Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Selective perceptions of hydraulic fracturing: The role of issue support in the evaluation of visual frames

  • Melanie A. Sarge (a1), Matthew S. VanDyke (a2), Andy J. King (a3) and Shawna R. White (a4)

Hydraulic fracturing (HF) is a focal topic in discussions about domestic energy production, yet the American public is largely unfamiliar and undecided about the practice. This study sheds light on how individuals may come to understand hydraulic fracturing as this unconventional production technology becomes more prominent in the United States. For the study, a thorough search of HF photographs was performed, and a systematic evaluation of 40 images using an online experimental design involving $N=250$ participants was conducted. Key indicators of hydraulic fracturing support and beliefs were identified. Participants showed diversity in their support for the practice, with 47 percent expressing low support, 22 percent high support, and 31 percent undecided. Support for HF was positively associated with beliefs that hydraulic fracturing is primarily an economic issue and negatively associated with beliefs that it is an environmental issue. Level of support was also investigated as a perceptual filter that facilitates biased issue perceptions and affective evaluations of economic benefit and environmental cost frames presented in visual content of hydraulic fracturing. Results suggested an interactive relationship between visual framing and level of support, pointing to a substantial barrier to common understanding about the issue that strategic communicators should consider.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Selective perceptions of hydraulic fracturing
      Available formats
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Selective perceptions of hydraulic fracturing
      Available formats
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Selective perceptions of hydraulic fracturing
      Available formats
Corresponding author
Correspondence: Melanie A. Sarge, College of Media and Communication, Texas Tech University, 3003 15th Street, Lubbock, TX 79409-3082. Email:
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Hilary Boudet , Christopher Clarke , Dylan Budgen , Edward Maibach , Connie Roser-Renouf , and Anthony Leiserowitz , “Fracking controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing,” Energy Policy, 2014, 65: 5767.

Jeffrey B. Jacquet , “Landowner attitudes toward natural gas and wind farm development in northern Pennsylvania,” Energy Policy, 2012, 50: 677688.

Jill Kriesky , Bernard D. Goldstein , Katrina Zell , and Scott Beach , “Differing opinions about natural gas drilling in two adjacent counties with different levels of drilling activity,” Energy Policy, 2013, 58: 228236.

Charles Davis  and Jonathan M. Fisk , “Energy abundance or environmental worries? Analyzing public support for fracking in the United States,” Review of Policy Research, 2014, 31(1): 116.

Shirley S. Ho , Dietram A. Scheufele , and Elizabeth A. Corley , “Factors influencing public risk-benefit considerations of nanotechnology: Assessing the effects of mass media, interpersonal communication, and elaborative processing,” Public Understanding of Science, 2011, 22(5): 606623.

Anthony Leiserowitz , “Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: The role of affect, imagery, and values,” Climatic Change, 2006, 77: 4572.

Robert M. Entman , “Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm,” Journal of Communication, 1993, 43(4): 5158.

Matthew C. Nisbet , “Communicating climate change: Why frames matter for public engagement,” Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 2009, 51(2): 1223.

Matthew C. Nisbet  and Dietram A. Scheufele , “What’s next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions,” American Journal of Botany, 2009, 96(10): 17671778.

P. Sol Hart  and Erik C. Nisbet , “Boomerang effects in science communication: How motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies,” Communication Research, 2012, 39(6): 701723.

Traci Mann , David Sherman , and John Updegraff , “Dispositional motivations and message framing: A test of the congruency hypothesis in college students,” Health Psychology, 2004, 23(3): 330334.

Jeffrey B. Jacquet , “Review of risks to communities from shale energy development,” Environmental Science & Technology, 2014, 48(15): 83218333.

Gene L. Theodori , “Public perception of the natural gas industry: Data from the Barnett Shale,” Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 2012, 7(3): 275281.

Mitchell J. Small , Paul C. Stern , and Elizabeth Bomberg , “Risks and risk governance in unconventional shale gas development,” Environmental Science & Technology, 2014, 48(15): 82898297.

Darrick T. Evensen , Christopher E. Clarke , and Richard C. Stedman , “A New York or Pennsylvania state of mind: Social representations in newspaper coverage of gas development in the Marcellus Shale,” Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 2014, 4(1): 6577.

Philip S. Hart , “One or many? The influence of episodic and thematic climate change frames on policy preferences and individual behavior change,” Science Communication, 2011, 33(1): 2851.

Maria Elizabeth Grabe  and Erik Page Bucy , Image Bite Politics: News and the Visual Framing of Elections (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009).

Markus Prior , “Visual political knowledge: A different road to competence?Journal of Politics, 2014, 76(1): 4157.

Andreas R. T. Schuck  and Claes H. de Vreese , “Between risk and opportunity: News framing and its effects on public support for EU enlargement,” European Journal of Communication, 2006, 21(1): 532.

Daniel Kahneman  and Amos Tversky , “Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk,” Econometrica, 1979, 47(2): 263292.

Xiaoli Nan , “Relative persuasiveness of gain- versus loss-framed human papillomavirus vaccination messages for the present- and future-minded,” Human Communication Research, 2012, 38(1): 7294.

Christopher L. Newman , Elizabeth Howlett , Scot Burton , John C. Kozup , and Andrea H. Tangari , “The influence of consumer concern about global climate change on framing effects for environmental sustainability messages,” International Journal of Advertising, 2012, 31(3): 511527.

Nan Yu , Lee A. Ahern , Colleen Connolly-Ahern , and Fuyuan Shen , “Communicating the risks of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder: Effects of message framing and exemplification,” Health Communication, 2010, 25(8): 692699.

Susanna Hornig , “Reading risk: Public response to print media accounts of technological risk,” Public Understanding of Science, 1993, 2(2): 95109.

Leonie A. Marks , Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes , Lee Wilkins , and Ludmila Zakharova , “Mass media framing of biotechnology news,” Public Understanding of Science, 2007, 16(2): 183203.

Fuyuan Shen , Lee Ahern , and Michelle Baker , “Stories that count: Influence of news narratives on issue attitudes,” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 2014, 91(1): 98117.

Maxwell E. McCombs  and Donald L. Shaw , “The agenda-setting function of mass media,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 1972, 36(2): 176187.

Anthony A. Leiserowitz , “American risk perceptions: Is climate change dangerous?,” Risk Analysis, 2005, 25(6): 14331442.

Hyo J. Kim  and Glen T. Cameron , “Emotions matter in crisis: The role of anger and sadness in the publics’ response to crisis news framing and corporate crisis response,” Communication Research, 2011, 38(6): 826855.

Rinaldo Kühne  and Christian Schemer , “The emotional effects of news frames on information processing and opinion formation,” Communication Research, 2015, 4(3)2: 387–407.

Carmen Keller , Michael Siegrist , and Heinz Gutscher , “The role of the affect and availability heuristics in risk communication,” Risk Analysis, 2006, 26(3): 631639.

Chul-Joo Lee , Dietram A. Scheufele , and Bruce V. Lewenstein , “Public attitudes toward emerging technologies: Examining the interactive effects of cognitions and affect on public attitudes toward nanotechnology,” Science Communication, 2005, 27(2): 240267.

Dolf Zillmann , Rhonda Gibson , and Stephanie L. Sargent , “Effects of photographs in news-magazine reports on issue perception,” Media Psychology, 1999, 1(3): 207228.

Alexander J. Rothman , Steven C. Martino , Brian T. Bedell , Jerusha B. Detweiler , and Peter Salovey , “The systematic influence of gain- and loss-framed messages on interest in and use of different types of health behavior,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1999, 25(11): 13551369.

Lijiang Shen  and James P. Dillard , “The influence of behavioral inhibition/approach systems and message framing on the processing of persuasive health messages,” Communication Research, 2007, 34(4): 433467.

Dolf Zillmann , “Exemplification effects in the promotion of safety and health,” Journal of Communication, 2006, 56(S1): S221S237.

Kiwon Seo , James P. Dillard , and Fuyuan Shen , “The effects of message framing and visual image on persuasion,” Communication Quarterly, 2013, 61(5): 564583.

Dietram A. Scheufele , “Framing as a theory of media effects,” Journal of Communication, 1999, 49(1): 103122.

Emily Balcetis  and David Dunning , “See what you want to see: Motivational influences on visual perception,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006, 91(4): 612625.

Neil Vidmar  and Milton Rokeach , “Archie Bunker’s bigotry: A study in selective perception and exposure,” Journal of Communication, 1974, 24(1): 3647.

Lene Aarøe , “Investigating frame strength: The case of episodic and thematic frames,” Political Communication, 2011, 28(2): 207226.

Porismita Borah , “Seeking more information and conversations: Influence of competitive frames and motivated processing,” Communication Research, 2011, 38(3): 303325.

Lijiang Shen  and James P. Dillard , “Message frames interact with motivational systems to determine depth of message processing,” Health Communication, 2009, 24(6): 504514.

Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick  and Jingbo Meng , “Looking the other way: Selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counterattitudinal political information,” Communication Research, 2009, 36(3): 426448.

Natalie J. Stroud , “Polarization and partisan selective exposure,” Journal of Communication, 2010, 60(3): 556576.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Politics and the Life Sciences
  • ISSN: 0730-9384
  • EISSN: 1471-5457
  • URL: /core/journals/politics-and-the-life-sciences
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 8
Total number of PDF views: 36 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 222 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 20th July 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.