Third person effect

This review explicates the past, present and future of theory and research concerning audience perceptions of the media as well as the effects that perceptions of media have on audiences. Before the sections that examine media perceptions and media effects perceptions, we first identify various psychological concepts and processes involved in generating media-related perceptions. In the first section, we analyze two types of media perceptions: media trust/credibility perceptions and bias perceptions, focusing on research on the Hostile Media Perception. In both cases, we address the potential consequences of these perceptions. In the second section, we assess theory and research on perceptions of media effects (often referred to as Presumed Influence) and their consequences (referred to as the Influence of Presumed Influence). As examples of Presumed Influence, we evaluate the literature on the Persuasive Press Inference and the Third-Person Perception. The bodies of research on media perceptions and media effects perceptions have been featured prominently in the top journals of the field of mass communication over the past 20 years. Here we bring them together in one synthetic theoretical review.

Abstract: This study explores hostile media bias and third-person perceptions of the influence of media coverage of immigrants using data (N = 529) from North Carolina, where the Latino population grew almost 400% in two decades. As hypothesized, anti-immigrant sentiment was significantly related to perceptions of “hostile” (pro-immigrant) news coverage. However, anti-immigrant sentiment was not directly related to belief in coverage effects on others. Analysis revealed two “paths” for relationships among anti-immigrant sentiment, exposure and attention to media coverage, perceived media bias, and presumed media influence or third-person perceptions.
Citation: Weberling McKeever*, B., Riffe, D., & Dillman Carpentier, F. (2012). Perceived hostile media bias, presumed media influence, and opinions about immigration. Southern Communication Journal, 77, 420-437.

In this article, we examine the notion that perceptions of strong influence of biased media coverage may indirectly lead to an increased willingness to resort to violent protest. We test this idea on a sample of Jewish settlers in the Gaza Strip ( N = 413), in the dramatic context of a Likud party vote on Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to pull out from the Gaza Strip, which includes a proposed evacuation of the settlers from their homes. Findings show that perceptions of influence of biased media coverage of the settlements on Israeli public opinion were associated with perceptions of the negative image of the settlements in Israeli public opinion, which in turn had an impact on the justification of violent resistance to the likely evacuation. The perceived image of the settlements, resulting from presumed media influence, also affected settlers' political inefficacy and their thoughts about residential mobility.

Imaginemos a seguinte situação: eu entendo o que uma determinada mensagem quis dizer e acho que o que ela diz é sério e grave, mas estou igualmente convencido, por outro lado, que, no que me diz respeito, o conteúdo da mensagem não vai produzir nenhuma modificação nas minhas convicções nem no meu comportamento. A convicção sobre a impossibilidade de eu ser influenciado pela mensagem decorre, neste caso, do fato de eu divergir, emocional e cognitivamente, dos valores, das posições ou dos fatos presentes na mensagem. Porque considero errado, cognitiva ou moralmente, o que uma mensagem diz, recuso inteiramente a hipótese de ser persuadido ou convencido por ela. Mas persuasão e preocupação são dois efeitos muito diferentes que uma mesma mensagem pode produzir em mim. Temos, então, uma situação curiosa: o efeito persuasivo direto sobre mim é nulo, ou quase, mas eu não fiquei indiferente à mensagem; ao contrário, ela produziu o enorme efeito de me preocupar. Ademais, não se trata de uma p...