Media consumption and perceptions of social reality effects and underlying processes

Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 50-73

  Shrum, L J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85118287015     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (86)

1. Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
2. Bargh, J. A., & Pietromonaco, P. (1982). Automatic information processing and social perception: The influence of trait information presented outside of conscious awareness on impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 437-449.
3. Berkowitz, L. (1970). Aggressive humors as a stimulus to aggressive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 710-717.
4. Berkowitz, L. (1973). Words and symbols as stimuli to aggressive responses. In J. Knutson (Ed.), Control of aggression: Implications from basic research (pp. 113-143). Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
5. Berkowitz, L. (1984). Some effects of thoughts on anti- and prosocial influences of media events: A cognitive-neoassociation analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 410-427.
6. Brosius, H., & Bathelt, A. (1994). The utility of examples in persuasive communication. Communication Research, 21, 48-78.
7. Bryant, J., Carveth, R. A., & Brown, D. (1981). Television viewing and anxiety: An experimental investigation. Journal of Communication, 31(1), 106-119.
8. Bushman, B., & Geen, R. (1990). Role of cognitive-emotional mediators and individual differences in the effects of media violence on aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 156-163.
9. Busselle, R. W. (2001). The role of exemplar accessibility in social reality judgments. Media Psychology, 3, 43-67.
10. Busselle, R. W., & Shrum, L. J. (2003). Media exposure and the accessibility of social information. Media Psychology, 5, 255-282.
11. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
12. Carlston, D. E., & Smith, E. R. (1996). Principles of mental representation. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 184-210). New York: Guilford Press.
13. Carver, C., Ganellen, R., Froming, W., & Chambers, W. (1983). Modeling: An analysis in terms of category accessibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 403-421.
14. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212-252). New York: Guilford Press.
15. Chaiken, S., & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 460-473.
16. Chayefsky, P. (writer). (1976). Network [Film]. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc.
17. Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407-428.
18. Doob, A., & Macdonald, G. (1979). Television viewing and fear of victimization: Is the relationship causal? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 170-179.
19. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
20. Freedman, J. L. (1984). Effect of television violence on aggressiveness. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 227-246.
21. Hastie, R., & Park, B. (1986). The relationship between memory and judgment depends on whether the judgment task is memory-based or on-line. Psychological Review, 93, 258-268.
22. Hawkins, R. P., & Pingree, S. (1982). Television's influence on constructions of social reality. In D. Pearl, L. Bouthilet, & J. Lazar (Eds.), Television and behavior: Ten years of scientific progress and implications for the eighties (Vol. 2, pp. 224-247). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
23. Hawkins, R. B., & 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. 33-50). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
24. Henninger, M., & Wyer, R. S. (1976). The recognition and elimination of inconsistencies among syllogistically related beliefs: Some new light on the "Socratic effect." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 680-693.
25. Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133-168). New York: Guilford Press.
26. Higgins, E. T., Bargh, J. A., & Lombardi, W. (1985). The nature of priming effects on categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 11, 59-69.
27. Higgins, E. T., & Brendl, C. M. (1995). Accessibility and applicability: Some "activation rules" influencing judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 218-243.
28. Higgins, E. T., & King, G. (1981). Accessibility of social constructs: Information processing consequences of individual and contextual variability. In N. Cantor & J. F. Kihlstrom (Eds.), Personality, cognition and social interaction (pp. 69-121). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Higgins, E. T., Rholes, W. S., & Jones, C. R. (1977). Category accessibility and impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 141-154.
30. Hirsch, P. (1980). The scary world of the nonviewer and other anomalies: A reanalysis of Gerbner et al.'s findings on cultivation analysis. Communication Research, 7, 403-456.
31. Hughes, M. (1980). The fruits of cultivation analysis: A reexamination of some effects of television watching. Public Opinion Quarterly, 44, 287-302.
32. Iyengar, S. (1990). The accessibility bias in politics: Television news and public opinion. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2, 1-15.
33. Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, S., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3-28.
34. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The simulation heuristic. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 201-208). New York: Cambridge University Press.
35. Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Fischhoff, G., Layman, M., & Combs, B. (1978). Judged frequency of lethal events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 551-578.
36. Manis, M., Shedler, J., Jonides, J., & Nelson, T. E. (1993). Availability heuristic in judgments of set size and frequency of occurrence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 448-457.
37. Mares, M. L. (1996). The role of source confusions in television's cultivation of social reality judgments. Human Communication Research, 23, 278-297.
38. McGuire, W. J. (1960). Cognitive consistency and attitude change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60, 345-353.
39. McGuire, W. J. (1986). The myth of massive media impact: Savagings and salvagings. In G. Comstock (Ed.), Public communication and behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 173-257). New York: Academic Press.
40. Moore, D. L., Hausknecht, D., & Thamodaran, K. (1986). Time compression, response opportunity, and persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 85-99.
41. Morgan, M., & Shanahan, J. (1996). Two decades of cultivation research: An appraisal and meta-analysis. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.), Communication yearbook 20 (pp. 1-45). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
42. Nisbett, R., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inferences: Strategies and shortcomings of human judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
43. Ogles, R. M., & Hoffner, C. (1987). Film violence and perceptions of crime: The cultivation effect. In M. L. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication yearbook 10 (pp. 384-394). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
44. O'Guinn, T. C., & Shrum, L. J. (1997). The role of television in the construction of consumer reality. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 278-294.
45. Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
46. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
47. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1990). Involvement and persuasion: Tradition versus integration. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 367-374.
48. Phillips, D. (1983). The impact of mass media violence on U.S. homicides. American Sociological Review, 48, 560-568.
49. Ratneshwar, S., & Chaiken, S. (1991). Comprehension's role in persuasion: The case of its moderating effect on the persuasive impact of source cues. Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 52-62.
50. Reeves, B., Chaffee, S., & Tims, A. (1982). Social cognition and mass communication research. In M. E. Roloff & C. R. Berger (Eds.), Social cognition and mass communication (pp. 287-326). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
51. Rubin, A. M., Perse, E. M., & Taylor, D. S. (1988). A methodological examination of cultivation. Communication Research, 15, 107-134.
52. Schank, R., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
53. Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Strack, F., Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., & Simons, A. (1991). Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 195-202.
54. Schwarz, N., Song, H., & Xu, J. (in press). When thinking is difficult: Metacognitive experiences as information. In M. Wänke (Ed.), The social psychology of consumer behavior. New York: Psychology Press.
55. Shapiro, M. A., & Lang, A. (1991). Making television reality: Unconscious processes in the construction of social reality. Communication Research, 18, 685-705.
56. Sherman, S. J., & Corty, E. (1984). Cognitive heuristics. In R. S. Wyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (Vol. 1, pp. 189-286). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
57. Shrum, L. J. (1995). Assessing the social influence of television: A social cognition perspective on cultivation effects. Communication Research, 22, 402-429.
58. Shrum, L. J. (1996). Psychological processes underlying cultivation effects: Further tests of construct accessibility. Human Communication Research, 22, 482-509.
59. Shrum, L. J. (1997). The role of source confusion in cultivation effects may depend on processing strategy: A comment on Mares (1996). Human Communication Research, 24, 349-358.
60. Shrum, L. J. (1999). The relationship of television viewing with attitude strength and extremity: Implications for the cultivation effect. Media Psychology, 1, 3-25.
61. Shrum, L. J. (2001). Processing strategy moderates the cultivation effect. Human Communication Research, 27, 94-120.
62. 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: Erlbaum.
63. Shrum, L. J. (2004). The cognitive processes underlying cultivation effects are a function of whether the judgments are on-line or memory-based. Communications, 29, 327-344.
64. Shrum, L. J. (2007 a). Cultivation and social cognition. In D. R. Roskos-Ewoldsen & J. L. Monahan (Eds.), Communication and social cognition: Theories and methods (pp. 245-272). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
65. Shrum, L. J. (2007b). The implications of survey method for measuring cultivation effects. Human Communication Research, 33, 64-80.
66. Shrum, L. J., Burroughs, J. E., & Rindfleisch, A. (2004). A process model of consumer cultivation: The role of television is a function of the type of judgment. In L. J. Shrum (Ed.), The psychology of entertainment media: Blurring the lines between entertainment and persuasion (pp. 177-191). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
67. Shrum, L. J., Burroughs, J. E., & Rindfleisch, A. (2005). Television's cultivation of material values. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 473-479.
68. Shrum, L. J., & O'Guinn, T. C. (1993). Processes and effects in the construction of social reality: Construct accessibility as an explanatory variable. Communication Research, 20, 436-471.
69. Shrum, L. J., O'Guinn, T. C., Semenik, R. J., & Faber, R. J. (1991). Processes and effects in the construction of normative consumer beliefs: The role of television. In R. H. Holman & M. R. Solomon (Eds.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 18, pp. 755-763). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.
70. Shrum, L. J., Wyer, R. S., & O'Guinn, T. C. (1998). The effects of television consumption on social perceptions: The use of priming procedures to investigate psychological processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 447-458.
71. Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S. (1979). The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1660-1672.
72. Tamborini, R., Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1984). Fear and victimization: Exposure to television and perceptions of crime and fear. In R. N. Bostrom (Ed.), Communication yearbook 8 (pp. 492-518). Beverly Hills: Sage.
73. Turner, C., & Berkowitz, L. (1972). Identification with film aggressor (covert role taking) and reactions to film violence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21, 256-264.
74. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.
75. Wober, M., & Gunter, B. (1988). Television and social control. Aldershot, England: Avebury.
76. Wyer, R. S. (1980). The acquisition and use of social knowledge: Basic postulates and representative research. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 558-573.
77. Wyer, R. S. (2004). Social comprehension and judgment: The role of situation models, narratives, and implicit theories. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
78. Wyer, R. S., & Hartwick, J. (1984). The recall and use of belief statements as bases for judgments: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 65-85.
79. Wyer, R. S., & Radvansky, G. A. (1999). The comprehension and validation of social information. Psychological Review, 106, 89-118.
80. Wyer, R. S., & Srull, T. K. (1980). The processing of social stimulus information: A conceptual integration. In R. Hastie, E. B. Ebbessen, T. M. Ostrom, R. S. Wyer, D. L. Hamilton, & D. E. Carlston (Eds.), Person memory: The cognitive basis of social perception (pp. 227-300). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
81. Wyer, R. S., & Srull, T. K. (1989). Memory and cognition in its social context. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
82. Zillmann, D. (1980). Anatomy of suspense. In P. H. Tannenbaum (Ed.), The entertainment functions of television (pp. 133-163). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
83. Zillmann, D. (1983). Transfer of excitation in emotional behavior. In J. T. Cacioppo & R. E. Petty (Eds.), Social psychophysiology: A sourcebook (pp. 215-242). New York: Guilford.
84. Zillmann, D. (2002). Exemplification theory of media influence. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 69-95). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
85. Zillmann, D., & Brosius, H. (2000). Exemplification in communication: The influence of case reports on the perception of issues. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
86. Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1982). Pornography, sexual callousness, and the trivialization of rape. Journal of Communication, 32(4), 10-21.