The influence of personal influence on the study of audiences

Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science

Volumn 608, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 233-250

  Livingstone, Sonia ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Audience research; Audiences and publics; Elihu Katz; Individual and society; New media users; Personal Influence

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750009438     PISSN: 00027162     EISSN: 15523349     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0002716206292325     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. Adorno, T. 1969. Scientific experiences of a European scholar in America. In The intellectual migration: Europe and America, 1930-1960, ed. D. Fleming and B. Bailyn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Alexander, J. C., and Giesen, B. 1987. From reduction to linkage: The long view of the micro-macro debate. In The micro-macro link, ed. J. C. Alexander, B. Giesen, R. Munch, and N. J. Smelser. Berkeley: University of California Press.
3. Allor, M. 1988. Relocating the site of the audience. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 5: 217-233.
4. Blumler, J. G., M. Gurevitch, and E. Katz. 1985. REACHING OUT: A future for gratifications research. In Media gratifications research: Current perspectives, ed. K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner, and P. Palmgreen. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
5. Blumler, J. G., and E. Katz, eds. 1974. The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratification research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
6. Boudon, R. 1991. What middle-range theories are. Contemporary Social Psychology 20 (4). 519-524.
7. Burbules, N. C. 1998. Rhetorics on the Web: Hyperreading and critical literacy. In Page to screen: Taking literacy into the electronic era, ed. I. Snyder, 102-122. New York: Routledge.
8. Carey, J. W. 1989. Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. New York: Routledge.
9. Coleman, J. S., E. Katz, and H. Menzel. 1966. Medical innovation: A diffusion study. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
10. Couldry, N., S. Livingstone, and T. Markham. Forthcoming. Media consumption and public engagement: Beyond the presumption of attention. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave.
11. Couldry, Nick, and Tim Markham. 2006. Public connection through media consumption: Between over socialization and de-socialization. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 608: 251-269.
12. Crain, R. L., E. Katz, and D. Rosenthal. 1969. The politics of community conflict: The fluoridation decision. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
13. Dayan, D., and E. Katz. 1992. Media events: The live broadcasting of history. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14. Eldridge, J., ed. 1993. Getting the message: News, truth and power. London: Routledge.
15. Elliott, P. 1974. Uses and gratifications research: A critique and a sociological alternative. In The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research, ed. J. G. Blumler and E. Katz. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16. Fornas, J., K. Klein, M. Ladendorf, J. Sunden, and M. Svenigsson, eds. 2002. Digital borderlands: Cultural studies of identity and interactivity on the Internet. New York: Peter Lang.
17. Gerbner, G., L. Gross, M. Morgan, and N. Signorielli. 1986. Living with television: The dynamics of the cultivation process. In Perspectives on media effects, ed. J. Bryant and D. Zillman. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. Gitlin, T. 1978. Media sociology: The dominant paradigm. Theory and Society 6: 205-253.
19. Grossberg, L. 1993. Can cultural studies find true happiness in communication? Journal of Communication 43 (4). 89-97.
20. Habermas, J. 1989. The tasks of a critical theory of society. In Critical theory and society: A reader, ed. S. E. Bronner and D. M. Kellner, 292-312. New York: Routledge.
21. Hall, S. 1980. Encoding/decoding. In Culture, media, language, ed. S. Hall, D. Hobson, A. Lowe, and P. Willis. London: Hutchinson.
22. Hall, S. 1994. Reflections on the encoding/decoding model. In Viewing, reading, listening: Audiences and cultural reception, ed. J. Cruz and J. Lewis. Boulder, CO: Westview.
23. Hardt, H. 1992. Critical communication studies: Communication, history and theory in America. London: Routledge.
24. Hawkins, R. P., J. Wiemann, and S. Pingree, eds. 1988. Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal processes. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
25. Horkheimer, M. 1972. Traditional and critical theory. In Critical theory: Selected essays, ed. M. Horkheimer. New York: Seabury Press.
26. Hovland, C., I. Janis, and H. H. Kelley. 1953. Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
27. Jay, M. 1973. The dialectical imagination: A history of the Frankfurt school and the Institute of Social Research, 1923-1950. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
28. Jay, M. ed. 1987. An unmastered past: The autobiographical reflections of Leo Lowenthal. Berkeley: University of California Press.
29. Jensen, K. B., ed. 2005. Interface://Culture: The World Wide Web as political resources and aesthetic form. Frederiksberg, Denmark: Samfundslitteratur Press/Nordicom.
30. Jensen, K. B., and K. E. Rosengren. 1990. Five traditions in search of the audience. European Journal of Communication 5 (2-3). 207-238.
31. Kadushin, Charles. 2006. Personal influence: A radical theory of action. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 608: 270-281.
32. Katz, E. 1956. Interpersonal relations and mass communications: Studies in the flow of influence. PhD diss., Columbia University, New York.
33. Katz, E. 1957. The two-step flow of communication: An up-to-date report on an hypothesis. Public Opinion Quarterly 21: 61-78.
34. Katz, E. 1959. Mass communications research and the study of popular culture: An editorial note on a possible future for this journal. Studies in Public Communication 2: 1-6.
35. Katz, E. 1960. Communication research and the image of society: Convergence of two traditions. American Journal of Sociology 65 (5). 435-440.
36. Katz, E. 1978. Of mutual interest. Journal of Communication 28 (2). 133-141.
37. Katz, E. 1979. The uses of Becker, Blumler and Swanson. Communication Research 6 (1). 74-83.
38. Katz, E. 1980. On conceptualising media effects. Studies in Communication 1: 119-141.
39. Katz, E. 1987. Communications research since Lazarsfeld. Public Opinion Quarterly 51: S25 - S45.
40. Katz, E. 1992. On parenting a paradigm: Gabriel Tarde's agenda for opinion and communication research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 4 (1). 80-86.
41. Katz, E., M. Gurevitch, and H. Hass. 1973. On the use of the mass media for important things. American Sociological Review 38 (2). 164-181.
42. Katz, E., and P. F. Lazarsfeld. 1955. Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communication. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
43. Katz, E., M. L. Levin, and H. Hamilton. 1963. Traditions of research on the diffusion of innovation. American Sociological Review 28: 237-252.
44. Katz, E., J. D. Peters, T. Liebes, and A. Orloff. 2003. Editors' introduction. In Canonic texts in media research, ed. E. Katz, J. D. Peters, T. Liebes, and A. Orluff, 1-8. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
45. Kress, G. 2003. Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge.
46. Lang, K., and G. E. Lang. 1983. The "new" rhetoric of mass communication research: A longer view. Journal of Communication 33 (3). 128-140.
47. Lang, K., and G. E. Lang. 2006. Personal influence and the new paradigm: Some inadvertent consequences. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 608: 157-178.
48. Lasswell, H. D. 1948. The structure and function of communication in society. In The communication of ideas, ed. L. Bryson. New York: Harper and Brothers.
49. Lazarsfeld, P. F. 1941. Remarks on administrative and critical communications research. Studies in Philosophy and Science 9: 3-16.
50. Lazarsfeld, P. F. 1969. An episode in the history of social research: A memoir. In D. Fleming and B. Bailyn (Eds.), The intellectual migration: Europe and America, 1930-1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
51. Lazarsfeld, P. F., and H. Gaudet. 1944. The people's choice. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce.
52. Levy, M. R., and M. Gurevitch, eds. 1994. Defining media studies: Reflections on the future of the field. New York: Oxford University Press.
53. Levy, M. R., and S. Windahl. 1985. The concept of audience activity. In Media gratifications research, ed. K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner, and P. Palmgreen. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
54. Liebes, T., and E. Katz. 1990. The export of meaning: Cross-cultural readings of Dallas. New York: Oxford University Press.
55. Lievrouw, L., and S. Livingstone. 2006. Introduction. In Handbook of new media: Social shaping and social consequences, ed. L. Lievrouw and S. Livingstone, updated student edition ed., 1-14. London: Sage.
56. Lindlof, T., ed. 1987. Natural audiences: Qualitative research on media uses and effects. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
57. Lindlof, T. 1991. The qualitative study of media audiences. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 35 (1). 23-42.
58. Livingstone, S. 1996. On the continuing problems of media effects research. In Mass media and society, ed. J. Curran and M. Gurevitch, 2nd ed., 305-324. London: Edward Arnold.
59. Livingstone, S. 1997. The work of Elihu Katz: Conceptualizing media effects in context. In International handbook of media research: A critical survey, ed. J. Corner, P. Schlesinger, and R. Silverstone, 18-47. London: Routledge.
60. Livingstone, S. 1998a. Audience research at the crossroads: The "implied audience" in media theory. European Journal of Cultural Studies 1 (2). 193-217.
61. Livingstone, S. 1998b. Making sense of television: The psychology of audience interpretation. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
62. Livingstone, S. 1998c. Relationships between media and audiences: Prospects for future research. In Media, culture, identity: Essays in honour of Elihu Katz, ed. T. Liebes and J. Curran. London: Routledge.
63. Livingstone, S. 2003. The changing nature of audiences: From the mass audience to the interactive media user. In The Blackwell companion to media research, ed. A. Valdivia, 337-359. Oxford: Blackwell.
64. Livingstone, S. 2004. The challenge of changing audiences: Or, what is the audience researcher to do in the Internet age? European Journal of Communication 19 (1). 75-86.
65. Livingstone, S., ed. 2005. Audiences and publics: When cultural engagement matters for the public sphere. Bristol, UK: Intellect Press.
66. Mendelsohn, H. 1989. Socio-psychological construction and the mass communication effects dialectic. Communication Research 16 (6). 813-823.
67. Merton, R. K. 1955. A paradigm for the study of the sociology of knowledge. In The language of social research: A reader in the methodology of social research, ed. P. F. Lazarsfeld and M. Rosenberg, 498-510. New York: Free Press.
68. Miller, D., and D. Slater. 2000. The Internet: An ethnographic approach. London: Berg.
69. Morley, D. 1980. The nationwide audience: Structure and decoding. London: British Film Institute.
70. Morley, D. 1992. Television, audiences and cultural studies. London: Routledge.
71. Morley, D. 1993. Active audience theory: Pendulums and pitfalls. Journal of Communication 43 (4). 13-19.
72. Nightingale, V. 1996. Studying audiences: The shock of the real. London: Routledge.
73. Peters, J. D. 1989. Democracy and American mass communication theory: Dewey, Lippman, Lazarsfeld. Communication 11: 199-220.
74. Peters, J. D. 2006. The part played by gentiles in the flow of mass communication: On the ethnic utopia of Personal influence. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 608: 97-114.
75. Pillai, P. 1992. Rereading Stuart Hall's encoding/decoding model. Communication Theory 2 (3). 221-233.
76. Pooley, Jefferson. 2006. Fifteen pages that shook the field: Personal influence, Edward Shils, and the remembered history of mass communication research. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 608: 130-156.
77. Press, A., and S. Livingstone. 2006. Taking audience research into the age of new media: Old problems and new challenges. In The question of method in cultural studies, ed. M. White and J. Schwoch. Oxford: Blackwell.
78. Schiller, H. I. 1989. Culture Inc.: The corporate takeover of public expression. New York: Oxford University Press.
79. Schrøder, K., K. Drotner, S. Kline, and C. Murray. 2003. Researching audiences. London: Arnold.
80. Sills, D. L. 1981. Surrogates, institutes, and the search for convergences: The research style of Paul F. Lazarsfeld. Contemporary Sociology 10: 351-361.
81. Simonson, P., and G. Weimann. 2003. Critical research at Columbia: Lazarsfeld's and Merton's "Mass communication, popular taste, and organized social action." In Canonic texts in media research, ed. E. Katz, J. D. Peters, T. Liebes, and A. Orluff, 12-38. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
82. Smith, M. B. 1983. The shaping of American social psychology: A personal perspective from the periphery. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 9 (2). 165-180.
83. Sproule, J. M. 1989. Progressive propaganda critics and the magic bullet myth. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 6 (3). 225-246.
84. Swanson, D. L. 1992. Understanding audiences: Continuing contributions of gratifications research. Poetics 21 (4). 305-328.
85. Thompson, J. B. 1994. Social theory and the media. In Communication theory today, ed. D. Crowley and D. Mitchell. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
86. Tomlinson, J. 1999. Globalization and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
87. Van Zoonen, L. 2002. Gendering the Internet: Claims, controversies and cultures. European Journal of Communication 17 (1). 5-23.