So sánh phương pháp

	Network Agenda-Setting	Phân tích Thiết lập Chương trình Nghị sự
Lĩnh vực	Communication	Nghiên cứu truyền thông
Họ	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Năm ra đời	2011	1972
Người khởi xướng	Lei Guo & Maxwell McCombs	Maxwell McCombs, Donald Shaw
Loại	Network-analytic extension of agenda-setting theory	Empirical method for studying how media coverage affects issue salience and public concern
Công trình gốc	Guo, L. (2012). The application of social network analysis in agenda-setting research: A methodological exploration. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 616–631.	McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176-187.
Tên gọi khác	Network agenda setting model, Third-level agenda setting, NAS model, Ağ Gündem Belirleme	agenda-setting theory, media agenda analysis, issue salience
Liên quan	4	5
Tóm tắt	Network agenda-setting (NAS), also called third-level agenda setting, extends classic agenda-setting theory by proposing that news media transfer to the public not only the salience of issues (first level) and of attributes (second level), but the very web of associations among issues and attributes. Introduced by Lei Guo and Maxwell McCombs, the method represents the media agenda and the public agenda as networks and tests whether the media's bundling of elements is reproduced in the public's mind.	Agenda-Setting Analysis is an empirical method for investigating the influence of media coverage on what issues the public considers important. Developed by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw (1972), the approach tests a core hypothesis about media effects: media coverage does not tell people what to think, but rather what to think about. By comparing the issues receiving media coverage with the issues the public identifies as important, researchers measure agenda-setting effects—the degree to which media attention predicts public concern. The method demonstrates media's power to structure the hierarchy of issues, even when media may not directly persuade on specific issues.