In This Article Agenda Setting

  • Introduction
  • General Overviews
  • Foundational Works
  • Process Components
  • Information Sources and Issue Importance
  • Influence Models
  • News Media Types
  • Contingent Conditions
  • Consequences
  • Study Designs
  • Data Analysis
  • Data Archives
  • Related Concepts
  • Theoretical Growth

Communication Agenda Setting
by
Hans-Bernd Brosius, Alexander Haas
  • LAST MODIFIED: 23 February 2011
  • DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199756841-0021

Introduction

The original idea of the agenda-setting (AS) function of news media is both obvious and convincing. This may have contributed to the fact that AS is one of the most frequently investigated approaches in research on mass media effects. It is based on the assumption that most people, for most issues, have only one way to learn what goes on in the world: the news media. They set the agenda and thus have the ability to influence the perceived importance of issues. In other words, AS scholars assume that increased media coverage of an issue leads to increased public perception of the importance of that issue. News media do not tell people what to think, but rather what to think about. Therefore, it should be the responsibility of the mass media to tell people what problems have to be solved and what issues should be thought about. AS focuses on the cognitive effects of mass media and can be distinguished from research on persuasive effects. Despite the large number of empirical studies, some scholars still see agenda setting as a metaphor rather than a structured theory. Its theoretical foundations are criticized for being too simple and rooted in a stimulus-response context. Since the 1990s there have been attempts to link agenda setting to the concepts of framing and priming. Some scholars reacted to these ideas by introducing second-level AS. Such a conceptualization would extend the basic assumption of AS. That broadened concept addresses not only the question of whether news media tell their audience what to think about, but also whether they influence how people think about issues.

General Overviews

With a growing number of empirical studies, increasing attempts have been made to review the literature and systematize the field. One of the earliest sources is Rogers and Dearing 1988. This book chapter is cited especially for explaining agenda setting (AS) as a process of interaction among the media agenda, the public agenda, and the policy agenda. The textbook Dearing and Rogers 1996 is also based on this differentiation. Almost simultaneously, Kosicki 1993 and Brosius 1994 focus on methodological and theoretical shortcomings as well as future tasks. At the same time, the “founding fathers,” McCombs and Shaw take a look at the past twenty-five years (McCombs and Shaw 1993). They also point to the need for theoretical integration. It is again McCombs who provides an essential and profound overview of the field of research (McCombs 2004). Meanwhile, Maurer 2010 represents the first German textbook. Wanta and Ghanem 2007 is a meta-analysis of about ninety studies.

  • Brosius, Hans-Bernd. 1994. Agenda Setting nach einem Vierteljahrhundert Forschung: Methodischer und theoretischer Stillstand? Publizistik 39:269–288.

    E-mail Citation »

    This article, recommended for advanced students, summarizes the state of research at that time. It reveals general weak spots regarding theory and methodology. Brosius outlines a theory that connects agenda setting with news selection and media effects. No English translation published.

  • Dearing, James W., and Everett M. Rogers. 1996. Agenda-Setting. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    E-mail Citation »

    This essential textbook summarizes the field of research. It is organized along the three main components in the agenda-setting process: media agenda, public agenda (divided into cross-sectional and longitudinal studies), and policy agenda. The final chapter draws generalizations about the state of research and identifies questions to be addressed in the future.

  • Kosicki, Gerald M. 1993. Problems and opportunities in agenda-setting research. Journal of Communication 43:100–127.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01265.xE-mail Citation »

    This article also starts with a summary of the AS literature and elaborates characteristics of AS studies. The author criticizes the absence of a theoretical connection to a theory of news work as a key failing of public AS studies and reflects on the future of AS research.

  • Maurer, Marcus. 2010. Agenda Setting. Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos.

    E-mail Citation »

    This legible and short textbook is the first in German suitable for undergraduates. It outlines the development of AS research from the beginnings to the present and includes a chapter on priming and framing. Milestones in research as well as important scholars are highlighted.

  • McCombs, Maxwell E. 2004. Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

    E-mail Citation »

    This book is essential to everyone interested in acquiring an overview of the field of AS research. McCombs provides a comprehensive synopsis of hundreds of studies. Endnotes instead of a bibliography make it a little more difficult to take full advantage of this excellent book.

  • McCombs, Maxwell E., and Donald L. Shaw. 1993. The evolution of agenda-setting research: Twenty-five years in the marketplace of ideas. Journal of Communication 43:58–67.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01262.xE-mail Citation »

    This brief review outlines the historical growth of AS and names four distinct phases of research. In the opening phase scholars tried to replicate the findings of the “Chapel Hill” study. In the second phase more studies focused on contingent conditions that enhance or limit the effect. Afterwards new domains such as candidate characteristics were analyzed. Finally, the authors focus on the sources of the media agenda.

  • Rogers, Everett M., and James W. Dearing. 1988. Agenda-setting research: Where has it been, where is it going? In Communication yearbook 11. Edited by James A. Anderson, 555–594. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

    E-mail Citation »

    An extended version of this book chapter was later published as a textbook. The text is cited especially for explaining agenda setting as a process of interaction among the media agenda, the public agenda, and the policy agenda. It is suitable for graduate students to demonstrate what the field of work looked like “at halftime.”

  • Wanta, Wayne, and Salma Ghanem. 2007. Effects of agenda-setting. In Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis. Edited by Raymond W. Preiss, Barbara M. Gayle, Nancy Burrell, Mike Allen, and Jennings Bryant, 37–51. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    E-mail Citation »

    The authors conducted a meta-analysis of about ninety AS studies. The results show a broad impact of news media on the public agenda. The authors could not identify methodological factors that influence the strength of the effect, but longitudinal studies show larger correlations than cross-sectional studies.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login.

How to Subscribe

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here.

Purchase an Ebook Version of This Article

Ebooks of the Oxford Bibliographies Online subject articles are available in North America via a number of retailers including Amazon, vitalsource, and more. Simply search on their sites for Oxford Bibliographies Online Research Guides and your desired subject article.

If you would like to purchase an eBook article and live outside North America please email onlinemarketing@oup.com to express your interest.

Article

Up

Down