播音与主持外文翻译..docVIP

（翻译两篇外文资料。要求翻译与毕业论文相关的外文文献要求达到10000个字符左右（或翻译成中文后至少在2000汉字以上）；将译文附在原文之后，翻译的外文资料必须是近年公开发表的且与毕业论文研究内容相符） 1. Framing, Agenda Setting, and Priming: The Evolution of Three Media Effects Models Dietram A. Scheufele David Tewksbury This special issue of Journal of Communication is devoted to theoretical explanations of news framing, agenda setting, and priming effects. It examines if and how the three models are related and what potential relationships between them tell theorists and researchers about the effects of mass media. As an introduction to this effort, this essay provides a very brief review of the three effects and their roots in media-effects research.Based on this overview, we highlight a few key dimensions along which one can compare,framing, agenda setting, and priming. We conclude with a description of the contexts within which the three models operate, and the broader implications that these conceptual distinctions have for the growth of our discipline. Parsimony versus precision: framing, agenda setting, and priming The three models we focus on in this issue—framing, agenda setting, and priming—have received significant scholarly attention since they were introduced. Agenda setting refers to the idea that there is a strong correlation between the emphasis that mass media place on certain issues (e.g., based on relative placement or amount of coverage) and the importance attributed to these issues by mass audiences (McCombs Shaw, 1972). As defined in the political communication literature, Priming refers to‘changes in the standards that people use to make political evaluations’(Iyengar Kinder, 1987, p. 63). Priming occurs when news content suggests to news audiences that they ought to use specific issues as benchmarks for evaluating the performance of leaders and governments. It is often understood as an extension of agenda setting. There are two reasons for this: (a) Both effects