Exemplars in the news: A theory of the effects of political communication

Communication and Emotion: Essays in Honor of Dolf Zillmann

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 179-194

  Brosius, Hans Bernd ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 75349102969     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781410607584     Document Type: Chapter

References (40)

1. Baesler, E. J., & Burgoon, J. K. (1994). The temporal effects of story and statistical evidence on belief change. Communication Research, 21, 582-602.
2. Bandura, A. (1994). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 61-90). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Bar-Hillel, M. (1980). The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments. Acta Psychologica, 44, 211-233.
4. Brendel, D., & Grobe, B. E. (1976). Journalistisches Grund-wissen: Darstellung der Formen und Mittel journalisti-scher Arbeit und Einführung in die Anwendung empiri-scher Daten in den Massenme-dien [The basics of journalism: Formats and tools of journalistic work]. München: Saur.
5. Brosius, H.-B. (1995). Alltagsrationalität in der Nachrichtenrezeption: Ein Modell der Wahrnehmung und Verarbeitung von Nach-richteninhalten [Everday rationality in news reception: A model of information processing of news content]. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
6. Brosius, H.-B. (1999). The influence of exemplars on recipients' judgments: The part played by similarity between exemplar and recipient. European Journal of Communication, 14, 213-224
7. Brosius, H.-B., & Bathelt, A. (1994). The utility of exemplars in persuasive communications. Communication Research, 21, 48-78.
8. Brosius, H.-B., Schweiger, W., & Rossmann, C. (2000). Auf der Suche nach den Ursachen des Fallbeispieleffekts: Der Einfluß von Anzahl und Art der Urheber von Fallbeispielinformation [In search of the causes of exemplification effects: Impact of number of exemplars and type of source]. Medienpsychologie, 12, 153-175.
9. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.
10. Chaiken, S., & Stangor, C. (1987). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 575-630.
11. Daschmann, G. (2001). Der Einfluß von Fallbeispielen auf Leserurteile: Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur Medienwirkung [The impact of exemplars on readers' judgments: Experimental studies on media effects]. Konstanz: UVK Medien.
12. Daschmann, G., & Brosius, H.-B. (1999). Can a single event create an issue? Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 76, 35-51.
13. Gan, S., Hill, J. R., Pschernig, E., & Zillmann, D. (1996). The Hebron massacre, selective reports of Jewish reactions, and perceptions of volatility in Israel. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40, 122-131.
14. Gerbner, G. L., Gross, L., Morgan, M., & Signorielli, N. (1982). Charting the mainstream: Television's contributions to political orientations. Journal of Communication, 32(2), 100-127.
15. Gerbner, G. L., Gross, L., Signorielli, N., & Morgan, M. (1980). Aging with television: Images on television drama and conceptions of social reality. Journal of Communication, 30(1), 37-49.
16. Gibson, R., & Zillmann, D. (1994). Exaggerated versus representative exemplification in news reports: Perception of issues and personal consequences. Communication Research, 21, 603-624.
17. Gibson, R., & Zillmann, D. (1998). Effects of citation in exemplifying testimony on issue perception. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 75, 167-176.
18. Haller, M. (1987). Die Reportage. Ein Handbuch für Journalisten [Reporting: A handbook for journalists]. München: Ölschläger.
19. Hamill, R., Wilson, T. D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1980). Insensitivity to sample bias: Generalizing from atypical cases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 578-589.
20. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21. McArthur, L. Z. (1981). What grabs you? The role of attention in impression formation and causal attribution. In E. T. Higgins, C. P. Herman, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Social cognition. The Ontario symposium, Vol. 1 (pp. 201-246). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22. McCombs, M. E., Cole, R. R., Stevenson, R. L., & Shaw, D. L. (1981). Precision journalism: An emerging theory and technique of news reporting. Gazette, 27, 21-34.
23. Meyer, P. (1973). Precision journalism: A reporter's introduction to social science methods. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
24. Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
25. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1984). The spiral of silence: Public opinion, our social skin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1991). Öffentliche Meinung: Die Entdeckung der Schweigespirale [Public opinion: The discovery of the spiral of silence]. Berlin: Ullstein.
27. Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
28. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
29. Perry, S. D., & Gonzenbach, W. J. (1997). Effects of news exemplification extended: Considerations of controversiality and perceived future opinion. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 41, 229-244.
30. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion. New York: Springer.
31. Potter, W. J. (1991a). The linearity assumption in cultivation research. Human Communication Research, 17, 562-583.
32. Potter, W. J. (1991b). The relationships between first- and second-order measures of cultivation. Human Communication Research, 18, 92-113.
33. Potter, W. J., & Chang, I. C. (1990). Television exposure measures and the cultivation hypothesis. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 34, 313-333.
34. Shoemaker, P. J., Chang, T., & Brendlinger, N. (1987). Deviance as a predictor of newsworthiness: Coverage of international events in the U.S. media. In M. L. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication yearbook (pp. 348-365). Beverly Hills: Sage.
35. Taylor, S. E., & Thompson, S. C. (1982). Stalking the elusive "vividness" effect. Psychological Review, 89, 155-181.
36. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.
37. Wilson, M. G., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1989). Information competition and vividness effects in on-line judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 4, 132-139.
38. Zillmann, D., & Brosius, H.-B. (2000). Exemplification in communication. The influence of case reports on issue perception. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
39. Zillmann, D., Gibson, R. Sundar, S. S., & Perkins, J. W. (1996). Effects of exemplification in news reports on the perception of social issues. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 73, 427-444.
40. Zillmann, D., Perkins, J. W., & Sundar, S. S. (1992). Impression-formation effects of printed news varying in descriptive precision and exemplifications. Medienpsychologie, 4, 168-185.