Life according to television. Implications of genre-specific cultivation effects: The Gratification/Cultivation model

Communications

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 295-326

  Bilandzic, Helena ^a   Rössler, Patrick ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Cultivation; Genre; Psychological approaches; Sociological approaches; Uses and Gratifications

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746905977     PISSN: 03412059     EISSN: 16134087     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/comm.2004.020     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. Adoni, H. and Mane, S. (1984). Media and the social construction of reality. Toward an integration of theory and research. Communication Research, 11(3), 323-340
2. Alexander, A. (1985). Adolescents' soap opera viewing and relationale perceptions. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 29, 295-308
3. Atkin, C. K., Greenberg, B. S., and McDermott, S. (1983). Television and race role socialization. Journalism Quarterly, 60(3), 407-414
4. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press
5. Berger, L. P. and Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. New York: Anchor Books
6. Bilandzic, H. (2002). Genrespezifische Kultivierung durch Krimirezeption. Medienpsychologie, 14(2), 60-68
7. Buerkel-Rothfuss, N. L. and Mayes, S. (1981). Soap opera viewing: The cultivation effect. Journal of Communication, 31(3), 108-115
8. Busselle, R. W. (2001). Television exposure, perceived realism, and exemplar accessibility in the social judgment process. Media Psychology, 3(1), 43-67
9. Carlson, J. M. (1983). Crime show viewing by preadults: The impact on attitudes toward civil liberties. Communication Research, 10(4), 529-552
10. Carlson, J. M. (1985). Prime time law enforcement: Crime show viewing and attitudes toward the criminal justice system. New York: Praeger
11. Carveth, R. and Alexander, A. (1985). Soap opera viewing motivations and the cultivation process. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 29(3), 259-273
12. Chiricos, T., Padgett, K., and Gertz, M. (2000). Fear, TV news, and the reality of crime. Criminology, 38(3), 755-785
13. Chory-Assad, R. M. and Tamborini, R. (2003). Television exposure and the public's perceptions of physicians. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 47(2), 197-215
14. Cohen, A. A., Adoni, H., and Drori, G. (1983). Differential perceptions of social conflicts in social reality and television news. Human Communication Research, 10, 203-225
15. Davis, S. and Mares, M.-L. (1998). Effects of talk show viewing on adolescents. Journal of Communication, 48(3), 69-86
16. Doob, A. N. and Macdonald, G. E. (1979). Television viewing and fear of victimization: Is the relationship causal? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 170-179
17. Ericsson, K. A. and Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
18. Esser, H. (1990). Habits, Frames und Rational Choice: Die Reichweite von Theorien der rationalen Wahl. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 19(4), 231-247
19. Esser, H. (1999). Soziologie. Spezielle Grundlagen. Band 1: Situationslogik. Frankfurt: Campus
20. Gehrau, V. (2001). Fernsehgenres und Fernsehgattungen. Ansätze und Daten zur Rezeption, Klassifikation und Bezeichnung von Fernsehprogrammen. München: Fischer
21. Gerber, G. and Gross, L. (1979). Editorial response: A reply to Newcomb's 'humanistic critique'. Communication Research, 6, 223-230
22. Gerbner, G. and Gross, L. (1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal of Communication, 26(2), 173-199
23. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Jackson-Beeck, M., Jeffries-Foy, S., and Signorielli, N. (1978). Cultural indicators: The violence profile no. 9. Journal of Communication, 28(3), 176-207
24. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., Signorielli, N., and Jackson-Beeck, M. (1979). The demonstration of power: Violence profile no. 10. Journal of Communication, 29, 177-196
25. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., and Signorielli, N. (1994). Growing up with television: The cultivation perspective. In J. Bryant and D. Zillman (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 17-41). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
26. Greenberg, B. S., Edison, N., Korzenny, F., Fernandez-Collado, C., and Atkin, C. K. (1980). Antisocial and prosocial behavoirs on television. In B. S. Greenberg (Eds.), Life on television: Content analyses of US TV drama. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Company
27. Greimas, A. J. (1983). Structural semantics. An attempt at a method. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press
28. Hall, S. (1980). Encoding/Decoding. In S. Hall and D. Hobson (Eds.), Culture, media, language (pp. 128-138). London: Hutchinson
29. Hawkins, R. and Pingree, S. (1980). Some processes in the cultivation effect. Communication Research, 7(2), 193-226
30. Hawkins, R. and Pingree, S. (1981a). Uniform messages and habitual viewing: Unnecessary assumptions in social reality effects. Human Communication Research, 7(4), 291-301
31. Hawkins, R. and Pingree, S. (1981b). Using television to construct social reality. Journal of Broadcasting, 25(4), 347-364
32. Hawkins, R. and Pingree, S. (1982). Television's influence on social reality. In D. Pearl, L. Bouthilet, and J. Lazar (Eds.), Television and behavior: Ten years of scientific progress and implications for the Eighties (pp. 224-247). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office
33. Hawkins, R. and Pingree, S. (1990). Divergent psychological processes in constructing social reality from mass media content. In N. Signorielli and M. Morgan (Eds.), Cultivation analysis: New directions in media effects research (pp. 35-50). Newbury Park, CA: Sage
34. Hawkins, R., Pingree, S., and Adler, I. (1987). Searching for cognitive processes in the cultivation effect. Adult and adolescent samples in the United States and Australia. Human Communication Research, 13(4), 553-577
35. Heeter, C. (1988). The choice process model. In C. Heeter and B. S. Greenberg (Eds.), Cableviewing (pp. 11-32). Norwood, NJ: Ablex
36. Hintzman, D. L. and Block, R. A. (1971). Repetition and memory: Evidence for a multiple-trace hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 88, 297-306
37. Lang, A. (2000). The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. Journal of Communication, 50(1), 46-70
38. Lippmann, W. (1922). Public opinion. New York: Harcourt, Brace
39. Livingstone, S. (1980). Viewers' interpretations of soap opera characters. In P. Drummond and R. Paterson (Eds.), Television and its audience: International research perspectives. London: BFI
40. Manning, P. K. and Cullum-Swan, B. (1994) Narrative, content and semiotic analysis. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 463-477). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
41. Mares, M.-L. (1996). The role of source confusions in television's cultivation of social reality judgements. Human Communication Research, 23(2), 278-297
42. Minnebo, J. (2000). Fear of crime and television use. A uses and gratifications approach. Communications, 25(2), 125-142
43. Morgan, M. and Shanahan, J. (1997). Two decades of cultivation research: An appraisal and meta-analysis. In B. R. Burleson and A. W. Kunkel (Eds.), Communication Yearbook 20 (pp. 1-45). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
44. Newcomb, H. (1978). Assessing the violence profile of Gerbner and Gross: A humanistic critique and suggestion. Communication Research, 5, 264-282
45. Newhagen, J. E. and Lewensten, M. (1992). Cultivation and exposure to television following the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. Mass Comm Review, 49-56
46. Ogles, R. M. and Hoffner, C. (1987). Film violence and perceptions of crime: The cultivation effect. In M. L. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 10. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
47. O'Keefe, G. J. (1984). Public views on crime: Television exposure and media credibility. In R. N. Bostrom (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 8 (pp. 514-553). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
48. Oliver, M. B. (1996). Influences of authoritarianism and portrayals of race on Caucasian viewers' responses to reality-based crime dramas. Communication Reports, 9(2), 142-150
49. Oliver, M. B. and Armstrong, G. B. (1995). Predictors of viewing and enjoyment of reality-based and fictional crime shows. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 72(3), 559-570
50. Ormrod, J. E. (Ed.). (1999). Human learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill
51. Palmgreen, P. and Rayburn, J. (1982). Gratifications sought and media exposure: An expectancy value model. Communication Research, 9, 561-580
52. Paus-Haase, I., Hasebrink, U., Mattusch, U., Keuneke, S., and Krotz, F. (1999). Talkshows im Alltag von Jugendlichen. Der tägliche Balanceakt zwischen Orientierung, Amüsement und Ablehnung. Opladen: Leske & Budrich
53. Perse, E. M. (1986). Soap opera viewing patterns of college students and cultivation. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 30(2), 175-193
54. Petty, R. E. and Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque: William C. Brown
55. Pingree, S., Starrett, S., and Hawkins, R. (1981). Soap opera viewing and social reality. Paper presented to the International Communication Association, Minneapolis
56. Pingree, S. (1983). Children's cognitive processes in constructing social reality. Journalism Quarterly, 60(3), 415-422
57. Popper, K. R. (1999). The high tide of prophecy: Hegel, Marx, and the aftermath (5th ed., reprinted (1945)). London: Routledge
58. Potter, W. J., Warren, R., Vaughan, M., Howley, K., Land, A., and Hagemeyer, J. (1997). Antisocial acts in reality programming in television. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 41, 69-75
59. Potter, W. J. (1988). Three strategies for elaborating the cultivation hypothesis. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 930-939
60. Potter, W. J. (1990). Adolescents' perceptions of the primary values of television programming. Journalism Quarterly, 67, 843-851
61. Potter, W. J. and Chang, I. C. (1990). Television exposure measures and the cultivation hypothesis. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 34(3), 313-333
62. Potter, W. J. (1990). Adolescents' perceptions of the primary values of television programming. Journalism Quarterly, 67(4), 843-851
63. Potter, W. J. (1993). Cultivation theory and research: A conceptual critique. Human Communication Research, 19, 564-601
64. Pratkanis, A. R., Greenwald, A. G., Leippe, M. R., and Baumgardner, M. H. (1988). In search of reliable persuasion effects: III. The sleeper effect is dead. Long live the sleeper effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 203-218
65. Reith, M. (1999). Viewing of crime drama and authoritarian aggression: An investigation of the relationship between crime viewing, fear, and aggression. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 43(2), 211-221
66. Rosenstein, A. W. and Grant, A. E. (1997). Reconceptualising the role of habit: A new model of television audience activity. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 41, 324-344
67. Roessler, P. and Brosius, H.-B. (2001). Do talk shows cultivate adolescents' views of the world? A prolonged-exposure experiment. Journal of Communication, 51, 143-163
68. Rouner, D. (1984). Active television viewing and the cultivation hypothesis. Journalism Quarterly, 67(1), 168-174
69. Scherer, H. and Schluetz, D. (2002). Gratifikation à la minute: Die zeitnahe Erfassung von Gratifikationen. In P. Roessler, S. Kubisch, and V. Gehrau (Eds.), Empirische Perspektiven der Rezeptionsforschung (pp. 133-151). München: R. Fischer
70. Schuetz, A. (1967). The phenomenology of the social world. Chicago, 111.: Northwestern University Press
71. Shanahan, J. and Morgan, M. (1999). Television and its viewers. Cultivation theory and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
72. Shapiro, M. and Lang, A. (1991). Making television reality: Unconscious processes in the construction of social reality. Communication Research. 18(5), 685-705
73. Shapiro, M. (1991). Memory and decision processes in the construction of social reality. Communication Research, 18(1), 3-24
74. Sheley, J. F. and Ashkins, C. D. (1981). Crime, crime news, and crime views. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45(4), 492-506
75. Shrum, L. J. (1997). The role of source confusion in cultivation effects may depend on processing strategy: A comment on Mares. Human Communication Research, 24, 349-358
76. Shrum, L. J. (2001). Processing strategy moderates the cultivation effect. Human Communication Research, 27(1), 94-120
77. Shrum, L. J. (1995). Assessing the social influence of television: A social cognition perspective on cultivation effects. Communication Research, 22(4), 402-429
78. Shrum, L. J. (1996). Psychological processes underlying cultivation effects: Further tests of construct accessibility. Human Communication Research, 22(4), 482-509
79. Shrum, L. J. and O'Guinn, T. C. (1993). Processes and effects in the construction of social reality: Construct accessibility as an explanatory variable. Communication Research, 20(3), 436-471
80. Shrum, L. J., Wyer, R. S. Jr,. and O'Guinn, T. C. (1998). The effects of television consumption on social perceptions: The use of priming procedures to investigate psychological processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 447-459
81. Tamborini, R., Zillman, D., and Bryant, J. (1984). Fear and victimization: Exposure to television and perceptions of crime and fear. In R. N. Bostrum (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 8 (pp. 492-513). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
82. Tapper, J. (1995). The ecology of cultivation: A conceptual model for cultivation research. Communication Theory, 5(1), 36-57
83. Thomas, W. I. and Thomas, D. S. (1928). The child in America. Behavior problems and programs. New York: Knopf
84. Valkenburg, P. M. and Patiwael, M. (1998). Does watching court TV 'cultivate' people's perceptions of crime? Gazette, 60, 227-238
85. Van den Bulck, J. (2003). The datasetting effect of learning fact from viewing fiction: Toward an on-line processing model of television effects. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, San Diego, USA
86. Vlasic, A. (in press). Die Integrationsfunktion der Massenmedien. Begriffsgeschichte, Modelle, Operationalisierung. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag
87. Wakshlag, J., Bart, L., Dudley, J., Gorth, G., McCutcheon, J., and Rolla, C. (1983). Viewer apprehension about victimization and crime drama programs. Communication Research, 10, 195-217
88. Weaver, J. and Wakshlag, J. (1986). Perceived vulnerability to crime, criminal victimization experience, and television viewing. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 30(2), 141-158
89. Woo, H.-J. and Dominick, J. R. (2001). Daytime television talk shows and the cultivation effect among U.S. and international students. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 45(4), 598-614
90. Youn, S.-M. (1994). Program type preference and program choice in a multichannel situation. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 38, 465-475
91. Zillmann, D. (1980). Anatomy of suspense. In P. H. Tannenbaum (Ed.), The entertainment functions of television (pp. 133-163). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
92. Zillmann, D. and Wakshlag, J. (1985). Fear of victimization and the appeal of crime drama. In D. Zillmann and J. Bryant (Eds.), Selective exposure to communication (pp. 141-156). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum