Journal archive

The Korean Society for Journalism & Communication Studies - Vol. 63 , No. 3
[Paper List] [Go to Volume List]

[ Journalism Communication ]
Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies - Vol. 63, No. 3, pp. 33-68
Abbreviation: KSJCS
ISSN: 2586-7369 (Online)
Print publication date 30 Jun 2019
Received 07 Feb 2019 Revised 27 May 2019 Accepted 31 May 2019
https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2019.63.3.002

태풍 재난 보도 프레임과 구체적 감정의 차별적 영향 : 유발된 슬픔과 분노의 매개효과 중심
임인재** ; 나은영***
**서강대학교 신문방송학과 박사과정 (mimohhh@naver.com)
***서강대학교 지식융합미디어학부 교수, 교신저자 (ena@sogang.ac.kr)

The typhoon disaster reporting frame and differential influence of discrete emotions : A focus on the mediating effect of induced sadness and anger
In Jae Lim** ; Eun-Yeong Na***
**Ph.D. student, Department of Mass Communications, Sogang University (mimohhh@naver.com)
***Professor, School of Media, Arts, and Science, Sogang University (ena@sogang.ac.kr)
초록

본 연구는 태풍 재난 보도 프레임(일화중심 vs 사실중심)에 따라 구체적인 부정적 감정(공포/걱정/슬픔/분노)과 위험인식이 차별적으로 나타나는지 살펴보았다. 그리고 보도 프레임이 행동의도(예방/회피)에 영향을 미치는 과정에서 부정적 감정이 매개효과를 보이는지, 이와 더불어 위험 관련 행동에 대한 프레임의 영향력을 위험인식이 매개하는지도 살펴보았다. 그리고 문화적 세계관(위계주의자/개인주의자/평등주의자/운명주의자)이 부정적 감정과 위험인식의 매개효과를 조절하는지 알아보았다. 실험참여자(N=320)를 두 집단으로 나눈 후 각각 일화중심 재난 보도프레임과 사실중심 재난 보도프레임을 보게 한 후 설문에 응답하게 했다. 분석결과, 사실중심 프레임 집단보다 일화중심 프레임 집단에서 슬픔, 분노, 위험인식의 발생이 유의미하게 높았다. 보도 프레임은 슬픔을 매개로 예방행동의도에 간접적으로 긍정적인 영향을 미쳤으며, 분노를 매개로 회피행동의도에 간접적으로 긍정적인 영향을 미쳤다. 그리고 위험인식을 매개로 예방행동의도에 간접적인 영향을 미쳤다. 네 개의 문화적 세계관 중 개인주의자가 슬픔의 매개효과를 조절하였다. 본 연구는 프레임이 위험 관련 행동에 영향을 미치는 과정에서 슬픔, 분노 등 구체적 감정의 차별적 영향력을 검증했으며, 이를 통해 재난 뉴스의 프레이밍 효과를 사람들의 인지적 차원뿐만 아니라 감정적 반응으로 확대했다는 점에서 의미를 지닌다. 이와 더불어 문화적 세계관이 재난 뉴스 프레이밍 효과 과정에서 조절변수로써 역할을 한다는 것을 검증했다는 점에서 의미가 있다.

Abstract

The study investigates the different impacts of the typhoon disaster report frame (episodic focus vs fact focus) on discrete negative emotions(fear/worry/sadness/anger) and risk perception. Also the mediating effects of negative emotions and risk perception were examined in the process of revealing the relationship between the types of typhoon disaster reporting and behavioral intentions, and whether the mediating effects of negative emotions and risk perception are controlled by cultural worldviews (hierarchist/individualist/egalitarian/fatalist). Participants in the experiment (N=320) were divided into two groups. As a results, the occurrence of sadness, anger, and risk perception in the episodic frame group was significantly higher than that of the fact frame group. The reporting frame had a positive effect indirectly on the preventive behavioral intention through the sadness, and had a positive influence indirectly on the avoidance behavioral intention through anger. In addition, the reporting frame indirectly influenced the precautionary intention through risk perception. Individualist in the four cultural worldviews moderated the mediating effect of sadness. This study examined the differential effects of discrete emotions, such as sadness and anger, in the process of framing affecting risk behavioral intentions. This means that the framing effect of disaster news is extended to the emotional response as well as the cognitive dimension of the people. In addition, it is meaningful to prove that the cultural worldview acts as a moderating variable in the process of the framing effect of disaster news.

Keywordsframing effect, emotional response, sadness, anger, risk perception
키워드: 프레이밍 효과, 감정적 반응, 슬픔, 분노, 위험인식
Acknowledgments

더 좋은 논문이 될 수 있도록 조언을 해주신 익명의 심사위원님들에게 감사의 말씀을 전합니다.

References
1. 구동모 (2013). <기초, 조절·매개효과 분석을 위한 연구방법론>, 파주: 학현사.
2. 강보영·권상희 (2018). 암 관련 뉴스 프레임이 인지적·정서적 태도와 예방행동의도에 미치는 영향 연구. <한국방송학보>, 32권 6호, 5-59.
3. 김영욱 (2008). <위험, 위기 그리고 커뮤니케이션: 현대 사회의 위험, 위기, 갈등에 대한 해석과 대응>, 서울: 이화여자대학교출판부.
4. 김종화·유홍식 (2012). 건강보도에서 획득ㆍ손실 프레임과 예시가 이슈의 지각과 예방행위 의도에 미치는 영향. <한국언론학보>, 56권 1호, 5-30.
5. 나은경·송현주·김현석·이준웅 (2008). 정서의 프레이밍: 경제 뉴스 보도 기사의 정서 반응 유발 효과. <한국언론학보>, 52권 2호, 378-404.
6. 나은영 (1998). 강한 태도의 편파적 처리과정을 포괄하는 새로운 패러다임의 모색: 이중처리과정 이론의 확장. <한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격>, 12권 1호, 37-70.
7. 백혜진 (2018). 뉴미디어 유형이 위험특성, 위험인식, 예방행동 의도의 관계에 미치는 영향. <한국언론학보>, 62권 1호, 215-245.
8. 유선욱·박계현·나은영 (2010). 신종플루 메시지에 대한 심리적 반발과 공포감이 예방행동의도에 미치는 영향. <한국언론학보>, 54권 3호, 27-53.
9. 이건혁 (2002). 미디어 프레임이 부정 감정, 정치 냉소, 그리고 정치 효능성에 미치는 영향. <한국언론학보>, 46권 3호, 252-288.
10. 이경미·최낙진 (2008). 태풍 ‘나리’ 관련 제주지역의 재난방송보도 연구. <언론정보연구>, 45권 1호, 97-129.
11. 이민영 (2017). 예시 사진과 집단주의 성향이 다문화 수용에 미치는 영향. <한국언론학보>, 61권 6호, 177-200.
12. 이민영·이재신 (2009). 위험인식의 낙관적 편견에 대한 프레임과 관여도의 역할. <한국언론정보학보>, 48호, 191-210.
13. 이영애·이나경 (2005). 위험지각의 심리적 차원. <인지과학>, 16권 3호, 199-211.
14. 이재신 (2014). 이성과 감정: 인간의 판단과정에 대한 뇌과학과 생물학적 접근. <커뮤니케이션 이론>, 10권 3호, 161-194.
15. 정선호·서동기 (2016). 회귀분석을 이용한 매개된 조절효과와 조절된 매개효과 검증 방법. <한국심리학회지: 일반>, 35권 1호, 257-282.
16. 조항민 (2013). 국내 언론의 재해보도에 관한 연구: 태풍·폭우·폭염에 대한 주요 일간신문 분석을 중심으로. <한국위기관리논집>, 9권 6호, 21-44.
17. Aarøe, L. (2011). Investigating frame strength: The case of episodic and thematic frame. Political communication, 28, 207-226.
18. Aust, C. F., & Zillmann. D. (1996). Effects of victim exemplification in television news on viewer perception of social issues. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73(4), 787-803.
19. Balzarotti,. S. & Ciceri,. M. R. (2014). News reports of catastrophes and viewers' fear: Threat appraisal of positively versus negatively framed events. Media Psychology, 17(4), 357-377.
20. Bodenhausen, G. V., Sheppard, L. A., & Kramer, G. P. (1994). Negative affect and social judgement: The differential impact of anger and sadness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 45-62.
21. BÖhm, G., & Pfister, H. (2000). Action tendencies and characteristics of environmental risks. Acta Psychologica, 104, 317-337.
22. Borah, P. (2009). Comparing visual framing in newspapers: Hurricane Katrina versus Tsunami. Newspaper Research Journal, 30(1), 50-57.
23. Dake, K. (1991). Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: An analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 22, 61-82.
24. Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: Avon.
25. DeSteno, D., Petty, R. E., Rucker, D. D., Wegener, D. T., & Braverman, J. (2004). Discrete emotion and persuasion: the role of emotion-induced expectancies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 43-56.
26. Dillard, J. P., & Peck, E. (2001). Affect and persuasion: Emotional responses to public service announcements, Communication Research, 27(4), 461-495.
27. Douglas, M., & Wildavsky, A. (1982). Risk and Culture. University of California Press, Berkeley.
28. Druckman, J. N. (2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23(3), 225–256.
29. Ekman, P., Levenson, R. W., & Friesen, W. V. (1983). Automatic nervous system activity distinguishes among emotion. Science, 221, 1208-1210.
30. Fabrigar, L. R., & Petty, R. E. (1999). The role of affective and cognitive bases of attitudes in susceptibility to affectively and cognitively based persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 363-381.
31. Fisher, J. D., Bell, P. A., & Baum, A. (1984). Environmental psychology (2nd ed), New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
32. Fiske, S. T., & Pavelchk, M. A. (1986). Category-based versus piecemeal-based affective responses: Developments in schema-triggered affect. in R. M. Sorrention, E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior (pp. 167-203). New York: Guilford Press.
33. Gamson, W., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95, 1-37.
34. Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching. CA: University of California Press
35. Gross, K. (2008). Framing persuasive appeals: Episodic and thematic framing, emotional response, and policy opinion. Political Psychology, 29(2), 169–192.
36. Gross, K., & D’Ambrosio, L. (2004). Framing emotional response. Political Psychology, 25(1), 1-29.
37. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
38. Hebb, D. O. (1946). On the nature of fear. Psychological Review, 53, 259-276
39. Houston, J. B., Spialekm, M. L., & First, J. (2018). Disaster media effects: A systematic review and synthesis based on the differential susceptibility to media effects model. Journal of Communication, 68, 734-757.
40. Igartua, J. J., Moral-Toranzo, F., & Fernàndez, I. (2011). Cognitive, attitudinal, and emotional effects of news frame and group cues, on processing news about immigration. Journal of Media Psychology, 23, 174-185.
41. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
42. Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1994). Nuclear Imagery and Regional Stigma; Testing hypothesis of image acqusition and valuation regarding Nevada. University of New Mexico, Institute for Public Policy, Albuquerque, NM.
43. Keltner, D., & Gross, J. J. (1999). Functional accounts of emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 13(5), 467-480.
44. Kim. H. J., & Cameron, G. T. (2011). Emotions matter in crisis: The role of anger and sadness in the publics’ response to crisis news framing and corporate crisis response. Communication Research, 38(6), 826-855
45. Kinder, D. R., & Sanders, L. M. (1990). Mimicking political debate with survey questions: the case of white opinion on affirmative action for blacks. Social Cognition, 8, 73-103
46. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and Adaptation. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
47. Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2000). Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgement and choice. Cognition And Emotion, 14(4), 473-493.
48. Lecheler. S., Schuck, R. T., & de Vreese. C. H. (2013). Dealing with feelings: Positive and negative discrete emotions as mediators of news framing effects. The European Journal of Communication Research, 38(2), 189-209.
49. Mackie, D. M., & Worth, L. (1989). Processing deficits and the mediation of positive affect in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 27-40.
50. McDanials, T., Axelrod, L. J., & Slovic, P. (1995). Characterizing perception of ecological risk. Risk Analysis, 15, 575-609.
51. Patricola, C. M., & Wehner, M. F. (2018). Anthropogenic influences on major tropical cyclone events. Nature, 563, 339–346.
52. Peters, E., M., Burraston, B., & Mertz, C., K. (2004). An emotion-based model of risk perception and stigma susceptibility: Cognitive appraisal of emotion, affective reactivity, worldviews, and risk perceptions in the generation of technological stigma. Risk Analysis, 24(5), 1349-1366.
53. Peters, E., & Slovic, P. (1996). The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(16), 1427-1453.
54. Ryffel, F. A., Wirz, D. S., Kühne, R., & Wirth, W. (2014). How emotional media reports influence attitude formation and change: The interplay of attitude base, attitude certainty, and persuasion. Media Psychology, 17, 397-419.
55. Schwarz, N., & Bless, H. (1991). Happy and mindless, but sad and smart? The impact of affective states on analytic reasoning. In J. P. Forgas. (Ed.), Emotion and social judgements (Ch. 3, pp. 55-71). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
56. Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1996). Feelings and phenomenal experiences. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 433-465). New York: Guilford Press.
57. Smith, C. A., & Ellsworth, P. C. (1985). Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 813-838.
58. Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280-285.
59. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24(2), 311-322.
60. Snyder, L. B., & Rouse, R. A. (1995). The media can have more than an impersonal impact: The case of AIDS risk perceptions and behavior. Health Communication, 7(2), 125-145.
61. Tyler, T. R., & Cook, F. L. (1984). The mass media and judgments of risk: Distinguishing impact on personal and societal level judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(4), 693-708.
62. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
63. Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2013). The differential susceptibility to media effects model, Journal of Communication, 63, 221-243.
64. Wilder, D. A. (1993). The role of anxiety in facilitating stereotype judgement of outgroup behavior. In D. M. Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (Ch. 5, pp. 87-109). New York: academic Press.
65. Zajonc, R. B., Murphy, S. T., & McIntosh, D. N. (1993). Brain temperature and subjective emotional experience. In M. Lewis & J. M. Hviland (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (Ch. 15, pp. 209-220). New York: Guilford Press.
66. Zillmann, D. (1999). Exemplification theory: Judging the whole by some of its parts. Media Psychology, 1(1), 69-94.