The third-person effect: A meta-analysis of the perceptual hypothesis

Mass Media Effects Research: Advances Through Meta-Analysis

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 81-102

  Paul, Bryant ^a   Salwen, Michael B ^b   Dupagne, Michel ^b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920669801     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203823453     Document Type: Chapter

References (84)

1. Abelman, R. (1996). Can we generalize from Generation X? Not! Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40, 441–446.
2. Allen, M., D’Alessio, D., & Brezgel, K. (1995). A meta-analysis summarizing the effects of pornography. II. Aggression after exposure. Human Communication Research, 22, 258–283.
3. Basil, M. D. (1996). The use of student samples in communication research. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40, 431–440.
4. Bereck, S. R., & Glynn, C. J. (1993, May). Interpersonal interaction and the third-person effect in potential first time presidential election voters. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, St. Charles, IL.
5. Brosius, H., & Engel, D. (1996). The causes of third-person effects: Unrealistic optimism, impersonal impact, or generalized negative attitudes towards media influence? International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 142–162.
6. Brown, J. D. (1986). Evaluations of self and others: Self-enhancement biases in social judgments. Social Cognition, 4, 353–376.
7. Cohen, J., Mutz, D., Price, V., & Gunther, A. (1988). Perceived impact of defamation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 161–173.
8. Courtright, J. A. (1996). Rationally thinking about nonprobability. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40, 414–421.
9. Culbertson, H. M., & Stempel, G. H. (1985). Media malaise: Explaining personal optimism and societal pessimism about health care. Journal of Communication, 35(2), 180–190.
10. Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1–15.
11. Davison, W. P. (1996). The third-person effect revisited. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 113–119.
12. Driscoll, P. D., & Salwen, M. B. (1997). Self-perceived knowledge of the O. J. Simpson trial: Third-person perception and perceptions of guilt. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 541–556.
13. Duck, J. M., Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1995). The perceived influence of AIDS advertising: Third-person effects in the context of positive media content. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 305–325.
14. Faber, R. J., Shah, D., Hanyoun, S., & Rojas, H. (1997). Advertising censorship: Factors accounting for a willingness to restrict commercial speech for legal products. Manuscript submitted for publication.
15. Fields, J., & Schuman, H. (1976). Public beliefs about the beliefs of the public. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40, 427–448.
16. Glynn, C. J., Hayes, A. F., & Shanahan, J. (1997). Perceived support for one’s opinions and willingness to speak out: A meta-analysis of survey studies on the “spiral of silence.” Public Opinion Quarterly, 61, 452–463.
17. Glynn, C. J., & Ostman, R. E. (1988). Public opinion about public opinion. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 299–306.
18. Glynn, C., Ostman, R., & McDonald, D. (1995). Opinions, perception, and social reality. In T. Glasser & C. Salmon (Eds.), Public opinion and the communication of consent (pp. 249–277). New York: Guilford.
19. Guilford, J. P. (1956). Fundamental statistics in psychology and education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
20. Gunther, A. (1991). What we think others think: Cause and consequence in the third-person effect. Communication Research, 18, 355–372.
21. Gunther, A. (1995). Overrating the X-rating: The third person perception and support for censorship of pornography. Journal of Communication, 45(1), 27–38.
22. Gunther, A. C., & Ang, P. H. (1996). Public perception of television influence and opinions about censorship in Singapore. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 248–265.
23. Gunther, A. C., & Mundy, P. (1993). Biased optimism and the third-person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 70, 58–67.
24. Gunther, A. C., & Thorson, E. (1992). Perceived persuasive effects of product commercials and public service announcements: Third-person effects in new domains. Communication Research, 19, 574–596.
25. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
26. Hoffner, C., Plotkin, R. S., Buchanan, M., Schneider, S., Ricciotti, L. A., Kowalczyk, L. Silberg, K., & Pastorek, A. (1997, May). The third-person effect in perceptions of the influence of television violence. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Montreal.
27. Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
28. Hoorens, V., & Ruiter, S. (1996). The optimal impact phenomenon: Beyond the third-person effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 599–610.
29. Hovland, C. I. (1963). Reconciling conflicting results derived from experimental studies of attitude change. In E. P. Hollander & R. G. Hunt (Eds.), Current perspectives in social psychology (pp. 378–389). New York: Oxford University Press.
30. Hu, Y. W., & Wu, Y. C. (1996, August). Testing a theoretical model on the third person effect: Perceived impacts of election polis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Anaheim, CA.
31. Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. London: Sage.
32. Hunter, J. E., Schmidt, F. L., & Jackson, G. B. (1982). Meta-analysis: Cumulating research findings across studies. New York: Sage.
33. Innes, J. M., & Zeitz, H. (1988). The public’s view of the impact of the mass media: A test of the ‘third person’ effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 457–463.
34. Jeffres, L. W. (1997). Mass media effects (2nd ed.). Prospects Heights, IL: Waveland.
35. Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1972). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 79–94). Morristown, NJ: General Leaming Press.
36. Kim, M. S., & Hunter, J. E. (1993). Attitude-behavior relations: A meta-analysis of attitudinal relevance and topic. Journal of Communication, 43(1), 101–142.
37. Lang, A. (1996). The logic of using inferential statistics with experimental data from nonprobability samples: Inspired by Cooper, Dupagne, Potter, and Sparks. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40, 422–430.
38. Lasorsa, D. L. (1989). Real and perceived effects of “Amerika.” Journalism Quarterly, 66, 373–378, 529.
39. Lasorsa, D. L. (1992). How media affect policymakers: The third-person effect. In J. D. Kennamer (Ed.), Public opinion, the press and public policy (pp. 163–175). New York: Praeger.
40. Lee, C., & Yang, S. (1996, August). Third-person perception and support for censorship of sexually explicit visual content: A Korean case. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Anaheim, CA.
41. Mason, L. (1995). Newspaper as repeater: An experiment on defamation and the third-person effect. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 72, 610–620.
42. McLeod, D. M., Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Nathanson, A. I. (1997). Support for censorship of violent and misogynic rap lyrics: An analysis of the third-person effect. Communication Research, 24, 153–174.
43. Morgan, M., & Shanahan, J. (1997). Two decades of cultivation research: An appraisal and meta-analysis. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.), Communication yearbook 20 (pp. 1–45). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44. Mutz, D. C., & Soss, J. (1997). Reading public opinion: The influence of news coverage on perceptions of public sentiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 61, 431–451.
45. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The spiral of silence: A theory of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 24(2), 43–51.
46. Ognianova, E., Meeds, R., Thorson, E., & Coyle, J. (1996, August). Political adwatches and the third-person effect. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Anaheim, CA.
47. O’Gorman, H., & Garry, S. (1976). Pluralistic ignorance—A replication and extension. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40, 449–458.
48. Paik, H., & Comstock, G. (1994). The effects of television violence on antisocial behavior: A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 21, 516–546.
49. Paul, B., Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne, M. (2000). The third-person effect: A meta-analysis of the perceptual hypothesis. Mass Communication & Society, 3, 57–85.
50. Perloff, R. M. (1989). Ego-involvement and the third person effect of televised news coverage. Communication Research, 16, 236–262.
51. Perloff, R. M. (1993). Third-person effect research 1983–1992: A review and synthesis. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 5, 167–184.
52. 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. 177–191). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
53. Potter, W. J., Cooper, R., & Dupagne, M. (1993). The three paradigms of mass media research in mainstream communication journals. Communication Theory, 3, 317–335.
54. Rojas, H. (1994). Censorship and the third-person effect in mass communication. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Minnesota, St. Paul.
55. Rojas, H., Shah, D. V., & Faber, R. J. (1996). for the good of others: Censorship and the third-person effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 162–185.
56. Rosenthal, R. (1984). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
57. Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 173–220). New York: Academic Press.
58. Rucinski, D., & Salmon, C. T. (1990). The ‘other’ as vulnerable voter: A study of the third-person effect in the 1988 U.S. presidential campaign. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2, 343–368.
59. 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.
60. Salwen, M. B., & Driscoll, P. D. (1996, August). Self-perceived knowledge and the third-person effect: Media influence during the O. J. Simpson trial. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Anaheim, CA.
61. Salwen, M. B., Dupagne, M., & Paul, B. (1998, August). Perceptions of media power and moral influence: Issue legitimacy and the third-person effect. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Baltimore, MD.
62. Sears, D.O., & Freedman, J. L. (1967). Selective exposure to information: A critical review. Public Opinion Quarterly, 31, 194–213.
63. Shah, D. V., Faber, R. J., Hanyoun, S., & Rojas, H. (1997, August). Censorship of political advertising: A third-person effect. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Chicago, IL.
64. Sparks, G. G. (1995). Comments concerning the claim that mass media research is “prescientific”: A response to Potter, Cooper, and Dupagne. Communication Theory, 5, 273–280.
65. Standley, T. C. (1994). Linking third-person effect and attribution theory. Unpublished master’s thesis, Southern Methodist University, Dallas.
66. Stenbjerre, M. N. (1997). A social categorization model of the third-person effect in mass communication. Unpublished master’s thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
67. Stenbjerre, M., & Leets, L. (1998, July). Central and peripheral routes to the third-person effect: Media effects attribution to self and others as a function of message elaboration. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Jerusalem.
68. Svenson, O. (1981). Are we all less risky and more skillful than our fellow drivers? Acta Psychologica, 47, 693–708.
69. Thorson, E., & Coyle, J. (1994). The third person effect in three genres of commercials: Product and greening ads, and public service announcements. In K. King (Ed.), Proceedings of the American Academy of Advertising (pp. 103–112). Athens: University of Georgia.
70. Tracz, S. M. (1984). The effect of the violation of the assumption of independence when combining correlation coefficients in a meta-analysis (Doctoral dissertation, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, 1984). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56, 688.
71. Tyler, T. R., & Cook, F. L. (1984). The mass media and judgments ofrisk: Distinguishing impact on personal and societal level judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 693–708.
72. Vallone, R. P., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1985). 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.
73. Vidmar, N., & Rokeach, M. (1974). Archie Bunker’s bigotry: A study in selective perception and exposure. Journal of Communication, 24(1), 124–137.
74. Ware, W., & Dupagne, M. (1994). Effects of U.S. television programs on foreign audiences: A meta-analysis. Journalism Quarterly, 71, 947–959.
75. Weinstein, N. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 806–820.
76. Weinstein, N. D., & Klein, W. M. (1996). Unrealistic optimism: Present and future. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15, 1–8.
77. Weinstein, N. D., & Lachendro, E. (1982). Egocentrism as a source of unrealistic optimism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 195–200.
78. White, H. A. (1995, August). Issue involvement and argument strength as mediating factors in the third-person effect. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Washington, DC.
79. White, H. A. (1997). Considering interacting factors in the third-person effect: Argument strength and social distance. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 557–564.
80. Whitman, D. (1996, December 16). I’m OK, you’re not. U.S. News & World Report, 121, 24–30.
81. Wolf, F. M. (1986). Meta-analysis: Quantitative methods for research synthesis. London: Sage.
82. Youn, S., Faber, R. J., & Shah, D. V. (1998). Attitudes toward gambling advertising and the third-person effect. Manuscript submitted for publication.
83. Zebrowitz, L. A. (1990). Social perception. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
84. Zimbardo, P. (1972). The tactics and ethics of persuasion. In B. T. King & E. McGinnies (Eds.), Attitudes, conflict and social change (pp. 88–114). New York: Academic Press.