Current critical problems in agenda-setting research

International Journal of Public Opinion Research

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 275-296

  Takeshita, Toshio ^a  

^a MEIJI UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33747883301     PISSN: 09542892     EISSN: 14716909     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ijpor/edh104     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Althaus, S. L., & Tewksbury, D. (2002). Agenda setting and the 'new' news: Patterns of issue importance among readers of the paper and online version of the New York Times. Communication Research, 29, 180-207.
2. Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611-639.
3. Benton, M., & Frazier, P. J. (1976). The agenda-setting function of the mass media at three levels of information holding. Communication Research, 3, 261-274.
4. Berelson, B. R., Lazarsfeld, P. F., & McPhee, W. N. (1954). Voting: A study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
5. Birkland, T. A. (1997). After disaster: Agenda setting, public policy, and focusing events. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
6. Bloggers as news media trophy hunters. (2005, February 14). The New York Times, p. Cr.
7. Blood, D. J., & Phillips, P. C. B. (1997). Economic headline news on the agenda: New approaches to understanding causes and effects. In M. McCombs, D. L. Shaw, & D. Weaver (Eds.), Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda-setting theory (pp. 97-113). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Blunder, J. G., & Kavanagh, D. (1999). The third age of political communication: Influences and features. Political Communication, 16, 209-230.
9. Carragee, K. M., & Roefs, W. (2004). The neglect of power in recent framing research. Journal of Communication, 54, 214-233.
10. Chaffee, S. H., & Choe, S. Y. (1980). Time of decision and media use during the Ford-Carter campaign. Public Opinion Quarterly, 44, 53-69.
11. Chaffee, S. H., & Wilson, D. G. (1977). Media rich, media poor: Two studies of diversity in agenda-holding. Journalism Quarterly, 34, 466-476.
12. Gushing, P. (1985). The effect of people/product relationships on advertising processing. In L. Alwitt & A. Mitchell (Eds.), Psychological process and advertising effects (pp. 241-259). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Dearing, J. W., & Rogers, E. M. (1996). Agenda-setting. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
14. Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (2003). The Internet and an informed citizenry. In David M. Anderson & Michael Cornfield (Eds.), The civic web: Online politics and democratic values (pp. 129-153). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
15. Downs, A. (1972). Up and down with ecology: The 'issue-attention cycle.' Public Interest, 25, 38-50.
16. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.
17. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (1980). The 'mainstreaming' of America: Violence profile no. n. Journal of Communication, 30(3), 10-29.
18. Geer, J. G. (1991). Do open-ended questions measure 'salient' issues? Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 360-370.
19. Ghanem, S. (1997). Filling in the tapestry: The second level of agenda-setting. In M. McCombs, D. L. Shaw, & D. Weaver (Eds.), Communication and democracy (pp. 3-14). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Golan, G., & Wanta, W. (2001). Second-level agenda setting in the New Hampshire primary: A comparison of coverage in three newspapers and public perceptions of candidates. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 247-259.
21. Iyengar, S. (1990). The accessibility bias in politics: Television news and public opinion. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2, 1-15.
22. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
23. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News that matters: Television and American opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
24. Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 290-314.
25. Katz, E. (1996). And deliver us from segmentation. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546, 22-33.
26. Kepplinger, H. M., Brosius, H.-B., & Staab, J. F. (1991). Instrumental actualization: A theory of mediated conflicts. European Journal of Communication, 6, 263-290.
27. Kim, S. J. (2003). Kan-media-sei to media-kokyoken no henka [The influence of the interaction between the Internet and the mass media on the formation of the public sphere]. Shakaigaku Hyoron [Japanese Sociological Review], 54, 175-191.
28. Kim, S., Scheufele, D., & Shanahan, J. (2002). Think about it this way: Attribute agenda-setting function of the press and the public's evaluation of a local issue. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 79, 7-25.
29. Kiousis, S., & McCombs, M. (2004). Agenda-setting effects and attitude strength: Political figures during the 1996 presidential election. Communication Research, 31, 36-57.
30. Klapper, J. T. (1960). The effects of mass communication. New York: The Free Press.
31. Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Problems and opportunities in agenda-setting research. Journal of Communication, 43(2), 100-127.
32. Krugman, H. E. (1965). The impact of television advertising: Learning without involvement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 29, 349-356.
33. Lasorsa, D. L. (1991). Effects of newspaper competition on public opinion diversity. Journalism Quarterly, 68, 38-47.
34. Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Merton, R. K. (1948). Mass communication, popular taste, and organized social action. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The communication of ideas (pp. 95-118). New York: Institute for Religious and Social Studies.
35. Lopez-Escobar, E., Llamas, J. P., & McCombs, M. (1998). Agenda setting and community consensus: First and second level effects. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 10, 335-348.
36. Maher, T. M. (2001). Framing: An emerging paradigm or a phase of agenda setting? In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy, Jr., & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life (pp. 83-94). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
37. McCombs, M. E. (1977, December). Expanding the domain of agenda-setting research: Strategies for theoretical development. Paper presented at the Mass Communication Division of the Speech Communication Association, Washington, DC.
38. McCombs, M. (1997). Building consensus: The news media's agenda-setting role. Political Communication, 14, 433-443.
39. McCombs, M., Llamas, J. P., Lopez-Escobar, E., & Rey, F. (1997). Candidate images in Spanish elections: Second-level agenda-setting effects. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 703-717.
40. McCombs, M., Lopez-Escobar, E., & Llamas, J. P. (2000). Setting the agenda of attributes in the 1996 Spanish general election. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 77-92.
41. McCombs, M., & Poindexter, P. (1983). The duty to keep informed: News exposure and civic obligation. Journal of Communication, 33(2), 88-96.
42. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 176-187.
43. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1976). Structuring the 'unseen environment.' Journal of Communication, 26(2), 18-22.
44. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1977). The agenda-setting function of the press. In D. L. Shaw & M. E. McCombs (Eds.), The emergence of American political issues: The agenda-setting function of the press (pp. 1-18). St. Paul, MN: West.
45. Miller, J. M., & Krosnick, J. A. (2000). News media impact on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Politically knowledgeable citizens are guided by a trusted source. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 301-315.
46. Narita, Y., Yoshida, N., Shimizu, M., Asaoka, T., Okamura, T., Tanabe, R., et al. (2004). Intahnetto-jidai ni okeru nyusu. no kozo-henka ni kansuru kenkyu [A study on how the structure of news changes in the age of the Internet]. Tokyo: Rikkyo University, School of Sociology.
47. Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A., & Oxley, Z. M. (1997). Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91, 567-583.
48. Neuman, W. R. (1991). The future of the mass audience. New York: Cambridge University Press.
49. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1997, July). Framing public discourse: Another take on a theoretical perspective. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Chicago.
50. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (2001). Framing as a strategic action in public deliberation. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy, Jr., & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life (pp. 35-65). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
51. Peter, J., & de Vreese, C. H. (2003). Agenda-rich, agenda-poor: A cross-national comparative investigation of nominal and thematic public agenda diversity. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 13, 44-64.
52. Petrocik, J. (1996). Issue ownership in presidential elections with a 1980 case study. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 825-850.
53. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.
54. Price, V., & Tewksbury, D. (1997). News values and public opinion: A theoretical account of media priming and framing. In G. A. Barnett & F. J. Boster (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences: Advances in persuasion (Vol. 13, pp. 173-212). Greenwich, CT: Ablex.
55. Reese, S. D., Gandy, O. H., Jr., & Grant, A. E. (Ed.). (2001). Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
56. RePass, D. E. (1971). Issue salience and party choice. American Political Science Review, 65, 389-400.
57. Roberts, M., Wanta, W., & Dzwo, T. H. (2002). Agenda setting and issue salience online. Communication Research, 29, 452-465.
58. Rochefort, D. A., & Cobb, R. W. (1994). Problem definition: An emerging perspective. In D. A. Rochefort & R. W. Cobb (Eds), The politics of problem definition: Shaping the policy agenda (pp. 1-31). Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
59. Roessler, P., & Eichhorn, W. (1999). Agenda setting. In H.-B. Brosius & C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), The German communication yearbook (pp. 277-304). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
60. Roessler, P., & Schenk, M. (2000). Cognitive bonding and the German reunification: Agenda-setting and persuasion effects of mass media. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 12, 29-47.
61. Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103-122.
62. Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication & Society, 3, 297-316.
63. Schoenbach, K., & Weaver, D. H. (1985). Finding the unexpected: Cognitive bonding in a political campaign. In S. Kraus & R. M. Perloff (Eds.), Mass media and political thought: An information-processing approach (pp. 157-176). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
64. Schuman, H., Ludwig, J., & Krosnick, J. A. (1986). The perceived threat of nuclear war, salience, and open questions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 50, 519-536.
65. Semetko, H. A., Blunder, J. G., Gurevitch, M., & Weaver, D. H. (1991). The formation of campaign agendas: A comparative analysis of party and media roles in recent American and British elections. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
66. Shaw, D. L., & Hamm, B. J. (1997). Agenda for a public union or for private communities? How individuals are using media to reshape American society. In M. McCombs, D. L. Shaw, & D. Weaver (Eds.), Communication and democracy (pp. 209-230). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
67. Shaw, D. L., & Martin, S. E. (1992). The function of mass media agenda setting. Journalism Quarterly, 69, 902-920.
68. Shaw, D. L., Stevenson, R. L., & Hamm, B. J. (2001, September). Agenda setting theory and public opinion studies in a post-mass media age. Paper presented at the annual conference of the World Association for Public Opinion Research, Rome.
69. Shimbun-shukan tokushu. (2004, November 11). Yomiuri Shimbun, p. 24.
70. Takeshita, T. (1997). Exploring the media's roles in defining reality: From issue-agenda setting to attribute-agenda setting. In M. McCombs, D. L. Shaw, & D. Weaver (Eds.), Communication and democracy (pp. 15-27). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
71. Takeshita, T. (1998). Media no gidai-settei kino [The agenda-setting function of the media]. Tokyo: Gakubunsha.
72. Tazaki, T. (1972). Taikyuzai konyu-go no kokoku sesshoku [The pattern of exposure to advertisements after purchasing durable products]. In H. Akuto (Ed.), Kokoku-koka [The advertisement effects] (pp. 236-251). Osaka, Japan: Yomiuri Television.
73. Tewksbury, D., & Althaus, S. L. (2000). Differences in knowledge acquisition among readers of the paper and online versions of a national newspaper. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 457-479.
74. Wanta, W., & Chang, K. K. (1999, May). Priming and the second level of agenda-setting: Merging two theoretical approaches. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association, San Francisco.
75. Wanta, W., Golan, G., & Lee, C. (2004). Agenda setting and international news: Media influence on public perceptions of foreign nations. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81, 364-377.
76. Wanta, W., King, P. T., & McCombs, M. E. (1995). A comparison of factors influencing issue diversity in the U.S. and Taiwan. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 7, 353-365.
77. Wanta, W., Song, Y., & Golan, G. (2002, July). Second-level agenda-setting: Linking attributes to Bush and McCain in the New Hampshire primary. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association, Seoul, Korea.
78. Weaver, D. H. (1980). Audience need for orientation and media effects. Communication Research, 7, 361-376.
79. Weaver, D. (1991). Issue salience and public opinion: Are there consequences of agenda-setting? International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 3, 53-68.
80. Weaver, D. (1997). Framing should not supplant agenda-setting. CT&M Concepts, 27, 3.
81. Weaver, D. H., Graber, D. A., McCombs, M. E., and Eyal, C. H. (1981). Media agenda-setting in a presidential election: Issues, images, and interest. New York: Praeger.
82. Weaver, D., McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. L. (2004). Agenda-setting research: Issues, attributes and influences. In L. L. Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp. 257-282). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
83. Young, M. L. (1992). Dictionary of polling: The languages of contemporary opinion research. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
84. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151-175.
85. Zhu, J. H., with Boroson, W. (1997). Susceptibility to agenda setting: A cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of individual differences. In M. McCombs, D. L. Shaw, & D. Weaver (Eds.), Communication and democracy (pp. 69-83). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.