Mass media effects

The Handbook of Communication Science

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 255-272

  Nabi, Robin L ^a   Oliver, Mary Beth ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649746346     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781412982818.n15     Document Type: Chapter

References (96)

1. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 43-67). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Bargh, J. A. Morsella, E. The unconscious mind. Perspectives on Psycho-logical Science 3 73-79. (2008). doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00064.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00064.x
5. Bryant, J. Miron, D. Theory and research in mass communication Journal of Communication 662-704. (2004).
6. Cantor, J. (2002). Fright reactions to mass media. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 287-306). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Cappella, J. N., & Jamieson, K. H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. New York: Oxford University Press.
8. Carveth, R. Alexander, A. Soap opera viewing motivations and the cultivation process. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 29 259-273. (1985).
9. Conway, J. C. Rubin, A. M. Psychological predictors of television viewing motivation Communication Research 18 443-464. (1991). doi:10.1177/009365091018004001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365091018004001
10. Davidson, W. P. The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly 47 1-15. (1983). doi:10.1086/268763 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/268763
11. Doob, A. N. Macdonald, G. E. Television viewing and fear of victimization: Is the relationship causal? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 170-179. (1979). doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.2.170 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.2.170
12. Duck, J. M. Hogg, M. A. Terry, D. J. Me, us and them: Political identification and the 3rd-person effect in the 1993 Australian federal election. European Journal of Social Psychology 25 195-215. (1995). doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420250206 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420250206
13. Duck, J. M. Hogg, M. A. Terry, D. J. Social identity and perceptions of media persuasion: Are we always less influenced than others. European Journal of Social Psychology 29 1879-1899. (1999).
14. Entman, R. M. Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43 (4) 51-58. (1993). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
15. Finn, S. Origins of media exposure: Linking personality traits to TV, radio, print, and film use. Communication Research 24 507-529. (1997). doi:10.1177/009365097024005003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365097024005003
16. Gerbner, G. Toward “cultural indicators”: The analysis of mass mediated message systems. AV Communication Review 17 137-148. (1969).
17. Gerbner, G. Gross, L. Morgan, M. Signorielli, N. The “mainstreaming” of America: Violence profile No. 11. Journal of Communication 30 10-29. (1980). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1980.tb01987.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1980.tb01987.x
18. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., Signorielli, N., & Shanahan, J. (2002). Growing up with television: Cultivation processes. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 43-67). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
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: Exploring the intellectual frontier in agenda-setting theory (pp. 3-14). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20. Gill, A. J. Oberlander, J. Austin, E. Rating e-mail personality at zero acquain-tance. Personality and Individual Differences 40 497-507. (2006). doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.06.027 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.06.027
21. Gosling, S. D., Gaddis, S., & Vazire, S. (2007, March). Personality impressions based on facebook profiles. Paper presented at the International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Boulder, CO.
22. Green, M. C. Brock, T. C. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 701-721. (2000). doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701
23. Gunther, A. C. The persuasive press inference: Effects of mass media on perceived public opinion. Communication Research 25 486-504. (1998). doi:10.1177/009365098025005002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365098025005002
24. Gunther, A. C. Chia, S. C. Y. Predicting pluralistic ignorance: The hostile media perception and its consequences. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 78 688-701. (2001). doi:10.1177/107769900107800405 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107769900107800405
25. Gunther, A. C. Mundy, P. Biased optimism and the third person effect. Journalism Quarterly 70 58-67. (1993). doi:10.1177/107769909307000107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107769909307000107
26. Gunther, A. C. Schmitt, K. Mapping boundaries of the hostile media effect. Journal of Communication 54 55-70. (2004). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02613.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02613.x
27. Gunther, A. C. Storey, J. D. The influence of presumed influence. Journal of Communication 53 199-215. (2003). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2003.tb02586.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2003.tb02586.x
28. Hawkins, R. P., & Pingree, S. (1990). Divergent psychological processes in constructing social reality from mass media content. In N. Signorielli & M. Morgan (Eds.), Cultivation analysis: New directions in media effects research (pp. 35-50). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29. Hirsch, P. The “scary world” of the non viewer and other anomalies: A reanalysis of Gerbner et al.’s findings on cultivation analysis, Part I. Communication Research 7 403-456. (1980).
30. Hirsch, P. On not learning from one’s own mistakes: A reanalysis of Gerbner et al.’s findings on cultivation analysis. Communication Research 8 3-37. (1981).
31. Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
32. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33. Kahneman, D. Tverksy, A. Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist 28 107-128. (1984).
34. Kalyanaraman, S. Sundar, S. S. The psychological appeal of personalized content in Web portals: Does customization affect attitudes and behavior? Journal of Communication 56 110-132. (2006). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00006.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00006.x
35. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19-32). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
36. Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. (1955). Personal influence. New York: Free Press.
37. Kubey, R. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Television addiction is no mere metaphor. Scientific American 286 74-78. (2002). doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0202-74 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0202-74
38. Lang, A. The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. Journal of Communication 50 46-70. (2000). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02833.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02833.x
39. LaRose, R. Lin, C. A. Eastin, M. S. Unregulated Internet usage: Addiction, habit, or deficient self-regulation? Media Psychology 5 225-253. (2003). doi:10.1207/S1532785XMEP0503_01 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0503_01
40. Lasswell, H. D. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The communication of ideas: A series of addresses (pp. 37-51). New York: Harper.
41. Levy, M. R. Windahl, S. Audience activity and gratifications: A conceptual clarification and exploration. Communication Research 11 51-78. (1984). doi:10.1177/009365084011001003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365084011001003
42. McCombs, M. E. (2004). Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
43. McCombs, M., & Ghanem, S. I. (2001). The convergence of agenda setting and framing. In R. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy, & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (pp. 67-81). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
44. McCombs, M. E. Shaw, D. L. The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36 176-187. (1972). doi:10.1086/267990 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/267990
45. McIlwraith, R. D.“I’m addicted to television”: The personality, imagination, and TV watching patterns of self-identified TV addicts. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 42 371-386. (1998).
46. McLeod, D. M. Detenber, B. H. Eveland, W. P. Behind the third-person effect: Differentiating perceptual processes for self and other. Journal of Communication 51 678-695. (2001). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2001.tb02902.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2001.tb02902.x
47. McQuail, D., Blumler, J. G., & Brown, J. R. (1972). The television audience: A revised perspective. In D. McQuail (Ed.), Sociology of mass communication (pp. 135-165). Middlesex, England: Penguin.
48. Meirick, P. C. Topic-relevant reference groups and dimensions of distance: Political advertising and first- and third-person effects. Communication Research 31 234-255. (2004). doi:10.1177/0093650203261514 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650203261514
49. Meirick, P. C. Self-enhancement moti-vation as a third variable in the relationship between first- and third-person effects. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 17 473-483. (2005). doi:10.1093/ijpor/edh077 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edh077
50. Meirick, P. C. Media schemas, perceived effects, and person perceptions. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 83 632-649. (2006). doi:10.1177/107769900608300310 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107769900608300310
51. Morgan, M., & Shanahan, J. (1997). Two decades of cultivation research: An appraisal and meta-analysis. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 20, pp. 1-45). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
52. Nabi, R. L. (2002). Discrete emotions and persuasion. In J. Dillard & M. Pfau (Eds.), Handbook of persuasion (pp. 289-308). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sagedoi:10.4135/9781452218410 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452218410.
53. Nabi, R. L. (2007). Emotion and persuasion: A social cognitive perspective. In D. R. Roskos-Ewoldsen & J. Monahan (Eds.), Social cognition and communication: Theories and methods (pp. 377-398). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
54. Nabi, R. L. Biely, E. N. Morgan, S. J. Stitt, C. Reality-based television programming and the psychology of its appeal. Media Psychology 5 303-330. (2003). doi:10.1207/S1532785XMEP0504_01 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0504_01
55. Nabi, R. L. Clark, S. Testing the limits of social cognitive theory: Why negatively-reinforced behaviors may be modeled anyway. Journal of Communication 58 407-427. (2008). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00392.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00392.x
56. Nabi, R. L. Riddle, K. Personality traits as moderators of the cultivation effect. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 52 327-348. (2008).
57. Nathanson, A. I. (2001). Mediation of children’s television viewing: Working toward concep-tual clarity and common understanding. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Communication yearbook 25 (pp. 115-151). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. doi:10.1207/s15567419cy2501_4 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15567419cy2501_4
58. Palmgreen, P. (1984). Uses and gratifications: A theoretical perspective. In R. N. Bostrom (Ed.), Communication yearbook 8 (pp. 20-55). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
59. Palmgreen, P., Wenner, L. A., & Rosengren, K. E. (1985). Uses and gratifications research: The past ten years. In K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner, & P. Palmgreen (Eds.), Media gratifications research: Current perspectives (pp. 11-37). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
60. Papacharissi, Z. Rubin, A. Predictors of Internet use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 44 175-196. (2000).
61. Perloff, R. M. The third-person effect: A critical review and synthesis. Media Psychology 1 353-378. (1999). doi:10.1207/s1532785xmep0104_4 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532785xmep0104_4
62. 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.
63. Piaget, J. Essai sur quelques aspects du developpment de la notion de partie chez l’enfant [Essays on some aspects of the development of the notion of part in infants]. Journal de Psychologie 18 449-480. (1921).
64. Potter, W. J. Cultivation theory and research: A conceptual critique. Human Communication Research 4 564-601. (1993).
65. Potter, W. J. Riddle, K.A content analysis of the media effects literature. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 84 90-104. (2007). doi:10.1177/107769900708400107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107769900708400107
66. Price, V. Huang, L. N. Tewksbury, D. Third-person effects of news coverage: Orientations toward media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 74 525-540. (1997). doi:10.1177/107769909707400307 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107769909707400307
67. Price, V., & Tewksbury, D. (1996). News values and public opinion: A theoretical account of media priming and framing. In G. Barnett & F. Boster (Eds.), Progress in communi-cation sciences (pp. 173-212). New York: Ablex.
68. Reid, S. A. Byrne, S. Brundidge, J. S. Shoham, M. D. Marlow, M. L.A critical test of self-enhancement, exposure, and self-categorization explanations for first- and third person perceptions. Human Communication Research 33 143-162. (2007).
69. Reid, S. A. Hogg, M. A.A self-categorization explanation for the third-person effect. Human Communication Research 31 129-161. (2005). doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2005.tb00867.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2005.tb00867.x
70. Rubin, A. M. (2002). The uses-and-gratifications perspective of media effects. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 525-548). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
71. Rubin, A. M. Rubin, R. B. Interface of personal and mediated communication: A research agenda. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 2 36-53. (1985). doi:10.1080/15295038509360060 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15295038509360060
72. Ruggiero, T. Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communi-cation & Society 3 3-37. (2000). doi:10.1207/S15327825MCS0301_02 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0301_02
73. Scheufele, D. A. Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication 49 103-122. (1999). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x
74. Scheufele, D. A. Tewksbury, D. Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication 57 9-20. (2007).
75. Schramm, W. (1997). The beginnings of commu-nication study in America. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
76. Shrum, L. J. Assessing the social influence of television. Communication Research 22 402-429. (1995). doi:10.1177/009365095022004002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365095022004002
77. Shrum, L. J. Processing strategy moderates the cultivation effect. Human Communication Research 27 94-120. (2001).
78. Shrum, L. J. (2002). Media consumption and perceptions of social reality: Effects and underlying processes. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 69-95). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
79. Shrum, L. J. (2007). Social cognition and cultivation. In D. Roskos-Ewoldsen & J. Monahan (Eds.), Communication and social cognition (2nd ed., pp. 245-272). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
80. Shrum, L. J. Bischak, V. D. Mainstreaming, resonance, and impersonal impact: Testing moderators of the culti-vation effect for estimates of crime risk. Human Communication Research 27 187-215. (2001).
81. Shrum, L. J. Burroughs, J. E. Rindfleisch, A. Television’s cultivation of material values. Journal of Consumer Research 32 473-479. (2005). doi:10.1086/497559 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/497559
82. Singhal, A., & Rogers, E. M. (1999). Entertainment-education: A communication strategy for social change. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
83. Slater, M. D. Rouner, D. Entertainment-education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion. Communication Theory 12 173-191. (2002).
84. Stiff, J. B. (1986). Persuasive communication. New York: Guilford.
85. Sun, Y. Pan, Z. Shen, L. Understanding the third-person perception: Evidence from a meta-analysis. Journal of Communication 58 280-300. (2008). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00385.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00385.x
86. Tal-Or, N. Tsfati, Y. On the substitutability of the third-person perception. Media Psychology 10 231-249. (2007). doi:10.1080/15213260701375637 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15213260701375637
87. Tichenor, P. J. Donohue, G. A. Olien, C. N. Mass media flow and differential growth in knowledge. Public Opinion Quarterly 34 159-170. (1970). doi:10.1086/267786 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/267786
88. Vallone, R. P. Ross, L. Lepper, M. R. The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49 577-585. (1985). doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.577
89. Wanta, W., & Ghanem, S. (2007). Effects of agenda setting: Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis. In R. W. Preiss, B. M. Gayle, N. Burrell, M. Allen, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 37-51). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
90. Weaver, D. H. Thoughts on agenda setting, framing, and priming. Journal of Communication 57 142-147. (2007). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00333.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00333.x
91. Weaver, J. B. Wakshlag, J. Perceived vulnerability to crime, criminal victimization experience, and television viewing. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 30 141-158. (1986).
92. Wilson, T. D. Dunn, E. W. Self-knowledge: Its limits, value and potential for improvement. Annual Review of Psychology 55 493-518. (2004). doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141954
93. Zillmann, D. (1985). The experimental exploration of gratifications from media entertainment. In K. E. Rosengren, L. A. Wenner, & P. Palmgreen (Eds.), Media gratifications research: Current perspectives (pp. 225-239). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
94. Zillmann, D. Mood management through communication choices. American Behavioral Scientist 31 327-340. (1988). doi:10.1177/000276488031003005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000276488031003005
95. Zillmann, D. Bhatia, A. Effects of associating with musical genres on hetero-sexual attraction. Communication Research 16 263-288. (1989). doi:10.1177/009365089016002005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365089016002005
96. Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1985). Selective exposure phenomena. In D. Zillmann & J. Bryant (Eds.), Selective exposure to communication (pp. 1-10). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.