Suchergebnisse

This study explored the potential utility of coorientational agreement and accuracy as predictors of willingness to negotiate. Research questions were examined in an experimental setting in which 199 students were randomly assigned to represent one of four groups involved in a simulated recreation management dispute. Analysis revealed considerable disagreement regarding the power and trustworthiness of groups, with self-perceptions being consistently higher than aggregate evaluations. In-group favoring biases, in turn, had a negative effect on the relationship between agreement and accuracy. The influence of favorably biased self-assessments on the relationship between coorientational agreement and accuracy should be taken into account when predicting strategy selection in conflict situations.

These two experiments compare perceptions of local, national, and Internet news articles on two U.S. environmental policy issues: oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and ratification of the Kyoto treaty on global warming. Of interest were the potential effects of perceived article reach and slant on estimates of public support for different policy alternatives. While perceived slant proved to be a fairly robust predictor of public opinion estimates, support for an effect of perceived reach was mixed. Deconstructing perceived media reach into access and exposure assumptions should produce an opinion inference model that is more sensitive to the differing influences of local, national, and Internet news as consumption patterns evolve.

This study analyzed the relative predictive power of four theoretical models that have been tested as explanations for the projection bias—the tendency of people to see others' opinions as much like their own. Our analysis focused particularly on audience processing of information in mass media, and in doing so we proposed a revision of the standard logical information processing model. We tested this set of hypotheses using data from a random telephone sample of 760 U.S. residents who answered opinion items about four current science, environmental, and health issues. The data showed mixed support for the various models but largely supported our conjecture that media coverage will either enhance or diminish the projection bias in predictable directions.

This research examines the hypothesis that people infer public opinion by relying on their own subjective assessments of media content, such as perceived news slant, coupled with their own presumptions about the effects of such content on others. The hypothesis was tested with an experimental design manipulating story slant and base rate information for two issues. Results supported the persuasive press inference, even when content included base rate information contrary to story slant. However, there was some evidence that for some types of news stories the projection of personal opinion might diminish the direct effect of slant.

This field experiment focused on perceived public opinion about the use of primates in laboratory research. We used this contentious issue to examine the simultaneous effects of three hypothetical ideas -- the hostile media perception, the persuasive press inference, & the projection bias -- on partisan perceptions of public opinion. Our data supported the projection hypothesis but also confirmed that partisans on each side of the issue judged news articles to be biased in a disagreeable direction relative to judgments of those on the other side. The perception of relatively disagreeable media bias, in turn, influenced perceptions of public opinion. Results supported the hypothesis that people make inferences about the climate of opinion based on their reading of the news, especially the perceived slant of that news. 2 Tables, 4 Figures, 1 Appendix, 22 References. Adapted from the source document.