Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Submit your manuscript through SAGETRACK

Learn about Basics of Communication

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Communication Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SALWEN, M. B.
Right arrow Articles by DUPAGNE, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

The Third-Person Effect

Perceptions of the Media's Influence and Immoral Consequences

MICHAEL B. SALWEN

MICHEL DUPAGNE

A nationwide telephone survey of 721 adults examined the impact of the third-person effect on individuals' perceptions of the media's general influence and immorality effects with three issues. The third-person effect perceptual hypothesis predicts that individuals will perceive media messages to have greater effects on other people than on themselves. A behavioral hypothesis predicts that third-person perception (i.e., seeing others as more influenced) will lead to support for restrictions on media messages. The findings reaffirmed robust support for the perceptual hypothesis. Regarding the behavioral hypothesis, effect perceptions were found to be issue dependent. For television violence, the issue with the clearest moral dimension, perceived immorality effects predicted support for restrictions. In contrast, perception of the media's general influence was a key predictor of support for restrictions on televised trials and negative political advertising. The failure of past research to distinguish dimensions of perceived effects may account for the less than robust findings regarding the behavioral hypothesis.

Communication Research, Vol. 26, No. 5, 523-549 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/009365099026005001
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Int J Public Opin ResHome page
I. Huck, O. Quiring, and H.-B. Brosius
Perceptual Phenomena in the Agenda Setting Process
Int. J. Public Opin. Res., June 1, 2009; 21(2): 139 - 164.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 American Behavioral ScientistHome page
K. Jensen and S. Collins
The Third-Person Effect in Controversial Product Advertising
American Behavioral Scientist, October 1, 2008; 52(2): 225 - 242.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 American Behavioral ScientistHome page
G. J. Golan, S. A. Banning, and L. Lundy
Likelihood to Vote, Candidate Choice, and the Third-Person Effect: Behavioral Implications of Political Advertising in the 2004 Presidential Election
American Behavioral Scientist, October 1, 2008; 52(2): 278 - 290.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 American Behavioral ScientistHome page
G. J. Golan and S. A. Banning
Exploring a Link Between the Third-Person Effect and the Theory of Reasoned Action: Beneficial Ads and Social Expectations
American Behavioral Scientist, October 1, 2008; 52(2): 208 - 224.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 American Behavioral ScientistHome page
J. Huh, D. E. DeLorme, and L. N. Reid
Operationalizing the Second-Person Effect and Its Relationship to Behavioral Outcomes of Direct-to-Consumer Advertising
American Behavioral Scientist, October 1, 2008; 52(2): 186 - 207.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 American Behavioral ScientistHome page
Y. Y. Choi, G. Leshner, and J. Choi
Third-Person Effects of Idealized Body Image in Magazine Advertisements
American Behavioral Scientist, October 1, 2008; 52(2): 147 - 164.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 American Behavioral ScientistHome page
A. G. Day
Out of the Living Room and Into the Voting Booth: An Analysis of Corporate Public Affairs Advertising Under the Third-Person Effect
American Behavioral Scientist, October 1, 2008; 52(2): 243 - 260.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J Public Opin ResHome page
J. Xu and W. J. Gonzenbach
Does a Perceptual Discrepancy Lead to Action? A Meta-analysis of the Behavioral Component of the Third-Person Effect
Int. J. Public Opin. Res., September 1, 2008; 20(3): 375 - 385.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 The Harvard International Journal of Press/PoliticsHome page
H. Mathias Kepplinger
Reciprocal Effects: Toward a Theory of Mass Media Effects on Decision Makers
International Journal of Press/Politics, April 1, 2007; 12(2): 3 - 23.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Communication ResearchHome page
J. Huh, D. E. Delorme, and L. N. Reid
The Third-Person Effect and its Influence on Behavioral Outcomes in a Product Advertising Context:: The Case of Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising
Communication Research, October 1, 2004; 31(5): 568 - 599.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Communication ResearchHome page
P. David, K. Liu, and M. Myser
Methodological Artifact or Persistent Bias?: Testing the Robustness of the Third-Person and Reverse Third-Person Effects for Alcohol Messages
Communication Research, April 1, 2004; 31(2): 206 - 233.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Communication ResearchHome page
E. Scharrer
Third-Person Perception and Television Violence: The Role of Out-Group Stereotyping in Perceptions of Susceptibility to Effects
Communication Research, December 1, 2002; 29(6): 681 - 704.
[Abstract] [PDF]