媒体报道内容如何影响腐败感知?——基于调查实验的实证发现How Does Media Coverage Shape Perceptions of Corruption?:Empirical Findings Based on a Survey Experiment
李论,过勇
摘要(Abstract)：
党的十八大以来，中国开展了力度空前的反腐败斗争并取得了瞩目的反腐败工作成效，然而，公众的腐败感知却变化缓慢。如何理解公众腐败感知的这种迟缓变化?本文以框架理论为分析工具，从外在信息视角切入，基于媒体报道内容做出了新的理论解释，并通过调查实验完成了实证检验。研究发现：第一，“展现腐败案件查处情况”的强调性框架会显著提升受众的腐败感知；第二，相较于腐败案件查处框架，同时涵盖“坦陈腐败严峻形势”“表达反腐败决心”“展现腐败案件查处情况”的综合内容框架会降低受众的腐败感知；第三，受众的意识形态倾向对腐败感知的框架效应具有调节作用。上述研究发现在理论上对腐败感知的生成机理做出了补充，在实践上为反腐败宣传工作的策略选择提供了启示。
关键词(KeyWords)： 腐败感知;框架效应;媒体报道内容;腐败案件查处;调查实验
基金项目(Foundation): 国家社会科学基金重大项目“党的自我革命引领社会革命的理论建构与实证研究”(项目批准号:23ZDA129)资助
作者(Author): 李论,过勇
参考文献(References)：
- 李辉，孟天广.2017.腐败经历与腐败感知：基于调查实验与直接提问的双重检验[J].社会，37(6):194-215.Li H,Meng T G.2017.Corruption experience and corruption perceptions:Comparing evidence from list experiment and direct questioning[J].Chinese Journal of Sociology,37(6):194-215.(in Chinese)
- 马得勇.2016.政治传播中的框架效应——国外研究现状及其对中国的启示[J].政治学研究，(4):57-69,126-127.Ma D Y.2016.Framing effects in political communication:A review of international research and its implications for China[J].CASS Journal of Political Science,(4):57-69,126-127.(in Chinese)
- 马得勇，兰晓航.2016.精英框架对大学生有影响吗——以实验为基础的实证分析[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),31(3):160-171,194-195.Ma D Y,Lan X H.2016.Does elite framing influence Chinese college students?—Empirical studies with a framing experiment[J].Journal of Tsinghua University (Philosophy and Social Sciences),31(3):160-171 194-195.(in Chinese)
- 孟天广.2017.从因果效应到因果机制：实验政治学的中国路径[J].探索，(5):30-38.Meng T G.2017.From causal effects to causal mechanisms:The Chinese path of experimental political science[J].Probe,(5):30-38.(in Chinese)
- 倪星，孙宗锋.2015.政府反腐败力度与公众清廉感知：差异及解释——基于G省的实证分析[J].政治学研究，(1):71-85.Ni X,Sun Z F.2015.Government anti-corruption efforts and integrity perception:Differences and explanations—An empirical analysis based on the G province[J].CASS Journal of Political Science,(1):71-85.(in Chinese)
- 倪星，李珠.2016.政府清廉感知：差序格局及其解释——基于2015年度全国廉情调查的数据分析[J].公共行政评论，9(3):4-20,185.Ni X,Li Z.2016.Government integrity perception:Hierarchical variation and explanation:Based on 2015 annual national survey on government integrity[J].Journal of Public Administration,9(3):4-20,185.(in Chinese)
- 孙宗锋，杨丽天晴.2016.“打老虎”如何影响公众腐败感知差异?——基于广东省的准实验研究[J].公共行政评论，9(3):89-107,188.Sun Z F,Yang L T Q.2016.How do anti-corruption efforts affect public perception of corruption?—Evidence from Guangdong province in China[J].Journal of Public Administration,9(3):89-107,188.(in Chinese)
- 肖培.(2021-06-28)[2023-05-24].庆祝中国共产党成立100周年活动新闻中心新闻发布会图文实录[EB/OL].国新网，http://www.scio.gov.cn/xwfb/gwyxwbgsxwfbh/wqfbh_2284/2021n_2711/2021n06y28rsw1/.
- 徐法寅.2022.民众“心中”和“眼中”的腐败——框架阐释理论视角下民众腐败感知的结构方程模型分析[J].政治学研究，(3):49-60,161.Xu F Y.2022.Public corruption cognition and corruption perception:An SEM analysis from formative framing theory[J].CASS Journal of Political Science,(3):49-60,161.(in Chinese)
- 袁柏顺.2016.公众腐败感知与腐败的民间传说——基于C市城区公众腐败感知调查的一项研究[J].公共行政评论，9(3):56-69,187.Yuan B S.2016.Public perception of corruption & folklore of corruption:A study based on a survey on the public perception of urban residents in C city[J].Journal of Public Administration,9(3):56-69,187.(in Chinese)
- 朱琳，宫伏佳.2015.腐败主客观测量结果差异性研究[J].经济社会体制比较，(5):66-80.Zhu L,Gong F J.2015.On the difference between objective and subjective measurements on corruption[J].Comparative Economic & Social Systems,(5):66-80.(in Chinese)
- Amsalem E,Zoizner A.2022.Real,but limited:A meta-analytic assessment of framing effects in the political domain[J].British Journal of Political Science,52(1):221-237.
- Borah P.2011.Conceptual issues in framing theory:A systematic examination of a decade's literature[J].Journal of Communication,61(2):246-263.
- Cacciatore M A,Scheufele D A,Iyengar S.2016.The end of framing as we know it … and the future of media effects[J].Mass Communication and Society,19(1):7-23.
- Chong D,Druckman J N.2007.Framing theory[J].Annual Review of Political Science,10:103-126.
- Druckman J N.2001.The implications of framing effects for citizen competence[J].Political Behavior,23(3):225-256.
- Druckman J N.2004.Political preference formation:Competition,deliberation,and the (Ir)relevance of framing effects[J].American Political Science Review,98(4):671-686.
- Entman R M.1993.Framing:Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm[J].Journal of Communication,43(4):51-58.
- Gross K,D'Ambrosio L.2004.Framing emotional response[J].Political Psychology,25(1):1-29.
- Jilke S,Van Ryzin G G.2017.Survey experiments for public management research:From part II-methods[M]//James O,Jilke S R,Van Ryzin G G.Experiments in Public Management Research:Challenges and Contributions.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,117-138.
- Scheufele D A.1999.Framing as a theory of media effects[J].Journal of Communication,49(1):103-122.
- Schopf J C.2011.Following the money to determine the effects of democracy on corruption:The case of Korea[J].Journal of East Asian Studies,11(1):1-39.
- Yu C,Chen C M,Lin M W.2013.Corruption perception in Taiwan:Reflections upon a bottom-up citizen perspective[J].Journal of Contemporary China,22(79):56-76.
- Zaller J.1991.Information,values,and opinion[J].American Political Science Review,85(4):1215-1237.
- Zhu J N,Lu J,Shi T J.2013.When grapevine news meets mass media:Different information sources and popular perceptions of government corruption in China's mainland[J].Comparative Political Studies,46(8):920-946.
- (1)摘编材料并不完全等同于官媒报道内容,但考虑到反腐败工作的政治敏感性,有关腐败议题的官媒报道的信息来源较为单一且高度依赖官方通报,因此大部分官媒的有关报道都广泛引用了以纪委工作通报为代表的官方表述,这使得纪委发布的工作报告与官媒报道在内容、文风和用语方面存在高度的一致性。
- (2)关于材料1～4的具体内容,参见附录。