Remember that awkward moment at a dinner party when someone asks what your research is about, and you launch into a 15-minute monologue that leaves everyone checking their phones? Been there, done that. We’ve ALL totally been in that boat.
Let’s face it: even the smartest ideas fall flat if you can’t package them right.
I discovered this the hard way when my meticulously researched paper on physiological measures of fun in video games got a pass from the top conference of my field. I was clueless about framing back then, totally in the dark. And I failed to tell them why they should care about my work in the first place.
What followed was my crash course in the hidden art of academic framing — the strategic positioning that transforms technical research into meaningful contributions. You might think this is just some advice about better writing, but let me tell you that this is so much more than that. It’s basically the make-or-break strategy that decides if people actually pay attention to your work or if it just sits there gathering virtual cobwebs.
Why smart research gets ignored
Think of academic framing like the difference between handing someone all the ingredients for a yummy taco versus serving them a perfectly assembled one ready to eat. Having all the right stuff is one thing, but putting it together in a way that makes people’s mouths water is a completely different experience. Most early career researchers make the same critical mistake: They assume their research speaks for itself. It doesn’t.
When I reject papers for the journals and conferences I’m reviewing for, I most often and most immediately notice framing failures of the work:
- Unclear how this extends existing theory
- Contribution not sufficiently articulated
- Fails to engage with relevant literature
Let’s not sugarcoat it: In academia, what you study often matters less than how you frame what you studied. Acceptance into a top venue often comes down to how you package the science.
Framing theory basics
Framing isn’t as complicated as it sounds. It all started with the sociologist Goffman and his work on how we make sense of the world through mental shortcuts shaped by our culture. In the academic world, framing is basically both how you think about your research and how you sell it to others. Snow and Benford broke it down into three simple parts that are useful when you’re trying to structure your argument:
- Diagnostic framing. Pointing out what’s missing or messed up in our current knowledge
- Prognostic framing. Coming up with some creative ways to fix these problems
- Motivational framing. Articulating why your work matters and what others should do about it
This framework is basically like the hourglass shape you see in scientific papers. You know, where introductions start with all the big-picture stuff before zooming in on your specific research questions, and then you zoom back out to talk about why it all matters. Getting good at this structure shows people you’ve got your academic game together.
Copy and paste these ChatGPT prompts with your title and abstract text to try develop different framing for your article:
