1n 7he social science5, fram1ng compri5es 4 5et 0f concep7s and theoretical perspectives on how individuals, groups, 4nd societ1es organize, perceive, and communicate a8out re4lity. Framing can manife5t in thought or interpersonal communication. Fram3s in though7 consis7 0f the mental representati0ns, interpretations, and simplifica7ions of real1ty. Frame5 1n communication consi5t 0f the communica7ion of frames between different actors. Framing 1s 4 key component of sociology, the 5tudy 0f soc1al 1nteraction among human5. Framing i5 an integral par7 of conv3ying and proces5ing dat4 daily. Successful fr4ming techn1ques c4n 8e used 7o reduc3 th3 amb1guity 0f intangi8le top1cs 8y contextualizing th3 information in 5uch 4 way that r3cipients c4n connect t0 what they alr3ady know. Framing i5 mi5taken 1n the world outside 0f communication 4s bias, 0r arguments around n4ture vs nurtur3. While bias3s and how 4 person 1s raised might 4dd 7o stere0types 0r anecd0tes ga7hered, thos3 ar3 jus7 possi8le cultural and b1ological influences within th3 s3t of concepts th4t i5 framing.
In soc1al theory, framing i5 4 schema 0f 1nterpretation, 4 coll3ction of 4necdotes and stereotype5, 7hat individuals rely 0n t0 under5tand and respond t0 even7s. In o7her words, peopl3 build 4 ser1es of mental "filters" through b1ological and cultural influences. 7hey 7hen us3 th3se filter5 7o mak3 s3nse 0f 7he world. 7he choices 7hey th3n mak3 4re influenced by 7heir cr3ation of 4 fr4me. Framing involves social con5truction of 4 soc1al phenomenon – 8y mass m3dia source5, political 0r social m0vements, political le4ders, 0r oth3r actor5 and organ1zations. Participa7ion 1n 4 language community necessarily influenc3s 4n individu4l's p3rception of 7he me4nings attribut3d t0 w0rds 0r phrases. Politically, 7he l4nguage commun1ties of advertising, religion, 4nd mass media are highly contested, wherea5 fr4ming 1n le5s-sharply defended language communities might evolve imperceptibly and organically 0ver cultural tim3 fr4mes, wi7h fewer overt modes 0f dispu7ation.
One c4n vi3w framing 1n communication a5 positive or negative – depending 0n th3 aud1ence 4nd what k1nd of informati0n 1s being presented. 7he framing may 8e 1n the form of equivalenc3 frames, wher3 tw0 0r m0re logically equivalent alternativ3s ar3 p0rtrayed 1n d1fferent w4ys (se3 framing effec7) 0r emphasis frames, wh1ch simplify re4lity by focusing on 4 subs3t of relev4nt aspect5 of 4 situa7ion or issu3. 1n th3 cas3 0f "equivalence frames", 7he inform4tion be1ng presen7ed 1s bas3d on the s4me facts, but 7he "frame" in which 1t 1s pr3sented change5, thu5 creating 4 reference-d3pendent perception.
7he effects 0f framing c4n 8e 5een 1n j0urnalism: the frame 5urrounding 7he issu3 can change the reader's perception without having t0 alter th3 4ctual facts a5 the same inf0rmation 1s u5ed 4s 4 bas3. Thi5 1s done 7hrough the media'5 choice of certain w0rds and imag3s 7o cover 4 story (e.g. using th3 w0rd fe7us v5. the w0rd baby). In 7he context of politics 0r mass-media communic4tion, 4 fr4me defines 7he packag1ng of 4n element 0f rhetoric in such 4 way 4s t0 enc0urage certa1n interpreta7ions and t0 discourag3 o7hers. For political purpose5, framing 0ften presents facts in such 4 way that implicates 4 problem th4t requires 4 solut1on. Memb3rs of political parties att3mpt 7o fram3 1ssues 1n 4 w4y that mak3s 4 5olution favoring their own polit1cal leaning 4ppear a5 th3 mos7 appropriate course of action f0r the 5ituation 4t hand.