Effects of Media Use on Complexity and Extremity of Attitudes Toward the Death Penalty and Prisoners' Rehabilitation

Media Psychology

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 1-24

  Sotirovic, Mira ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0011374064     PISSN: 15213269     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/S1532785XMEP0301_01     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Abelson, R. P. (1995). Attitude extremity. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 25-41). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Alwin, D. F., & Hauser, R. M. (1975). The decomposition of effects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40, 37-47.
3. Baker-Brown, G., Ballard, E. J., Bluck, S., de Vries, B., Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. E. (1992). The conceptual/integrative complexity scoring manual. In C. P. Smith (Ed.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis (pp. 401-418). New York: Cambridge University Press.
4. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion contact. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212-252). New York: Guilford Press.
5. Coren, S., & Suedfeld, P. (1990). A power test of conceptual complexity: Textual correlates. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 357-367.
6. de Vries, B., & Walker, L. J. (1987). Conceptual/integrative complexity and attitudes toward capital punishment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 448-457.
7. Gold, P. (1994). Just say no to infotainment. Insight on the News, 10, 37-39.
8. Graber, D. A. (1988). Processing the news: How people tame the information tide (2nd ed). New York: Longman.
9. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
10. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1989). Lisrel 7: A guide to the program and applications. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.
11. Judd, C. M., & Brauer, M. (1995). Repetition and evaluative extremity. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 43-71). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Kaplan, K. J. (1972). On the ambivalence-indifference problem in attitude theory and measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 77, 361-372.
13. Kinder, D. R. (1994). Reason and emotion in American political life. In R. C. Schank & E. Langer (Eds.), Beliefs, reasoning, and decision making (pp. 277-314). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Langworthy, R. H., & Whitehead, J. T. (1986). Liberalism and fear as explanations of punitiveness. Criminology, 24, 575-591.
15. Linville, P. W. (1982). The complexity extremity effect and age based stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 193-210.
16. McLeod, J. M., Daily, K., Eveland, W., Guo, Z., Culver, K., Kurpius, D., Moy, P., Horowitz, E., & Zhong, M. (1995, August). The synthetic crisis: Media influences on perceptions of crime. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Washington, DC.
17. McLeod, J. M., & McDonald, D. (1985). Beyond simple exposure: Media orientations and their impact on political processes. Communication Research, 12, 3-33.
18. Moscovici, S., & Doise, W. (1994) Conflict and consensus: A general theory of collective decision. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
19. Mueller, R. O. (1996). Basic principles of structural equation modeling. New York: Springer-Verlag.
20. Neuman, W. R., Just, M. R., & Criegler, A. N. (1992). Common knowledge: News and the construction of political meaning. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
21. Newton, K. (1999). Mass media effects: Mobilization or media malaise? British Journal of Political Science, 29, 577-599.
22. Nitko, A. J. (1989). Designing tests that are integrated with instruction. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 451-474). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
23. Norris, P. (1996). Does television erode social capital? Political Science and Politics, 29, 474-480.
24. Paige, S. (1998). That's infotainment. Insight on the News, 21, 8-12.
25. Paulhus, D. L., & Lim, D. T. K. (1994). Arousal and evaluative extremity in social judgments: A dynamic complexity model. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 89-99.
26. Petkova, K. G., Ajzen, I., & Driver, B. L. (1995). Salience of anti-abortion beliefs and commitment to an attitudinal position: On the strength, structure, and predictive validity of anti-abortion attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 463-484.
27. Pomerantz, E. M., Chaiken, S., & Tordesillas, R. S. (1995). Attitude strength and resistance process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 408-420.
28. Potter, W. J., & Smith, S. (2000). The context of graphic portrayals of television violence. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44, 301-323.
29. Rokeach, M. (1960). The open and closed mind: Investigations into the nature of belief systems and personality systems. New York: Basic Books.
30. Schroder, H. M., Driver, M. J., & Streufert, S. (1967). Human information processing. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
31. Schuman, H. (1995). Attitudes, beliefs, and behavior. In K. S. Cook, G. A. Fine, & J. S. House (Eds.), Sociological perspectives on social psychology (pp. 68-79) Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
32. Selznick, G. J., & Steinberg, S. (1969). The tenacity of prejudice. New York: Harper Torchbooks.
33. Shrum, L. J. (1999). The relationship of television viewing with attitude strength and extremity: Implications for the cultivation effect. Media Psychology, 1, 3-25.
34. Sniderman, P. M. (1981). A question of loyalty. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
35. Streufert, S., & Satish, U. (1997). Complexity theory: Predictions based on the confluence of science-wide and behavioral theories. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 2096-2116.
36. Streufert, S., & Streufert, S. C. (1978). Behavior in the complex environment. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
37. Sullivan, D., Piereson, J., & Marcus, G. E. (1982). Political tolerance and American democracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
38. Taylor, D. C., Scheppele, K. L., & Stinchcombe, A. L. (1979). Salience of crime and support for harsher criminal sanctions. Social Problems, 26, 413-424.
39. Tetlock, P. E. (1984). Cognitive style and political belief system in the British House of Commons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 365-375.
40. Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Integrative complexity of policy reasoning. In S. Kraus & R. M. Perloff (Eds.), Mass media and political thought (pp. 267-289). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
41. Tetlock, P. E., Peterson, R. S., & Berry, J. M. (1993). Flattering and unflattering personality portraits of integratively simple and complex managers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 500-511.
42. Thompson M. M., Zanna, M. P., & Griffin, D. W. (1995). Let's not be indifferent about (attitudinal) ambivalence. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 361-386). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
43. Watt, J. H., & Krull, R. (1977). An examination of three models of television viewing and aggression. Human Communication Research, 3, 99-112.
44. Zoglin, R. (1993). The magazining of TV news. Time, 142, 50-52.