2004
Volume 8, Issue 1
  • E-ISSN: 2665-9085
file format pdf download PDF

Abstract

Abstract

Computational methods can minimize the time and resources needed to manually code thousands of images. Yet, they also come with challenges, including validation, algorithmic bias, and privacy concerns. Acknowledging that the pictorial turn has now entered a computational phase, this article reports on a manual and automated coding of 7000+ images to better understand online extremist content. Using Rodriguez and Dimitrova’s (2011) four-tiered model of visual framing, the study compares manual and OpenAI’s ChatGpt4o’s coding of Al-Qaeda and ISIS images across the denotative, semiotic, connotative, and ideological levels. AI coding exhibited moderate to strong performance on denotative variables but was weaker in the semiotic and connotative tiers. The study concludes with a discussion of the advantages of human and AI functioning together to better understand visual framing.

© The authors. This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY 4.0 license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/CCR2026.1.2.ELDA
2026-01-01
2026-04-17

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/26659085/8/1/CCR2026.1.2.ELDA.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/CCR2026.1.2.ELDA&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Abdelrahim, Y. (2019). Visual Analysis of ISIS Discourse Strategies and Types in Dabiq and Rumiyah Online Magazines. Visual Communication Quarterly, 26(2), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/15551393.2019.1586546
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson, C. (2017). Data-first manifesto: Shifting priorities in scholarly communications. Information Services and Use, 37(3), 335–342. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-170852
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Armstrong, D., Gosling, A., Weinman, J., & Marteau, T. (1997). The Place of Inter-Rater Reliability in Qualitative Research: An Empirical Study. Sociology, 31(3), 597–606. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038597031003015
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bakhshi, S., & Gilbert, E. (2015). Red, purple and pink: The colors of diffusion on Pinterest. PLOS ONE, 10(2), 117–148. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0117148
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Barr, A., & Herfroy-Mischler, A. (2017). ISIL’s Execution Videos: Audience Segmentation and Terrorist Communication in the Digital Age. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2017.1361282
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Barthes, R. (1981). Camera lucida: Reflections on photography. Hill.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bridle, J. (2023). New dark age: Technology and the end of the future (Updated).
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Broz, M. (2023). How many pictures are there (2024): Statistics, trends, and forecasts. https://photutorial.com/how-many-photos/
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Burscher, B., Odijk, D., Vliegenthart, R., Rijke, M., & Vreese, C. (2014). Teaching the Computer to Code Frames in News: Comparing Two Supervised Machine Learning Approaches to Frame Analysis. Communication Methods and Measures, 8(3), 190–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2014.937527
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Cacciatore, M., Scheufele, D., & Iyengar, S. (2016). The End of Framing as we Know it ... and the Future of Media Effects. Mass Communication and Society, 19(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2015.1068811
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Carlin, M. (2012). Guns, gold and corporeal inscriptions. Third Text, 26(5), 503–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/09528822.2012.712763
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Ceci, L. (2024). Hours of video uploaded to YouTube every minute 2007–2022. https://www.statista.com/statistics/259477/hours-of-video-uploaded-to-youtube-every-minute/
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Center, I. (2005). Evolution of jihadi video. https://intelcenter.com/EJV-PUB-v1-0.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Chan, C., Bajjalieh, J., Auvil, L., Wessler, H., Althaus, S., Welbers, K., Atteveldt, W., & Jungblut, M. (2021). Four best practices for measuring news sentiment using ‘off-the-shelf’ dictionaries: A large-scale p-hacking experiment. Computational Communication Research, 3(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.5117/CCR2021.1.001.CHAN
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Chen, K., Duan, Z., & Kim, S. (2024). Uncovering gender stereotypes in controversial science discourse: Evidence from computational text and visual analyses across digital platforms. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 29(1), 052. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmad052
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Chen, K., Kim, S., Gao, Q., & Raschka, S. (2022). Visual framing of science conspiracy videos. Computational Communication Research, 4(1), 98–134. https://doi.org/10.5117/ccr2022.1.003.chen
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Chen, N., Drouhard, M., Kocielnik, R., Suh, J., & Aragon, C. (2018). Using Machine Learning to Support Qualitative Coding in Social Science: Shifting the Focus to Ambiguity. ACM Trans. Interact. Intell. Syst, 8(2), 1–9 20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3185515
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Chen, Y., Zhai, Y., & Sun, S. (2024). The gendered lens of AI: examining news imagery across digital spaces. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 29(1),
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Chouliaraki, L., & Kissas, A. (2018). The communication of horrorism: a typology of ISIS online death videos. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 35(1), 24–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2017.1393096
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Ciovacco, C. (2009). The contours of Al Qaeda’s media strategy. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 32(10), 853–875. https://doi.org/10.1080/10576100903182377
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Coleman, A. (2006). The islamic imagery project. Visual motifs in jihadi the islamic imagery. https://www.ctc.usma.edu/v2/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Islamic-Imagery-Project.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Coleman, R. (2010). Framing the Pictures in Our Heads: Exploring the Framing and Agenda-Setting Effects of Visual Images. In Doing News Framing Analysis (pp. 233–261).
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Damanhoury, K. (2022). Photographic Warfare: ISIS, Egypt, and the Online Battle for Sinai. University of Georgia Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Damanhoury, K., & Winkler, C. (2018). Picturing Law and Order: A Visual Framing Analysis of ISIS’s Dabiq Magazine. Arab Media & Society, Winter/Spr(25, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.70090/kdcw18vf
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Dietrich, B., & Ko, H. (2022). Finding fauci. Computational Communication Research, 4(1), 135–172. https://doi.org/10.5117/ccr2022.1.004.diet
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Dijk, T. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Dondero, M. (2019). Visual Semiotics and Automatic Analysis of Images From the Cultural Analytics Lab: How Can Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis Be Combined?. Semiotica, 2019(230), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2018-0104
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Duarte, F. (2024). Amount of data created daily. https://explodingtopics.com/blog/data-generated-per-day
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Edwards, J., & Winkler, C. (1997). Representative form and the visual ideograph: The Iwo Jima image in editorial cartoons. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 83(3), 289–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335639709384187
     [Google Scholar]
  31. El Karhili, N., Hendry, J., Kackowski, W., El Damanhoury, K., Dicker, A., & Winkler, C. (2021). Islamic/State: Daesh’s Visual Negotiation of Institutional Positioning. Journal of Media and Religion, 20(2), 79–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348423.2021.1930813
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Fabiszak, M., Buchstaller, I., Brzezińska, A., Alvanides, S., Griese, F., & Schneider, C. (2021). Ideology in the linguistic landscape: Towards a quantitative approach. Discourse & Society, 32(4), 405–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926521992149
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Farwell, J. (2010). Jihadi Video in the ‘War of Ideas. Survival, 52(6), 127–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2010.540787
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Feng, D., & O’Halloran, K. (2013). The visual representation of metaphor: A social semiotic approach. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 11(2), 320–335. https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.11.2.07
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Feng, W. (2017). Metonymy and visual representation: Towards a social semiotic framework of visual metonymy. Visual Communication, 16(4), 441–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357217717142
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Forgas, J., & East, R. (2008). How real is that smile? Mood effects on accepting or rejecting the veracity of emotional facial expressions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 32(3), 157–170.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Gamieldien, Y., Case, J., & Katz, A. (2023). Advancing Qualitative Analysis. An Exploration of the Potential of Generative AI and NLP in Thematic Coding (SSRN Scholarly Paper, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4487768
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Geise, S., & Baden, C. (2015). Putting the Image Back Into the Frame: Modeling the Linkage Between Visual Communication and Frame-Processing Theory. Communication Theory, 25(1), 46–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12048
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Glausch, M. (2020). Infographics and their role in the IS propaganda machine. Contemporary Voices: St Andrews Journal of International Relations, 1(3), 32–50. https://doi.org/10.15664/jtr.1492
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Northeastern University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Goffman, E. (1979). Gender and advertisements. Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Green, L. (2015). Advertising war: Pictorial publicity, 1914-1918. Doctoral Dissertation, Manchester Metropolitan University.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Gregg, H. (2023). The Islamic State in Africa: The Emergence, Evolution, and Future of the Next Jihadist Battlefront. Parameters, 53(3), 159–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10220461.2023.2201586
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Ha, Y., Park, K., Kim, S., Joo, J., & Cha, M. (2020). Automatically Detecting Image–Text Mismatch on Instagram with Deep Learning. Journal of Advertising, 50(1), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2020.1843091
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Hall, E. (1966). The hidden dimension. Doubleday.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Hanusch, F. (2013). Sensationalizing death? Graphic disaster images in the tabloid and broadsheet press. European Journal of Communication, 28(5), 497–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323113491349
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Hariman, R., & Lucaites, J. (2007). No caption needed: Iconic photographs, public culture, and liberal democracy. University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Heck, A. (2017). Images, visions and narrative identity formation of ISIS. Global Discourse, 7(2-3), 244–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2017.1342490
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Höijer, B. (2004). The discourse of global compassion: The audience and media reporting of global suffering. Media, Culture & Society, 26(4), 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443704044215
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Impara, E. (2018). A social semiotics analysis of Islamic State’s use of beheadings: Images of power, masculinity, spectacle and propaganda. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 53, 25–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2018.02.002
     [Google Scholar]
  51. JasenkaG. (2023). How many pictures? Photo statistics that will blow you away. https://www.lightstalking.com/photo-statistics/
  52. Jewitt, C., & Oyama, R. (2008). Visual Meaning: a Social Semiotic Approach. In Handbook of Visual Analysis (pp. 134–156). Sage Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Joo, J., & Steinert-Threlkeld, Z. (2022). Image as data: Automated content analysis for visual presentations of political actors and events. Computational Communication Research, 4(1), 11–67. https://doi.org/10.5117/CCR2022.1.001.JOO
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Kaczkowski, W., Winkler, C., El Damanhoury, K., & Luu, Y. (2021). Intersections of the Real and the Virtual Caliphates: The Islamic State’s Territory and Media Campaign. Journal of Global Security Studies, 6(2), https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogaa020
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Knobloch, S., Hastall, M., Zillmann, D., & Callison, C. (2003). Imagery effects on the selective reading of internet newsmagazines. Communication Research, 30(1), 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650202239023
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Kraft, R. (1986). The influence of camera angle on comprehension and retention of pictorial events. Memory & Cognition, 15(4), 291–307. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197032
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Kress, G., & Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Kress, G., & Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design (2nd). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (Fourth). SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Kuznar, L. (2015). Daesh’s image of the state in their own words.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Lakretz, Y., Dehaene, S., & King, JR. (2020). What Limits Our Capacity to Process Nested Long-Range Dependencies in Sentence Comprehension?. Entropy, 22(4), 446. https://doi.org/10.3390/e22040446
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Leeuwen, T. (2001). Semiotics and iconography. In The handbook of visual analysis (pp. 92–118).
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Linell, P. (1998). Approaching Dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Lokmanoglu, A. (2020). Coin as Imagined Sovereignty: A Rhetorical Analysis of Coins as a Transhistorical Artifact and an Ideograph in Islamic State’s Communication. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 44(1), 52–73.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Lokmanoglu, A., Winkler, C., Mcminimy, K., & Almahmoud, M. (2022). Troop Withdrawal Announcements, ISIS Media: Visualizing Community and Resilience. International Journal of Communication, 16, 215–246.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Lokmanoglu, A., Allaham, M., Abhari, R., Mortenson, C., & Villa Turek, E. (2023). A Picture is Worth a Thousand (S)words: Classification and Diffusion of Memes on a Partisan Media Platform. https://doi.org/10.18742/pub01
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Lokmanoglu, A., & Walter, D. (2025). Topic modeling of video and image data: A visual semantic unsupervised approach. Communication Methods and Measures, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19312458.2025.2549707
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Mackieson, P., Shlonsky, A., & Connolly, M. (2019). Increasing rigor and reducing bias in qualitative research: A document analysis of parliamentary debates using applied thematic analysis. Qualitative Social Work, 18(6), 965–980. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325018786996
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Marathe, M., & Toyama, K. (2018). Semi-Automated Coding for Qualitative Research: A User-Centered Inquiry and Initial Prototypes. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173922
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Mattoni, A., & Teune, S. (2014). Visions of protest. A media‐historic perspective on images in social movements. Sociology Compass, 8(6), 876–887.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. McCain, T., Chilberg, J., & Wakshlag, J. (1977). The effect of camera angle on source credibility and attraction. Journal of Broadcasting, 21(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838157709363815
     [Google Scholar]
  72. McClancy, K. (2013). The iconography of violence: Television, Vietnam, and the soldier hero. Film & History: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 43(2), 50–66.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. McGee, M. (1980). The “ideograph”: A link between rhetoric and ideology. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 66(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638009383499
     [Google Scholar]
  74. McGee, M. (1990). Text, Context, and the Fragmentation of Contemporary Culture. Western Journal of Speech Communication: WJSC, 54(3), 274–289.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Mcgil, J. (2024). https://contentdetector.ai/articles/meme-statistics/
  76. McMinimy, K., Winkler, C., Lokmanoglu, A., & Almahmoud, M. (2021). Censoring Extremism: Influence of Online Restriction on Official Media Products of ISIS. Terrorism and Political Violence, 00(00), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2021.1988938
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Messaris, P., & Abraham, L. (2001). The role of images in framing news stories. In Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (pp. 215–226). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410605689
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Mitchell, W. (1995). Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation. University of Chicago Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo3683962.html
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Morgan, D. (2023). Exploring the Use of Artificial Intelligence for Qualitative Data Analysis: The Case of ChatGPT. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, 16094069231211248. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231211248
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Moriarty, S. (2002). The symbiotics of semiotics and visual communication. Journal of Visual Literacy, 22(1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/23796529.2002.11674579
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Muise, D., Lu, Y., Pan, J., & Reeves, B. (2022). Selectively localized: Temporal and visual structure of smartphone screen activity across media environments. Mobile Media & Communication, 10(3), 487–509. https://doi.org/10.1177/20501579221080333
     [Google Scholar]
  82. OpenAI. (2024). ChatGPT-4o API. https://platform.openai.com/
  83. Paglen, T. (2019). Invisible Images: Your Pictures Are Looking at You. Architectural Design, 89(1), 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2383
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Panofsky, E. (1955). Meaning in the visual arts. Doubleday Anchor Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Peng, Y. (2018). Same candidates, different faces: Uncovering media bias in visual portrayals of presidential candidates with computer vision. Journal of Communication, 68(5), 920–941.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Peng, Y. (2021). What Makes Politicians’ Instagram Posts Popular? Analyzing Social Media Strategies of Candidates and Office Holders with Computer Vision. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 26(1), 143–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220964769
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Peng, Y., Lock, I., & Ali Salah, A. (2024). Automated visual analysis for the study of social media effects: Opportunities, approaches, and challenges. Communication Methods and Measures, 18(2), 163–185.
     [Google Scholar]
  88. Peng, Y., & Yingdan, L. (2023). Computational visual analysis in political communication. In Research handbook in visual politics (pp. 41–53). Edward Elgar. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4577025
     [Google Scholar]
  89. Perlmutter, D. (1998). Photojournalism and foreign policy: Icons of outrage in international crises. Praeger.
     [Google Scholar]
  90. Rietz, T., & Maedche, A. (2021). Cody: An AI-Based System to Semi-Automate Coding for Qualitative Research. Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445591
     [Google Scholar]
  91. Rodriguez, L., & Dimitrova, D. (2011). The levels of visual framing. Journal of Visual Literacy, 30(1), 48–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/23796529.2011.11674684
     [Google Scholar]
  92. Saldana, J. (2021). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. SAGE Publications Ltd.
     [Google Scholar]
  93. Saltman, E., & Smith, M. (2015). Till Martyrdom Do Us Part - Gender and the ISIS. http://www.strategicdialogue.org/Till_Martyrdom_Do_Us_Part_Gender_and_the_ISIS_Phenomenon.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  94. Schwalbe, C. (2006). Remembering Our Shared Past: Visually Framing the Iraq War on U.S. News Websites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(1), 264–289. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00325.x
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Sezen, D. (2020). Without a blink: Machine ways of seeing in contemporary visual culture. Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, 11(1), 103–107. https://doi.org/10.1386/iscc_00010_7
     [Google Scholar]
  96. Song, H., Tolochko, P., Eberl, JM., Eisele, O., Greussing, E., Heidenreich, T., Lind, F., Galyga, S., & Boomgaarden, H. (2020). In Validations We Trust? The Impact of Imperfect Human Annotations as a Gold Standard on the Quality of Validation of Automated Content Analysis. Political Communication, 37(4), 550–572. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1723752
     [Google Scholar]
  97. Steinert-Threlkeld, Z., Chan, A., & Joo, J. (2022). How State and Protester Violence Affect Protest Dynamics. The Journal of Politics, 84(2), 798–813. https://doi.org/10.1086/715600
     [Google Scholar]
  98. Stone, E., Sieck, W., Bull, B., Frank Yates, J., Parks, S., & Rush, C. (2003). Foreground:background salience: Explaining the effects of graphical displays on risk avoidance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-5978(03)00003-7
     [Google Scholar]
  99. Tang, D., & Schmeichel, B. (2015). Look me in the eye: Manipulated eye gaze affects dominance mindsets. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 39(2), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-015-0206-8
     [Google Scholar]
  100. Torres, M. (2023). A framework for the unsupervised and semi-supervised analysis of visual frames. In Political Analysis (pp. 1–22). https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2023.32
     [Google Scholar]
  101. Trachtenberg, A. (1985). Albums of war: On reading Civil War photographs. Representations, 9, 1–32.
     [Google Scholar]
  102. Turner, V. (1974). Dramas, fields, and metaphors: Symbolic action in human society. Cornell University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/3710621
     [Google Scholar]
  103. Turner, V. (1979). Process, performance, and pilgrimage: A study in comparative symbology. Concept Publishing Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  104. Walter, D., & Ophir, Y. (2024). Meta-theorizing framing in communication research (1992–2022): Toward academic silos or professionalized specialization?. Journal of Communication, jqad043, https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqad043
     [Google Scholar]
  105. Warrick, J. (2016). Black flags: The rise of ISIS. Anchor Books,
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Wignell, P., Tan, S., & O’Halloran, K. (2017). Under the shade of AK47s: A multimodal approach to violent extremist recruitment strategies for foreign fighters. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 10(3), 429–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2017.1319319
     [Google Scholar]
  107. Williams, N., Casas, A., & Wilkerson, J. (2020). Images as data for social science research: An introduction to convolutional neural nets for image classification. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  108. Wilson, L. (2017). Understanding the Appeal of ISIS. Cambridge UP. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.68729
     [Google Scholar]
  109. Winkler, C., El Damanhoury, K., Dicker, A., & Lemieux, A. (2018). Images of death and dying in ISIS media: A comparison of English and Arabic print publications. Media, War & Conflict, 12(3), 248–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635217746200
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Winkler, C., El-Damanhoury, K., Dicker, A., Luu, Y., Kaczkowski, W., & El-Karhili, N. (2019). Considering the military-media nexus from the perspective of competing groups: the case of ISIS and al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict, 13(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1630744
     [Google Scholar]
  111. Winkler, C., McMinimy, K., El Damanhoury, K., & Almahmoud, M. (2021). Shifts in the visual media campaigns of AQAP and ISIS after high death and high publicity attacks. Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression, 13(4), 251–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/19434472.2020.1759674
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Winkler, C. (2022). Revisiting representative form in ISIS media: How emerging collectives reconstitute communities in the 21st century. Frontiers in Communication, 7, https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.968302
     [Google Scholar]
  113. Winkler, C., & Damanhoury, K. (2022). Proto-state Media Systems: Al-Qaeda and ISIS as Exemplars. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  114. Winkler, C., Dewick, L., Luu, Y., & Kaczkowski, W. (2019). Dynamic/Static Image Use in ISIS’s Media Campaign: An Audience Involvement Strategy for Achieving Goals. Terrorism and Political Violence, 33(6), 1323–1341. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2019.1608953
     [Google Scholar]
  115. Winkler, C., El Damanhoury, K., Dicker, A., & Lemieux, A. (2016). The medium is terrorism: Transformation of the about to die trope in Dabiq. Terrorism and Political Violence, 31(2), 224–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2016.1211526
     [Google Scholar]
  116. Winter, C. (2018). Apocalypse, later: a longitudinal study of the Islamic State brand. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 35(1), 103–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2017.1393094
     [Google Scholar]
  117. Zelin, A. (2015). Picture Or It Didn’t Happen: A Snapshot of the Islamic State’s Official Media Output. Perspectives on Terrorism, 9(4), 85–97.
     [Google Scholar]
  118. Zelin, A. (2021). https://jihadology.net/
  119. Zelizer, B. (2010). About to die: How news images move the public. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2012.641782
     [Google Scholar]
  120. Zhang, H., & Pan, J. (2019). CASM: A Deep-Learning Approach for Identifying Collective Action Events with Text and Image Data from Social Media. Sociological Methodology, 49(1), 1–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081175019860244
     [Google Scholar]
  121. Zhang, H., & Peng, Y. (2022). Image Clustering: An Unsupervised Approach to Categorize Visual Data in Social Science Research. Sociological Methods & Research, 004912412210826, https://doi.org/10.1177/00491241221082603
     [Google Scholar]
  122. Zhang, X., & Dahu, W. (2019). Application of artificial intelligence algorithms in image processing. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 61, 42–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvcir.2019.03.004
     [Google Scholar]
  123. Zou, J., & Schiebinger, L. (2018). AI can be sexist and racist—It’s time to make it fair. Nature, 559, 324–326.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/CCR2026.1.2.ELDA
Loading
Visual Framing in the AI Era: Lessons from Manual Approaches for Computational Methods
CCR 8, 1 (2026); https://doi.org/10.5117/CCR2026.1.2.ELDA
/content/journals/10.5117/CCR2026.1.2.ELDA
/content/journals/10.5117/CCR2026.1.2.ELDA
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Keyword(s): AI; Visual Framing; Extremism; Photography; ISIS; Al-Qaeda

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error