Suchergebnisse

Public Opinion is a comprehensive and multidisciplinary examination of public opinion in the United States. Drawing on scholarship in political science, psychology, sociology, and communications, the authors explore the nature of political and social attitudes in the United States and how these attitudes are shaped by various institutions, with an emphasis on mass media. The book also serves as a provocative starting point for the discussion of citizen moods, political participation, and voting behavior. Feature boxes and illustrations throughout help students understand all aspects of the elusive phenomenon we call public opinion.The third edition has been thoroughly revised and updated to reflect how public opinion is studied today, and to incorporate current data and debates. The book now contains two revised and reframed theory chapters 'Group Membership and Public Opinion' and 'Public Opinion and Social Process', as well as new coverage of the influence of online and social media on public opinion, especially in issue opinions and campaigns.

Examines the role of opinion thresholds, the impact of social groups, & the influence of others' opinions in public opinion expression, testing parts of Michael A. Krassa's (1988 [see abstract 89U4089]) modification of Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann's (1974 [see abstract 77I7781]) spiral of silence theory. It is asserted that fear of isolation lowers opinion expression, & perceived dominance of opinion & fear of isolation are greater when individuals are confronted by a close reference group. Self-administered questionnaire data were obtained in 1993 from 882 Canadian adults living in or near national parks regarding endemic environmental issues. Findings supported the notion that perceived opinion dominance significantly predicted opinion expression, but only in relation to a generalized reference group. Fear of isolation significantly predicted opinion expression with respect to both generalized & specific reference groups. Results on opinion intensity & its interaction with opinion dominance & fear of isolation are discussed. 5 Tables, 2 Figures, 16 References. Adapted from the source document.

We examine the role of interpersonal discussion in an attempt to better understand talk's contribution to perceived media impacts related to the sexual abuse scandal at Penn State University. Through the use of a survey conducted both in the state of Pennsylvania and nationally, we analyze how interpersonal discussion, issue involvement, media exposure, and affinity for the Penn State football team influence third-person perceptions (TPPs) related to the Penn State case. By examining a dynamic and polarizing social issue involving a previously well-regarded athletic program facing intense social and criminal scrutiny, we are able to better understand how TPPs are formed in the midst of an ongoing scandal. Results reveal the influence of interpersonal discussion—and especially interpersonal disagreement—as a key moderating variable in forming these perceptions of media influence.

Research in public opinion and political communication indicates that those who hold viewpoints that are in the minority may be more hesitant to express their opinion when compared to those in the majority. Gauging hesitation through response latencies has been put forth as a measure of the internalization of majority pressure. In a laboratory setting, participants are asked to offer simple judgments (e.g., "like" or "dislike") for various digitized images of both political and nonpolitical persons, things, and ideas. Responses are recorded and categorized according to majority or minority status and then analyzed at both the subject and the object level in an attempt to better understand the link between the climate of opinion and response hesitancy. Overall, those in the minority take longer to offer "like" or "dislike" responses when compared to those in the majority. This relationship is positively correlated with the size of the majority. Furthermore, individual differences are found to moderate the minority slowness effect (MSE). The effect is also found to be stronger for political objects when compared to nonpolitical objects.

Using role congruity theory as the basis for the study, an analysis of 1,020 articles published 1991-2005 in Communication Research and Journal of Communication, as well as the ISI citations these articles received and the citations these articles included, was conducted. In line with a hypothesized "Matilda effect" (underrecognition of female scientists), articles authored by female communication scientists received fewer citations than articles authored by males. Hypotheses on moderating impacts of research topic, author productivity, and citing author's sex, as well as on change in the effect's extent across time were derived from the theoretical framework. Networking conceptualizations led to an additional hypothesis. Five of six hypotheses were supported.

This research investigates the impact of normative intensity (i.e., strength of feeling) and crystallization (i.e., level of agreement) regarding communication behaviors and perceptions of social sanctions. By adapting the return potential model originally set forth by Jay Jackson, the authors examine perceptions of communication behaviors as a normative opinion process. Telephone survey respondents were asked to offer their own personal opinions regarding several communicative behaviors. By calculating the normative power (NP = Normative Intensity × Crystallization) associated with each of these behaviors, predictions were made regarding the frequency of behavior. The authors also connect normative power with the social costs ascribed to acts falling outside the accepted realm of behavior. Results indicate that public opinion can be seen as a normative process in which the intensity and crystallization of the climate of opinion exert influence on behavior in various communication situations.