Based on news content analysis and survey data from the 2004 presidential election, this study examines the theoretical link between second-level agenda setting and various types of political participation beyond mere voting. Using the hierarchy-of-effects model, this study tested the sequence of C(cognitive)-A(affective)-B(behavior): News attention to presidential candidates creates second-level agenda-setting effects among the public (C); in turn, agenda-setting effects trigger strong attitudes toward candidates (A); and finally, strong attitudes lead to various types of political participation (B). Every direct effect in the structural model was significant. Indirect and total effects of agenda setting for political participation were all found to be significant. As hypothesized, agenda-setting effects operated as a mediator between media use and political participation.
AjzenI. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
2.
Associated Press. (2004, October21). NBC’s Nightly News dominates ratings. New York, NY: Author.
3.
BaillieR. K. (1996). Determining the effects of media portrayals of alcohol: Going beyond short term influence. Alcohol & Alcoholism, 31, 235-242.
4.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
5.
BarryT. E. (2002). In defense of the hierarchy of effects: A rejoinder to Weilbacher. Journal of Advertising Research, 42(3), 44-47.
6.
BassiliJ. N. (1995). Response latency and the accessibility of voting intentions: What contributes to accessibility and how it affects vote choice. Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 637-653.
7.
ChaffeeS. H.RoserC. (1986). Involvement and the consistency of knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. Communication Research, 13, 373-399.
8.
ChaffeeS. H.SchleuderJ. (1986). Measurement and effects of attention to media news. Human Communication Research, 13(1), 76-107.
9.
DearingJ. W.RogersE. M. (1996). Agenda-setting. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Delli CarpiniM. X. (2004). Mediating democratic engagement: The impact of communications on citizens’ involvement in political and civic life. In KaidL. L. (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp. 395-434). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
EaglyA. H.ChaikenS. (1995). Attitude strength, attitude structure, and resistance to change. In PettyR. E.KrosnickJ. A. (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 413-432). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
EaglyA. H.WoodW.ChaikenS. (1978). Causal inferences about communicators and their effect on opinion change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(4), 424-435.
13.
EntmanR. M. (1989). Democracy without citizens: Media and the decay of American politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
14.
FazioR. H.ChenJ.McDonelE. C.ShermanS. J. (1982). Attitude accessibility, attitude-behavior consistency, and the strength of the object-evaluation association. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18(4), 339-357.
15.
FicoF.ZeldesG. A.DiddiA. (2004). Partisan and structural balance of local television election coverage of incumbent and open gubernatorial elections. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(4), 897-910.
16.
FombrunC.ShanleyM. (1990). What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 233-258.
17.
GhanemS. (1997). Filling in the tapestry: The second level of agenda setting. In Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda-setting theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
GhorpadeS. (1986). Agenda setting: A test of advertising’s neglected function. Journal of Advertising Research, 26(4), 23-27.
19.
GraberD. (1984). Mass media and American politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
20.
HuL.BentlerP.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
21.
IyengarS.KinderD. R. (1987). News that matters: Television and American opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22.
KangN.KwakN. (2003). A multilevel approach to civic participation: Individual length of residence, neighborhood residential stability, and their interactive effects with media use. Communication Research, 30(1), 80.
23.
KatzE.GurevitchM.HassH. (1973). On the uses of mass media for important things. American Sociology Review, 38(2), 164-181.
24.
KepplingerH. M.RothH. (1979). Creating a crisis: German mass media and oil supply in 1973-74. Public Opinion Quarterly, 43(3), 285-296.
25.
KimK.McCombsM. E. (2007). News story descriptions and the public’s opinions of political candidates. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(2), 299-314.
26.
KimS.-H.ScheufeleD. A.ShanahanJ. (2002). Think about it this way: Attribute agenda-setting function of the press and the public’s evaluation of a local issueJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 79(1), 7.
27.
KinderD. R. (1986). Presidential character revisited. In LauR. R.SearsD. O. (Eds.), Political cognition: Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28.
KiousisS. (2005). Compelling arguments and attitude strength: Exploring the impact of second-level agenda setting on public opinion of presidential candidate images. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 10(2), 3.
29.
KiousisS.McCombsM. E. (2004). Agenda-setting effects and attitude strength: Political figures during the1996 presidential election. Communication Research, 31(1), 36.
30.
KiousisS.McDevittM. (2008). Agenda setting in civic development: Effects of curricula and issue importance on youth voter turnout. Communication Research, 35(4), 481-502.
31.
KiousisS.PopescuC.MitrookM. (2007). Understanding influence on corporate reputation: An examination of public relations efforts, media coverage, public opinion, and financial performance from an agenda-building and agenda-setting perspective. Journal of Public Relations Research, 19(2), 147-165.
32.
KlineR. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.
33.
KrosnickJ. A. (1988). The role of attitude importance in social evaluations: A study of policy preferences, presidential candidate evaluations, and voting behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 196-210.
34.
KrosnickJ. A.BoningerD. S.ChuangY. C.BerentM. K.CarnotG. (1993). Attitude strength: One construct or many related constructs?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(6), 1132-1151.
35.
KrosnickJ. A.PettyR. E. (1995). Attitude strength: An overview. In PettyR. E.KrosnickJ. A. (Eds.), Attitude strength: antecedents and consequences (pp. 1-24). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
36.
LavineH. (2001). The electoral consequences of ambivalence toward presidential candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 915-929.
37.
LongmanK. A. (1971). Advertising. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace.
38.
MarcusG. E. (1988). The structure of emotional response: 1984 presidential candidates. The American Political Science Review, 82(3), 737-761.
39.
McCombsM. E. (2004). Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion. Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.
40.
McCombsM. E.LlamasJ. P.Lopez-EscobarE.ReyF. (1997). Candidate images in Spanish elections: Second-level agenda-setting effects. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(4), 703-717.
41.
McCombsM.ReynoldsA. (2002). News influence on our pictures of the world. In BryantJ.ZillmannD. (Eds.), Media effects (pp. 1-16). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
McGuireW. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In LindzeyG.AronsonE. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 233-346). New York, NY: Hillsdale.
43.
McGuireW. J. (1989). Theoretical foundations of campaigns. In RiceR. E.AtkinC. K. (Eds.), Public communication campaigns (2nd ed., pp. 43-66). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
44.
McLeodJ. M.ScheufeleD. A. (1999). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion. Political Communication, 16(3), 315.
45.
MillarM. G.TesserA. (1986). Effects of affective and cognitive focus on the attitude-behavior relation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(2), 270-276.
46.
MillarM. G.TesserA. (1989). The effects of affective-cognitive consistency and thought on the attitude-behavior relation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25(2), 189-202.
47.
MillerJ. M.KrosnickJ. A. (2000). News media impact on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Politically knowledgeable citizens are guided by a trusted source. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 301-315.
48.
MillerJ. M.PetersonD. A. M. (2004). Theoretical and empirical implications of attitude strength. Journal of Politics, 66(3), 847-867.
49.
MoyP.TorresM.TanakaK.McCluskeyM. (2005). Knowledge or trust? Investigating linkages between media reliance and participation. Communication Research, 32(1), 59-86.
50.
NeuendorfK. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
51.
NorrisP. (1996). Does television erode social capital? A reply to Putnam. PS: Political Science and Politics, 29(3), 474-480.
52.
Ogata JonesK.DenhamB. E.SpringstonJ. K. (2006). Effects of mass and interpersonal communication on Breast Cancer screening: Advancing agenda-setting theory in health contexts. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34(1), 94-113.
53.
OskampS. (1991). Attitudes and opinions (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
54.
PalmgreenP.WennerL. A.RayburnJ. D. (1980). Relations between gratifications sought and obtained: A study of TV news. Communication Research, 7, 161-192.
55.
PettyR. E.KrosnickJ. A. (1995). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
PriorM. (2006). The Incumbent in the living room: The rise of television and the incumbency advantage in US House Elections. Journal of Politics, 68(3), 657-673.
58.
PutnamR. D. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. PS: Political Science and Politics, 28(4), 664-683.
59.
PutnamR. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
60.
ReeseD. S.DanielianH. L. (1989). Intermedia influence and the drug issue: Converging on cocaine. In ShoemakerP. J. (Ed.), Communication campaigns about drugs: Government, media, and the public (pp. x, 127.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
61.
RobertsM. S. (1992). Predicting voting behavior via the agenda-setting tradition. Journalism Quarterly, 69(4), 878-892.
62.
RosenstoneS. J.HansenJ. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York, NY: Macmillan.
63.
RothschildM. L.RayM. L. (1974). Involvement and political advertising effect. Communication Research, 1(3), 264-285.
64.
SatoH. (2003). Agenda setting for smoking control in Japan, 1945-1990: Influence of the mass media on national health policy making. Journal of Health Communication, 8(1), 23.
65.
SeverinW. J.TankardJ. W. (2000). Communication theories: Origins, methods, and uses in the mass media. New York, NY: Longman.
66.
ShahD. V. (1998). Civic engagement, interpersonal trust, and television use: An individual-level assessment of social capital. Political Psychology, 19(3), 469-496.
67.
ShahD. V.McLeodJ. M.YoonS.-H. (2001). Communication, context, and community: An exploration of print, broadcast, and Internet influences. Communication Research, 28(4), 464.
68.
SheaferT. (2007). How to evaluate it: The role of story-evaluative tone in agenda setting and priming. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 21-39.
69.
SherifC. W.SherifM.NebergallR. E. (1965). Attitude and attitude change: The social judgment-involvement approach. Philadelphia: Saunders.
70.
StroudN. J.KenskiK. (2007). From agenda setting to refusal setting. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(4), 539-559.
71.
SutherlandM.GallowayJ. (1981). Role of advertising: Persuasion or agenda setting?Journal of Advertising Research, 21(5), 25-29.
72.
TakeshitaT. (2006). Current critical problems in agenda-setting research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18(3), 11-32.
73.
TesserA.MartinL.MendoliaM. (1995). The impact of thought on attitude extremity and attitude-behavior consistency. In PettyR. E.KrosnickJ. A. (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 1-24). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
74.
TsfatiY. (2003). Does audience skepticism of the media matter in agenda setting?Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47(2), 157-176.
75.
UslanerE. M. (1998). Social capital, television, and the “Mean world”: Trust, optimism, and civic participation. Political Psychology, 19(3), 441-467.
76.
ValenteT. W.ParedesP.PoppeP. R. (1998). Matching the message to the process: The relative ordering of knowledge, attitudes, and practices in behavior change research. Human Communication Research, 24(3), 366-385.
77.
VerbaS.NieN. H. (1972). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
78.
VerbaS.SchlozmanK. L.BradyH. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
79.
VisserP. S.KrosnickJ. A.SimmonsJ. P. (2003). Distinguishing the cognitive and behavioral consequences of attitude importance and certainty: A new approach to testing the common factor hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 118-141.
80.
VisserP. S.BizerG. Y.KronickJ. A. (2006). Exploring the latent structure of strength related attitude attributes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 1-67.
81.
WartickS. L. (1992). The relationship between intense media exposure and change in corporate reputation. Business & Society, 31(1), 33.
82.
WeaverD.H. (1980). Audience need for orientation and media effects. Communication Research, 7(3), 361-377.
83.
WeaverD. (1984). Media agenda-setting and public opinion: Is there a link? In BostromR. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 8 (pp. 680-691). Newberry Park, CA: Sage.
84.
WeaverD. H. (1991). Issue salience and public opinion: Are there consequences of agenda-setting?International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 3, 53-68.
85.
WickerA. W. (1969). Attitudes versus actions: The relationship between verbal and overt behavioral responses to attitude objects. Journal of Social Issues, 25, 41-78.
86.
ZukinC.KeeterS.AndolinaM.JenkinsK.Delli CarpiniX. M. (2006). A new engagement? Political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
87.
ZillmanD. (1985). The experimental explorations of gratifications from media entertainment. In ZillmanD.BryantJ. (Eds.), Selective exposure to communication (pp. 225-239). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
