Knowledge about others' reaction to a public service announcement: The impact on self persuasion and third-person perception

Journalism and Mass Communication Quaterly

Volumn 77, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 788-803

  White, H Allen ^a   Dillon, John F ^a  

^a MURRAY STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0040358917     PISSN: 10776990     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/107769900007700405     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. "Mass. State Anti-Smoking Efforts Successful - Study," Reuters, 4 August, 2000.
2. "Mass. State Anti-Smoking Efforts."
3. "Bush Lead on Gore Grows to 17 Points," USA Today, 7 August, 2000, sec. A, p. 1, col. 3.
4. "Gore Turns to Lieberman: Jewish VP Pick Lifts Democrats' Standing in Poll," USA Today, 8 August, 2000, sec. A, p. 1, col. 3.
5. W. Phillips Davison, "The Third Person Effect in Communication," Public Opinion Quarterly 47 (spring 1983): 1-15.
6. Richard, M. Perloff, "Third Person Effect Research 1983-1992: A Review and Synthesis," International Journal of Public Opinion Research 5 (summer 1993): 167-84; W. Phillips Davison, "The Third Person Effect Revisited," International Journal of Public Opinion Research 8 (summer 1996): 113-19.
7. Richard, M. Perloff, "Third Person Effect Research 1983-1992: A Review and Synthesis," International Journal of Public Opinion Research 5 (summer 1993): 167-84; W. Phillips Davison, "The Third Person Effect Revisited," International Journal of Public Opinion Research 8 (summer 1996): 113-19.
8. Wolfram Peiser and Jochen Peter, "Third-Person Perception of Television-Viewing Behavior," Journal of Communication 50 (winter 2000): 25-45.
9. Jeremy Cohen and Robert G. Davis, "Third-Person Effects and The Differential Effect in Negative Political Advertising," Journalism Quarterly 68 (winter 1991): 680-88.
10. Albert C. Gunther and Esther Thorson, "Perceived Persuasive Effects of Product Commercials and Public Service Announcements: Third-Person Effects in New Domains," Communication Research 19 (October 1992): 574-96.
11. Michael B. Salwen and Paul D. Driscoll, "Consequences of Third Person Perception in Support of Press Restrictions in the O.J. Simpson Trial," Journal of Communication 47 (spring 1997): 60-77.
12. Douglas M. McLeod, William P. Eveland, and Amy I. Nathanson, "Support for Censorship of Violent and Misogynic Rap Lyrics: An Analysis of the Third Person Effect," Communication Research 24 (April 1997): 153-74.
13. Peiser and Peter, "Third-Person Perception of Television-Viewing Behavior."
14. Gunther and Thorson, "Perceived Persuasive Effects."
15. Cohen and Davis, "Third-Person Effects and The Differential"; Vincent Price, David Tewksbury, and Li-Ning Huang, "Third-Person Effects on Publication of a Holocaust-Denial Advertisement," Journal of Communication 28 (spring 1998): 3-26.
16. Cohen and Davis, "Third-Person Effects and The Differential"; Vincent Price, David Tewksbury, and Li-Ning Huang, "Third-Person Effects on Publication of a Holocaust-Denial Advertisement," Journal of Communication 28 (spring 1998): 3-26.
17. Albert C. Gunther and Ang Ping Hwa, "Public Perceptions of Television Influence and Opinions About Censorship in Singapore," International Journal of Public Opinion Research 8 (summer 1996): 248-65; Vera Hoorens and Suzanne Ruiter, "The Optimal Impact Phenomenon: Beyond the Third-Person Effect," European Journal of Social Psychology 26 (July 1996): 599-610.
18. Albert C. Gunther and Ang Ping Hwa, "Public Perceptions of Television Influence and Opinions About Censorship in Singapore," International Journal of Public Opinion Research 8 (summer 1996): 248-65; Vera Hoorens and Suzanne Ruiter, "The Optimal Impact Phenomenon: Beyond the Third-Person Effect," European Journal of Social Psychology 26 (July 1996): 599-610.
19. H. Allen White, "Considering Interacting Factors in the Third-Person Effect: Argument Strength and Social Distance," Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 74 (autumn 1997): 557-64.
20. Albert C. Gunther and Paul Mundy, "Biased Optimism and the Third Person Effect," Journalism Quarterly 70 (spring 1993): 58-67; Hans-Bernd Brosius and Dirk Engel, "The Causes of Third-Person Effects: Unrealistic Optimism, Impersonal Impact or Generalized Attitudes Towards Media Influence?" International Journal of Public Opinion Research 8 (summer 1996): 142-62.
21. Albert C. Gunther and Paul Mundy, "Biased Optimism and the Third Person Effect," Journalism Quarterly 70 (spring 1993): 58-67; Hans-Bernd Brosius and Dirk Engel, "The Causes of Third-Person Effects: Unrealistic Optimism, Impersonal Impact or Generalized Attitudes Towards Media Influence?" International Journal of Public Opinion Research 8 (summer 1996): 142-62.
22. Fritz Heider, The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations (New York: Wiley and Sons, 1958); Albert C. Gunther, "What We Think Others Think: Cause and Consequence in the Third-Person Effect," Communication Research 18 (June 1991): 355-72.
23. Fritz Heider, The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations (New York: Wiley and Sons, 1958); Albert C. Gunther, "What We Think Others Think: Cause and Consequence in the Third-Person Effect," Communication Research 18 (June 1991): 355-72.
24. Sarah Trenholm, Persuasion and Social Influence (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1989).
25. Richard M. Perloff and Barbara K. Fetzer, "Self-Other Judgments and Perceived Vulnerability to Victimization," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50 (March 1986): 502-510.
26. Mary D. Alicke, M.L. Klotz, David L. Breitenbecher, Tricia J. Yurak, and Debbie S. Vredenburg, "Personal Contact, Individuation, and the Better-Than-Average Effect," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68 (May 1995): 804-825.
27. Richard M. Perloff, "The Third-Person Effect: A Critical Review and Synthesis," Media Psychology 1 (fall 1999): 353-78.
28. Perloff, "The Third-Person Effect," 366.
29. Gunther and Hwa, "Public Perceptions of Television Influence and Opinions About Censorship in Singapore"; Hoorens and Ruiter, "The Optimal Impact Phenomenon: Beyond the Third Person Effect."
30. Gunther and Hwa, "Public Perceptions of Television Influence and Opinions About Censorship in Singapore"; Hoorens and Ruiter, "The Optimal Impact Phenomenon: Beyond the Third Person Effect."
31. Cohen and Davis, "Third-Person Effects and The Differential"; Price, Tewksbury, and Huang, "Third-Person Effects on Publication of a Holocaust-Denial Advertisement."
32. Cohen and Davis, "Third-Person Effects and The Differential"; Price, Tewksbury, and Huang, "Third-Person Effects on Publication of a Holocaust-Denial Advertisement."
33. White, "Considering Interacting Factors in the Third-Person Effect."
34. Another term might be "excellence attributes."
35. Jeremy Cohen, Diana Mutz, Vincent Price, and Albert Gunther, "Perceived Impact of Defamation: An Experiment on Third-Person Effects," Public Opinion Quarterly 52 (summer 1988): 161-73.
36. Julie M. Duck and Barbara Ann Mullin, "The Perceived Impact of Mass Media: Reconsidering the Third-Person Effect," European Journal of Social Psychology 25 (January-February 1995): 77-93.
37. William P. Eveland Jr., Amy I. Nathanson, Benjamin H. Detenber, and Douglas M. McLeod, "Rethinking the Social Distance Corollary: Perceived Likelihood of Exposure and the Third-Person Perception," Communication Research 26 (June 1999): 275-302.
38. William McGuire, "The Nature of Attitude and Attitude Change," in The Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. G. Lindzey and E. Aronson, 2d ed., vol. 3 (Reading MA: Addison-Wesley, 1969).
39. Peiser and Peter, "Third-Person Perception of Television-Viewing Behavior."
40. McLeod, Eveland, and Nathanson, "Support for Censorship of Violent and Misogynic Rap Lyrics."
41. Cohen and Davis, "Third-Person Effects and The Differential."
42. Eveland, Nathanson, Detenber, and McLeod, "Rethinking the Social Distance Corollary."
43. McGuire, "The Nature of Attitude."
44. All Likert-type items used in the study were on a seven-point scale in which 1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree.
45. McGuire, "The Nature of Attitude."
46. For example, the seven-point Likert items involving the spokesperson stated: "To me, the spokesperson chosen for the PSA had characteristics that made him persuasive"; and "I think the characteristics of the spokesperson chosen for the PSA made it successful in persuading (other people)." Similar items were created for the message content, production qualities, and audience characteristics. The Likert items involving the "audience member" (receiver) persuasion factor were typical of previous third-person perception studies. That is, subjects responded to Likert items that stated "I" have the characteristics to be persuaded by the PSA and to items that stated "others" have the characteristics to be persuaded by the PSA. In other words, third-person perception studies have, all along, been using McGuire's receiver factor.
47. For example, the items dealing with spokesperson (source) in the "success in persuading" treatment group stated: "To me, the spokesperson chosen for the PSA had characteristics that made him persuasive"; and "I think the characteristics of the spokesperson chosen for the PSA were responsible for its success in persuading (other people)." The items dealing with the spokesperson in the "failure to persuade" treatment group read: "To me, the spokesperson chosen for the PSA had character-istics that made him persuasive"; and "I think the characteristics of the spokesperson chosen for the PSA were responsible for its failure to persuade, (other people)."
48. The Likert items asking about "self" persuasion were identical across conditions. The different scenarios required slight differences in the wording of the items dealing with third-person persuasion.
49. Perloff, "The Third-Person Effect."
50. The Likert item read: "To me, the PSA was persuasive overall."
51. Perloff, "The Third-Person Effect."