Divergent theoretical approaches to the construct of framing have resulted in conceptual confusion in conflict research. We disentangle these approaches by analyzing their assumptions about 1) the nature of frames — that is, cognitive representations or interactional co-constructions, and 2) what is getting framed — that is, issues, identities and relationships, or interaction process. Using a meta-paradigmatic perspective, we delineate the ontological, theoretical and methodological assumptions among six approaches to framing to reduce conceptual confusion and identify research opportunities within and across these approaches.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 470 citations exist upstream.