Right Organizations (HROs) attempt to shape individuals’ values and mobilize them to act. Yet little systematic research has been done to evaluate the efficacy of these efforts. We identified the three most common messaging techniques: (1) informational frames; (2) personal frames; and (3) motivational frames. We tested their efficacy using an experimental research design in which participants were randomly assigned to the control group (shown no campaign materials) or one of the treatment groups shown a campaign against sleep deprivation featuring one of these framing strategies. We then surveyed participants regarding their attitudes and their willingness to act. Results demonstrate that all three framing strategies are more effective at mobilizing consensus than action. Personal narratives are the most consistently successful, increasing individuals’ sense of knowledge on the issue and their emotional reaction to the issue, leading them to reject the practice and participate in a campaign to demand its cessation
    corecore