How combining framing strategies affects human rights micromobilization

Abstract

Human rights organizations (HROs) frame advocacy campaigns in order to shape individuals’ values and mobilize them to act. While previous work has examined some commonly used HRO frames, we know little about how they work as most often utilized—in combination. In this experiment, participants were randomly assigned either to a control group or to treatment groups shown campaigns against sleep deprivation during interrogation featuring frames used alone or in combination. We find that effects of personal frames on action mobilization are not mitigated by the inclusion of other frames, and that human rights campaigns with multiple frames yield outcomes that are neither better nor worse than a single personal narrative of human suffering. HROs should be able to use multiple frames in combination as needed without concern.