A qualitative narrative policy framework? Examining the policy narratives of US campaign finance regulatory reform

Abstract

In 2010, the narrative policy framework was introduced as a positivist, quantitative, and structuralist approach to the study of policy narratives. Deviating from this central tenet of the narrative policy framework, in this article we show that the framework is quite compatible with qualitative methods—and the various epistemologies associated with them. To demonstrate compatibility between qualitative methods and the Narrative Policy Framework, we apply classic qualitative criteria to an illustrative case examining policy narratives in US campaign finance reform. Drawing on elite interviews, we illuminate competing policy narratives rooted in distinct democratic values that exhibit variation in how victims and harm are defined, how blame is attributed to villains, what policy solutions are put forth, and policy narrative communication strategies. Our incorporation of qualitative methods within the narrative policy framework is critical for the framework's overall development as it provides opportunities for more detailed description, inductive forms of inquiry, and grounded theory development in policy areas where sample sizes, access, and salience may limit quantitative approaches.

Implementing a Public Health Objective for Alcohol Premises Licensing in Scotland: A Qualitative Study of Strategies, Values, and Perceptions of Evidence

“…Qualitative research enables insight into people’s meanings and experiences and highlights social processes, which may be important in efforts to influence policy at this local level [45,46]. …”

Policy Narratives and Policy Outcomes: An NPF Examination of Oregon's Ballot Measure 97

“…Qualitative methods are recognized as a legitimate way to operationalize the NPF (e.g., Jones & Radaelli, ; Gray & Jones, ). Our approach follows Gray and Jones's () study on elite narratives of campaign finance reform, where researchers detail specific steps for effective data collection and analysis in qualitative NPF studies .…”

“…Qualitative methods are recognized as a legitimate way to operationalize the NPF (e.g., Jones & Radaelli, ; Gray & Jones, ). Our approach follows Gray and Jones's () study on elite narratives of campaign finance reform, where researchers detail specific steps for effective data collection and analysis in qualitative NPF studies . Quantitative and qualitative approaches can then be mixed to utilize both scientific and interpretive epistemological approaches, strengthening both approaches within the NPF (Gray & Jones, ), which we do to address our second research question later in these analyses.…”

Bounded Stories

“…Importantly, we decided to code for broad issue categorization frames given Benford's (, pp. 414–15) thinking that generic frames have greater utility in advancing science in broader domains (e.g., hazards, social movements) than do issue‐specific frames (e.g., Gray & Jones, ). Furthermore, these broad issue categorization frames are more compatible with the idea of culturally available schemata mentioned earlier, as they are more likely to be widely shared in a community.…”

“…Narrative settings focus audience attention on a specific space and time, much like issue categorization frames focus attention on a subset of potential considerations. While the NPF has proposed that settings are an important structural component of policy narratives (Shanahan et al, , p. 176), empirical NPF work regarding settings is practically nonexistent (see exceptions in Gray & Jones, ; Ney, ). As such, the need to operationalize the concept effectively is acute.…”