AlasuutariP.The values hierarchy of TV programs: An analysis of discourses of viewing habits. In AlasuutariP., ArmstrongK. & KytömäkiJ.Reality and fiction in Finnish TV viewing. Research & Development, Research Report 3. Helsinki: Yleisradio, 1991.
2.
Ang.I.Watching Dallas: Soap opera and the melodramatic imagination. London: Methuen, 1985.
BeckK. & BargmanC.Investigating Hispanic adolescent involvement with alcohol: A focus group interview approach. Health Education Research8, 151–158, 1993.
5.
BuckinghamD.Public secrets: EastEnders and its audience. London: British Film Institute, 1987.
6.
ChenC. & HernonP.Information seeking. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers, 1982.
7.
DervinB.From the mind's eye of the user: The sense-making qualitative-quantitative methodology. In GlazierJ. & PowellR. eds. Qualitative research in information management. Englewood: Libraries Unlimited, 1992.
8.
DervinB.Comparative theory reconceptualized: From entities and states to processes and dynamics. Communication Theory11, 59–69, 1991.
9.
DervinB.Mass communicating: Changing conceptions of the audience. In RiceR. & PaisleyW. eds. Public communication campaigns. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1981.
10.
DervinB.Users as research inventions: How research categories perpetuate inequities. Journal of Communication393, 216–232, 1989.
11.
DervinB. & NilanM.Information needs and uses. In WilliamsM. ed. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology21, 3–33. White Plains: Knowledge Industry Publications, 1986.
12.
EiserC.EiserJ. & PritchardM.Reactions to drug education: A comparison of two videos produced for schools. British Journal of Addiction838, 955–963, 1988.
13.
EskolaK.Kirjallisuus ja audio-visuaalinen kulttuuri kommunikaationa [Literature and audio-visual culture as communication]. In KytömäkiJ. ed. Nykyajan sadut: joukkoviestinnän kertomukset ja vastaanotto. Helsinki: Gaudeamus, 1991.
14.
EskolaK.Literature and interpretative communities—Literary communication: On relevant concepts and empirical applications in Finland. Acta Sociologica334, 359–371, 1990.
15.
EskolaK.Reading life through literature/literature through life. In VainikkalaE. & EskolaK. eds. Literature as communication. Publication No. 18.Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, Research Unit for Contemporary Culture, 1989.
16.
EskolaK.Cultural change in Finland: The evidence from studies of reception. Nordicom Review2, 13–20, 1987.
17.
FeuerJ.Genre study and television. In AllenR. ed. Channels of discourse. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987.
18.
FiskeJ.Television culture. London: Methuen, 1987.
19.
GlassfordD.et al.Student-generated solutions to the alcohol/drug problem: A Wisconsin profile. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education371, 65–71, 1991.
20.
HaavistoK.NurminenR. & TommolaS.Lahtelaisissa lukioissa ja ammatillisissa oppilaitoksissa opiskelevien päihteiden käytöstä keväällä1993[About drug use among secondary school students and students in vocational schools in spring 1993 in the city of Lahti]. Working paper No. 3, Lahti project. Helsinki: Social Research Institute of Alcohol Studies, 1993.
21.
HagforsC.Yleisöreaktiotutkimus television asiaohjelmista[A study of the public's responses to informative television programs]. PTS report No. 17.Helsinki: Yleisradio, 1969.
22.
HeikkinenT. & KontulaO.Koulujen huumeopetus: Tutkimus lukuvuodesta 1989–1990 [Drug education in schools: A study of the curricular year 1989–1990]. Report No. 63.Helsinki: National Agency for Welfare and Health, 1992.
23.
HemánusP.PartanenJ. & VirtanenM.Virittävyyden ongelma [The problem of generativity]. Publication No. C 9. Tampere: University of Tampere, Department of Communication, 1987.
HobsonD.Crossroads: The drama of a soap opera. London: Methuen, 1982.
26.
HoffnerC. & CantorJ.Perceiving and responding to mass media characters. In BryantJ. & ZillmanD. eds. Responding to the screen: Reception and reaction processes. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1991.
27.
HöijerB.Studying viewer reception of television programs by in-depth interviews: Theoretical and methodological considerations. European Journal of Communication5. 1, 29–56, 1990a.
28.
HöijerB.Vetenskap i TV: en kvalitativ närstudie av hur tittare tolkar och upplever ett medicinskt program. PUB Report No. 10.Stockholm: Sveriges Radio, 1990b.
29.
HolmilaM.Community action on alcohol: Experiences of the Lahti Project in Finland. Health Promotion International104, 283–291, 1995.
30.
HolubR.Reception theory: A critical introduction. London: Methuen, 1984.
31.
JensenK.Reception analysis: Mass communication as the social production of meaning. In JensenK. & JankowskiN. eds. A handbook of qualitative methodologies for mass communication research. London: Routledge, 1991.
32.
JokinenK.What we talk about when we talk about literature. In VainikkalaE. ed. The cultural study of reception. Publication No. 38.Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, Research Unit for Contemporary Culture, 1993.
33.
KerttulaR.Teatteriesitys kommunikaatiotapahtumana [Theatric performance as communication]. Kulttuuritutkimus53, 3–5, 1988.
34.
KirstinäL.The horizon of expectations of Finnish and Hungarian readers. In VainikkalaE. & EskolaK. eds. Literature as communication. Publication No. 18.Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, Research Unit for Contemporary Culture, 1989.
35.
KnuuttilaS.Retoriikka, taide ja julkinen sana [Rhetorics, art and public communication]. In KytömäkiJ. ed. Nykyajan sadut: Joukkoviestinnän kertomukset ja vastaanotto. Helsinki: Gaudeamus, 1991.
36.
Koskinen-OllonqvistP.Koulun alkoholiopetuksen kehittäminen [The development of school-based alcohol education]. Publication No. 5.Helsinki: Center for Health Education, 1993.
37.
KytömäkiJ. & SavinenA.Terveisiä katsojilta [Greetings from the public]. Research & Development, Research Report 1. Helsinki: Yleisradio, 1993.
38.
LayderD.New strategies in social research: An introduction and guide. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993.
39.
LiebesT. & KatzE.The export of meaning: Cross-cultural readings of Dallas. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
40.
LundS.Publikums reaksjoner på fjernsynsserien “Resten av livet.” Report No. 2.Oslo: Norsk Rikskringkastning, 1986.
41.
LundS.Publikums reaksjoner pi programserien “Nesten voksen.” Report No. 3.Oslo: Norsk Rikskringkastning, 1984.
42.
MontazeriA.Effective communication: A description of an experience: Reception of two anti-smoking advertisements. Workshop on Health Education Research, Tampere, Finland, September6–8, 1994.
43.
MontonenM.The Liquor Weeks: Local cooperation to inform the public about alcohol. Third Symposium on Community Action Research, Greve in Chianti. Italy, September24–29, 1995.
44.
MontonenM.Alkoholi televisiodraamassa: Vertaileva vastaanottotutkimus [Alcohol in television drama: A comparative study of reception]. Licenciate's thesis. University of Helsinki, 1991.
45.
MontonenM.Alkoholi, televisio ja valistus [Alcohol on television and alcohol education]. Alkoholipolitiikka555, 231–241, 1990.
46.
MorleyD.Television, audiences & cultural studies. London: Routledge, 1992.
47.
NewcombH.One night of prime time: An analysis of television's multiple voices. In CareyJ. ed. Media, myths, and narratives: Television and the press. Newbury Park: Sage, 1988.
48.
NewcombH. & HirschP.Television as a cultural forum. In GurevitchM. & LevyM. eds. Mass Communication Review Yearbook 5. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1985.
49.
PressA.Class, gender and the female viewer. In BrownM. ed. Television and women's culture. London: Sage, 1990.
SchönE.Self-statements on literary reading in the life of children and youths. In VainikkalaE. ed. The cultural study of reception. Publication No. 38.Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, Research Unit for Contemporary Culture, 1993.
52.
SegersR.Kirja ja lukija [The book and the reader]. Helsinki: Finnish Literary Society, 1985.
53.
SeiterE.et al., eds. Remote control: Television, audiences and cultural power. London: Routledge, 1989.
54.
SuominenS.Paikallistelevision terveysohjelmat seurantaryhmien arvioimina [Focus group assessments of health education on local television]. In The Yearbook of Health Education Research. Helsinki: National Agency for Welfare and Health, 1991.
55.
SussmanS.et al.Viewing and evaluation of a televised drug education program by students previously or concurrently exposed to school-based substance abuse prevention programming. Health Education Research24, 373–383, 1987.
56.
SvendsenE.Ambulancelaegen: Drama eller dokumentar? In Medieforskning i Danmarks Radio1987Forskningsrapport 4B. København: Danmarks Radio, 1988.
57.
TaylorR.Information use environments. In DervinB. & VoigtM. eds. Progressin Communication Sciences, Vol. X.Norwood: Ablex, 1991.
58.
VirtanenM.Valistuksen virittävyys [The generativity of education]. Report No. 147.Helsinki: Social Research Institute of Alcohol Studies, 1981.
59.
WilsonT.Information needs and uses: Fifty years of progress? In VickeryB. ed. Fifty years of information progress. London: Aslib, 1994.