Attention, perception, and perceived effects: Negative political advertising in a battleground state of the 2004 presidential election

Mass Communication and Society

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 177-196

  Cheng, Hong ^a   Riffe, Daniel ^a  

^a OHIO UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 57749141280     PISSN: 15205436     EISSN: 15327825     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15205430701592859     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Aldrich, J. (1995). Why parties? The origin and transformation of political parties in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Anderson, N. (2004a, November 2). Silence of the wolves, and their ilk, in swing states. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved March 14, 2005, from http://www.latimes.com/news/yahoo/la-na-ads2nov02,1,2474245.story
3. Anderson, N. (2004b, October 19). TV ad spending soars as messages turn shrill. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved March 14, 2005, from http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ads19oct19.story
4. Ansolabehere, S., & Iyengar, S. (1995). Going negative: How attack ads shrink and polarize the electorate. New York: The Free Press.
5. Brians, C. L., Wattenberg, M.P. (1996).Campaign issue knowledge and salience: Comparing reception from TV commercials, TV news and newspaper. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 172-193.
6. Broder,D. S. (1972). The party's over: The failure of politics in America.NewYork: Harper and Row.
7. Chang, C. (2003). Party bias in political-advertising processing: results from an experimental involving the 1998 Taipei mayoral election. Journal of Advertising, 32, 55-67.
8. Chapin, J. R. (2000). Third-person perception and optimistic bias among urban minority at-risk youth. Communication Research, 27, 51-81.
9. Chia, S. C., Lu, K. H., & McLeod, D. M. (2004). Sex, lies, and video compact disc: A case study on third-person perception and motivations for media censorship. Communication Research, 31, 109-130.
10. Cohen, J., & Davis, R. G. (1991). Third-person effects and the different impact in negative political advertising. Journalism Quarterly, 68, 680-688.
11. David, P., Liu, K., & Myser, M. (2004). Methodological artifact or persistent bias? Testing the robustness of the third-person and reverse third-person effects for alcohol messages. Communication Research, 31, 206-233.
12. David, P., Morrison, G., Johnson, M. A., & Ross, F. (2002). Body image, race, and fashion models: Social distance and social identification in third-person effects. Communication Research, 29, 270-294.
13. Davison,W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1-14.
14. Devlin, L. P. (1989). Contrasts in presidential campaign commercials of 1988. American Behavioral Scientist, 32, 389-414.
15. Duck, J. M., Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (1995). Me, us and them: Political identification and the third-person effect in the 1993 Australian federal election. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 195-215.
16. Duck, J. M., Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (1999). Social identity and perceptions of media persuasion: Are we always less influenced than others? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 1879-1899.
17. Duck, J.M., & Mullin, B. (1995). The perceived impact of the mass media: Reconsidering the third-person effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 77-93.
18. Duncan, T. (2002). IMC: Using advertising and promotion to build brands. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
19. Eveland,W. P., Jr., Nathanson, A. I., Detenber, B. H., McLeod, D. M. (1999). Rethinking the social distance corollary: Perceived likelihood of exposure and the third-person perception. Communication Research, 26, 275-302.
20. Farhi, P. (2004, October). Ohio city bombarded with political spots; In Toledo, it's 14,273 TV ads and counting. The Washington Post. Retrieved March 14, 2005, from http://www.tnsmi-cmag.com
21. Garramone, G. M. (1985). Effects of negative political advertising: The role of sponsors and rebuttal. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 29, 147-159.
22. Gilbert, C. (2004, August 27). Swift boat ad has outsize impact. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Retrieved July 1, 2006, from http://www.jsonline.com/news/nat/aug04/254623.asp
23. Harmon, R. R., & Coney, K. A. (1982). The persuasive effects of source creditability in buy and lease situations. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 255-260.
24. Henriksen, L., & Flora, J. A. (1999). Third-person perception and children. Communication Research, 26, 643-665.
25. Hershey, M. R. (2005). Party politics in America (11th ed.). New York: Pearson Longman.
26. Hoffner, C., Buchanan, M., Anderson, J. D., Hubbs, L. A., Kamigaki, S. K., Kowalczyk, L., et al. (1999). Support for censorship of television violence: The role of the third-person effect and news exposure. Communication Research, 26, 726-742.
27. Hoffner, C., Plotkin, R. S., Buchanan, M., Anderson, J. D., Karnigaki, S. K., Hubbs, L. A., et al. (2001). The third-person effect in perceptions of the influence of television violence. Journal of Communication, 51, 283-299.
28. Hoorens, V.,Ruiter, S. (1996). The optimal impact phenomenon: Beyond the third-person effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 599-610.
29. Hosenball, M., Isikoff, M., & Bailey, H. (2004, September 20). The secret money war. Newsweek, pp. 22-28.
30. Huh, J., Deloreme, D. E., & Reid, L. N. (2004). The third-person effect and its influence on behavioral outcomes in the product advertising context: The cast of direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising. Communication Research, 31, 568-599.
31. Johnson-Cartee, K. S., & Copeland, G. A. (1991). Negative political advertising: Coming of age. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32. Johnson-Cartee, K. S., & Copeland, G. A. (1997). Manipulation of the American voter: Political campaign commercials. Westport, CT: Praeger.
33. Kaid, L. L., & Boydston, J. (1987). An experimental study of the effectiveness of negative political advertisements. Communication Quarterly, 35, 193-201.
34. Lasorsa, D. L. (1992). Policymakers and the third-person effect. In J. D. Kennamer (Ed.), Public opinion, the press and public policy (pp. 163-175). Westport, CT: Praeger.
35. Lau, R. R., & Pomper, G. M. (2004). Negative campaigning: An analysis of U.S. senate elections. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
36. Lau, R. R.,Sigelman, L. (2000). Effectiveness of negative political advertising. In J. A. Thurber, C. J. Nelson, & D. A. Dulio (Eds.), Campaign advertising in elections (pp. 10-43). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
37. Lau, R. R., Sigelman, L., Heldman, C., & Babbitt, P. (1999). The effects of negative political advertisements: A meta-analytic assessment. American Political Science Review, 93, 851-875.
38. Lo, V. H., & Wei, R. (2002). Third-person effect, gender, and pornography on the Internet. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 46, 13-33.
39. McLeod, D. M., Detenber, B. H., & Eveland,W. P., Jr. (2001). Behind the third-person effects: Differentiating perceptual processes for self and other. Journal of Communication, 51, 678-695.
40. Meirick, P. C. (2004). Topic-relevant reference groups and dimensions of distance: Political advertising and firstand third-person effects. Communication Research, 31, 234-255.
41. Merritt, S. (1984). Negative political advertising: Some empirical findings. Journal of Advertising, 13, 27-38.
42. Paek, H. J., Pan, Z. D., Sun, Y., Abisaid, J., & Houden, D. (2005). The third-person perception as social judgment: An exploration of social distance and uncertainty in perceived effects of political attack ads. Communication Research, 32, 143-170.
43. Park, H. S., & Salmon, C. T. (2005). A test of the third-person effect in public relations: Application of social comparison theory. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 82, 25-43.
44. Paul, B., Salwen, M. B.,Dupagne, M. (2000). The third-person effect:Ameta-analysis of the perceptual hypothesis. Mass Communication and Society, 3, 57-85.
45. Peiser,W.,Peter, J. (2000). Third-person perception of television-viewing behavior. Journal of Communication, 50, 25-45.
46. Peiser, W., & Peter, J. (2001). Explaining individual differences in third-person perception: A limits/possibilities perspective. Communication Research, 28, 156-180.
47. Perloff, R. M. (1993). Third-person effect research, 1983-1992: A review and synthesis. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 5, 167-184.
48. Perloff, R. M. (1996). Perceptions and conceptions of political media impact: The third-person effect and beyond. In A. N. Crigler (Ed.), The psychology of political communication (pp. 177-197). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
49. Perloff, R. M. (1999). The third-person effect: A critical review and synthesis. Media Psychology, 1, 353-379.
50. Perloff, R. M. (2002). The third-person effect. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 489-506). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51. Pinkleton, B. (1997). The effects of negative comparative political advertising on candidate evaluations and advertising evaluations: An exploration. Journal of Advertising, 26, 19-30.
52. Pinkleton, B. E., Um, N., & Austin, E.W. (2002). An exploration of the effects of negative political advertising on political decision making. Journal of Advertising, 31, 13-25.
53. Presidential TV ads. (2004). Retrieved March 14, 2005, from TNS Media Intelligence/CMAG Web site: http://www.tnsmi-cmag.com
54. Public perceptions of negative political campaigns. (2002). Page Wise. Retrieved July 1, 2006, from Essortment Web site:http://id.essortment.com/negativepolitic_rqeo.htm
55. Salwen, M. B. (1998). Perceptions of media influence and support for censorship: The third-person effect in the 1996 presidential election. Communication Research, 25, 259-285.
56. Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne, M. (1999). The third-person effect. Communication Research, 26, 523-549.
57. Scharrer, E. (2002). Third-person perception and television violence: The role of out-group stereotyping in perceptions of susceptibility to effects. Communication Research, 29, 681-704.
58. Shen, F., Wu, H. D. (2002). Effects of soft-money issues advertisements on candidate evaluation and voting preference: An exploration. Mass Communication and Society, 5, 395-410.
59. Thomas, E., & Gegax, T.T. (2004, August 30). New hostile fire. Newsweek, pp. 26-27.
60. Thurber, J. A., Nelson, C. J., & Dulio, D. A. (Eds.). (2000). Crowded airwaves: Campaign advertising in elections. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
61. Tsfati, Y., & Cohen, J. (2003). On the effect of the "third-person effect": Perceived influence of media coverage and residential mobility intentions. Journal of Communication, 53, 711-728.
62. Valentino, N. A., Hutchings, V. L., & Williams, D. (2004). The impact of political advertising on knowledge, Internet information seeking, and candidate preference. Journal of Communication, 54, 337-354.
63. Wanta,W., Lemert, J. B., & Lee, T. (1998). Consequences of negative political advertising exposure. In T. J. Johnson, C. E. Hays, & S. P. Hays (Eds.), Engaging the public: How government and the media can reinvigorate American democracy (pp. 97-109). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
64. Wattenberg, M. P. (1990). The rise of Canadian-centered politics: Presidential elections of the 1980s. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
65. Weaver, D., & Drew, D. (2001). Voter learning and interest in the 2000 presidential election: Did the media matter? Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 787-798.
66. Westneat, D. (2004, October 20). Ohio: The real battleground. The Seattle Times. (Fourth edition North News) p. A1.
67. Wu, W., & Koo, S. H. (2001). Perceived effects of sexually explicit Internet content: The third-person effect in Singapore. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 260-274.