The current study examines how discrete emotions function in the manifestation of the third-person effect of news coverage of election poll results. An online survey was conducted employing a sample of undergraduate students from the United States (n = 197) and South Korea (n = 178) before the 2012 presidential elections in the two countries. Results demonstrate that third-person perception is negatively associated with pride, which, in turn, is positively linked to political participation intention only for the supporters of a losing candidate. For U.S. respondents, third-person perception is positively associated with anger, which is positively associated with support for restrictions on polling news. For South Korean respondents, the mediation of anxiety between third-person perception and political participation intention is significant for the supporters of a losing candidate. Implications of the findings are discussed.
AbelsonR. P.KinderD. R.PetersM. D.FiskeS. T. (1982). Affective and semantic components in political personal perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 619-630.
2.
AjzenI. (1991). Theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.
3.
AjzenI.BrownT. C.CarvajalF. (2004). Explaining the discrepancy between intentions and actions: The case of hypothetical bias in contingent valuation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 1108-1121. doi:10.1177/0146167204264079
4.
ArmitageC. J.ConnerM. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471-489.
5.
BanningS. A. (2006). Third-person effects on political participation. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83, 785-800.
6.
BollenK. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
7.
BraderT.ValentinoN. A. (2007). Identities, interests, and emotions: Symbolic versus material wellsprings of fear, anger, and enthusiasm. In NeumanW. R.MarcusG. E.CriglerA. N.MacKuenM. (Eds.), The affect effect: Dynamics of emotion in political thinking and behavior (pp. 180-201). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
8.
ByrneB. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
CohenJ.DavisR. G. (1991). Third-person effects and the differential impact in negative political advertising. Journalism Quarterly, 68, 680-688.
11.
CohenJ.MutzD.PriceV.GuntherA. (1988). Perceived impact of defamation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 161-173.
12.
DavisE.GreenbergerE.CharlesS.ChenC.ZhaoL.DongQ. (2012). Emotion experience and regulation in China and the United States: How do culture and gender shape emotion responding?International Journal of Psychology, 47, 230-239. doi:10.1080/00207594.2011.626043
13.
DavisonW. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1-15.
14.
de VreeseC. H.SemetkoH. A. (2002). Public perception of polls and support for restrictions on the publication of polls: Denmark’s 2000 Euro referendum. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 14, 367-390.
15.
DuckJ. M.HoggM. A.TerryD. J. (1995). Me, us and them: Political identification and the third-person effect in the 1993 Australian federal election. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 195-215.
16.
EidM.DienerE. (2001). Norms for experiencing emotions in different cultures: Inter-and intra-national differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 869-885.
17.
EvelandW. P.Jr.McLeodD. M. (1999). The effect of social desirability on perceived media impact: Implications for third-person perceptions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 11, 315-333.
18.
EysenckM. W. (1992). Anxiety: The cognitive perspective. East Sussex, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19.
FrijdaN. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
20.
FrijdaN. H. (2010). Impulsive action and motivation. Biological Psychology, 84, 570-579. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2010.01.005
21.
FrijdaN. H.KuipersP.ter SchureE. (1989). Relations among emotion, appraisal, and emotional action readiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 212-228.
22.
FrijdaN. H.MesquitaB. (1995). The social roles and functions of emotions. In KitayamaS.MarkusH. R. (Eds.), Emotion and culture: Empirical studies of mutual influence (pp. 51-87). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
GuntherA. C.BoltD.BorzekowskiD. L. G.LiebhartJ. L.DillardJ. P. (2006). Presumed influence on peer norms: How mass media indirectly affect adolescent smoking. Journal of Communication, 56, 52-68.
25.
GuntherA. C.HwaA. P. (1996). Public perceptions of television influence and opinions about censorship in Singapore. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 248-265.
26.
GuntherA. C.PerloffR. M.TsfatiY. (2008). Public opinion and the third-person effect. In DonsbachW.TraugottM. W. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of public opinion research (pp. 184-191). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
27.
Harmon-JonesE.SigelmanJ. (2001). State anger and prefrontal brain activity: Evidence that insult-related relative left-prefrontal activation is associated with experienced anger and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 797-803.
28.
HofstedeG.HofstedeG. J.MinkovM. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London, England: McGraw-Hill.
29.
HuddyL.FeldmanS.CasseseE. (2007). On the distinct political effects of anxiety and anger. In NeumanW. R.MarcusG. E.CriglerA. N.MacKuenM. (Eds.), The affect effect: Dynamics of emotion in political thinking and behavior (pp. 202-230). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
30.
HwangH.PanZ.SunY. (2008). Influence of hostile media perception on willingness to engage in discursive activities: An examination of mediating role of media indignation. Media Psychology, 11, 76-97. doi:10.1080/15213260701813454
31.
ImadaT. (2012). Cultural narratives of individualism and collectivism: A content analysis of textbook stories in the United States and Japan. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43, 576-591. doi:10.1177/0022022110383312
32.
IzardC. E. (1977). Human emotions. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
33.
IzardC. E. (1991). The psychology of emotions. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
34.
KepplingerH. M. (2008). Effects of the news media on public opinion. In DonsbachW.TraugottM. W. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of public opinion research (pp. 192-204). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
35.
LazarusR. S. (1984). Thoughts on the relations between emotion and cognition. In SchererK. R.EkmanP. (Eds.), Approaches to emotion (pp. 247-257). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
36.
LazarusR. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
37.
LazarusR. S.CoyneJ. C.FolkmanS. (1984). Cognition, emotion and motivation: The doctoring of Humpty-Dumpty. In SchererK. R.EkmanP. (Eds.), Approaches to emotion (pp. 221-237). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38.
LeeB.TamboriniR. (2005). Third-person effect and Internet pornography: The influence of collectivism and Internet self-efficacy. Journal of Communication, 55, 292-310.
39.
LevittE. E. (1967). The psychology of anxiety. New York, NY: Bobbs-Merrill.
40.
LewisM. (2000). Self-conscious emotions: Embarrassment, pride, shame, and guilt. In LewisM.Haviland-JonesJ. M. (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 623-636). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
41.
MarcusG. E.NeumanW. R.MackuenM. (2000). Affective intelligence and political judgment. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
42.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253.
43.
MascoloM. F.FischerK. W. (1995). Developmental transformations in appraisals for pride, shame and guilt. In TangneyJ. P.FischerK. W. (Eds.), Self-conscious emotions: The psychology of shame, guilt, embarrassment and pride (pp. 64-113). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
44.
MeirickP. C. (2004). Topic-relevant reference groups and dimensions of distance. Communication Research, 31, 234-255.
45.
NabiR. L. (1999). A cognitive-functional model for the effects of discrete negative emotions on information processing, attitude change, and recall. Communication Theory, 9, 292-320.
46.
NabiR. L. (2003). Exploring the framing effects of emotion: Do discrete emotions differentially influence information accessibility, information seeking, and policy preference?Communication Research, 30, 224-247.
47.
NamkoongK.FungT.ScheufeleD. A. (2012). The politics of emotion: New media attention, emotional responses, and participation during the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Mass Communication and Society, 15, 25-45. doi:10.1080/15205436.2011.563894
48.
NerbJ.SpadaH. (2001). Evaluation of environmental problems: A coherence model of cognition and emotion. Cognition & Emotion, 15, 521-551.
49.
NeuwirthK.FrederickE.MayoC. (2002). Person-effects and heuristic-systematic processing. Communication Research, 29, 320-359.
50.
PanZ.AbisaidJ. L.PaekH. J.SunY.HoudenD. (2006). Exploring the perceptual gap in perceived effects of media reports of opinion polls. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 340-350.
51.
PanagopoulosC. (2010). Affect, social pressure and prosocial motivation: Field experimental evidence of the mobilizing effects of pride, shame and publicizing voting behavior. Political Behavior, 32, 369-386. doi:10.1007/s11109-010-9114-0
52.
PaulB.SalwenM. B.DupagneM. (2000). The third-person effect: A meta-analysis of the perceptual hypothesis. Mass Communication and Society, 3, 57-85.
53.
PerloffR. M. (2002). The third-person effect. In BryantJ.ZillmannD. (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 489-506). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
54.
PlutchikR. (1962). The emotions: Facts, theories, and a new model. New York, NY: Random House.
55.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
56.
PreacherK. J.RuckerD. D.HayesA. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185-227. doi:10.1080/00273170701341316
57.
PriceV.StroudN. J. (2006). Public attitudes toward polls: Evidence from the 2000 U.S. Presidential election. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 393-421.
58.
RojasH. (2010). “Corrective” actions in the public sphere: How perceptions of media and media effects shape political behaviors. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22, 343-363. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edq018
59.
RosemanI. J.SmithC. A. (2001). Appraisal theory: Overview, assumptions varieties, controversies. In SchererK. R.SchorrA.JohnstoneT. (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion (pp. 3-19). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
60.
SalwenM. B.DupagneM. (1999). The third-person effect: Perceptions of the media’s influence and immoral consequences. Communication Research, 26, 523-550.
61.
SchererK. R. (1997). The role of culture in emotion-antecedent appraisal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 902-922.
62.
SchererK. R. (2001). Appraisal considered as a process of multilevel sequential checking. In SchererK. R.SchorrA.JohnstoneT. (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion (pp. 92-120). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
63.
SpielbergerC. D. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
64.
SunY.PanZ.ShenL. (2008). Understanding the third-person perception: Evidence from a meta-analysis. Journal of Communication, 58, 280-300.
65.
SunY.ShenL.PanZ. (2008). On the behavioral component of the third-person effect. Communication Research, 35, 257-278.
66.
TagarM. R.FedericoC. M.HalperinE. (2011). The positive effect of negative emotions in protracted conflict: The case of anger. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 157-164. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.09.011
67.
TianY. (2011). Communication behaviors as mediators: Examining links between political orientation, political communication, and political participation. Communication Quarterly, 59, 380-394. doi:10.1080/01463373.2011.583503
68.
Ting-ToomeyS. (1999). Communicating across cultures. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
69.
TsaiJ. L. (2007). Ideal affect: Cultural causes and behavioral consequences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 242-259.
70.
ValentinoN. A.BraderT.GroenendykE. W.GregorowiczK.HutchingsV. L. (2011). Election night’s alright for fighting: The role of emotions in political participation. Journal of Politics, 73, 156-170. doi:10.1017/s0022381610000939
71.
ValloneR. P.RossL.LepperM. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 577-589.
72.
WeiR.ChiaS. C.LoV. H. (2011). Third-person effect and hostile media perception influences on voter attitudes toward polls in the 2008 U.S. Presidential election. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 23, 169-190. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edq044
73.
WeiR.LoV. H. (2007). The third-person effects of political attack ads in the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Media Psychology, 9, 367-388.
74.
WeiR.LoV. H.LuH. Y. (2010). The third-person effect of tainted food product recall news: Examining the role of credibility, attention, and elaboration for college students in Taiwan. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 87, 598-614.
75.
WeiR.LoV. H.LuH. Y. (2011). Examining the perceptual gap and behavioral intention in the perceived effects of polling news in the 2008 Taiwan presidential election. Communication Research, 38, 206-227. doi:10.1177/0093650210365536
76.
WilliamsL.DeStenoD. (2008). Pride and perseverance: The motivational role of pride. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 1007-1017.
77.
XuJ.GonzenbachW. J. (2008). Does a perceptual discrepancy lead to action? A meta-analysis of the behavioral component of the third-person effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20, 375-385. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edn031
