Analyzing Framing Processes by Means of Logical Argument Mapping

Abstract

The primary goal of this paper is to present a new method-called Logical Argument Mapping (LAM)-for the analysis of framing processes. To justify this approach, I start with a distinction between boundary setting, sense making, and meaning construction as three forms or aspects of framing, and argue for the thesis that crucial for the resolution of frame-based controversies is our ability to deal with entire "webs" of mutually supporting beliefs. LAM allows us to visualize the inferential structure of those webs of belief in a holistic manner. The method is introduced by means of an exemplary analysis of two conflicting interpretations of how the international community should deal with Hamas after its election victory in 2006.