A nationwide telephone survey of 721 adults examined the impact of the third-person effect on individuals' perceptions of the media's general influence and immorality effects with three issues. The third-person effect perceptual hypothesis predicts that individuals will perceive media messages to have greater effects on other people than on themselves. A behavioral hypothesis predicts that third-person perception (i.e., seeing others as more influenced) will lead to support for restrictions on media messages. The findings reaffirmed robust support for the perceptual hypothesis. Regarding the behavioral hypothesis, effect perceptions were found to be issue dependent. For television violence, the issue with the clearest moral dimension, perceived immorality effects predicted support for restrictions. In contrast, perception of the media's general influence was a key predictor of support for restrictions on televised trials and negative political advertising. The failure of past research to distinguish dimensions of perceived effects may account for the less than robust findings regarding the behavioral hypothesis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Altheide, D. L.
(1985). Media power. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
2.
Annas, I.
(1996). Aristotle and Kant on morality and practical reasoning. In S. Engstrom & J. Whiting (Eds.), Aristotle, Kant, the Stoics: Rethinking happiness and duty (pp. 237-258). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3.
Atwood, L. E.
(1994). Illusions of media power. The third-person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 71, 269-281.
4.
Baughman, J. L.
(1989). “The world is ruled by those who holler the loudest”: The third-person effect on American journalism history. Journalism History, 16 (½), 12-19.
5.
Bereck, S. R.
, & Glynn, C. J. (1993, May). Interpersonal interaction and the third-person effect in potential first time presidential election voters. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, St. Charles, IL.
6.
Brosius, H. -B.
, & Engel, D. (1996). The causes of third-person effects: Unrealistic optimism, impersonal impact, or generalized negative attitudes towards media influence?International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 142-162.
7.
Brown, J. D.
(1986). Evaluations of self and others: Self-enhancement biases in social judgments. Social Cognition, 4, 353-376.
8.
Cohen J.
, & Davis, R. G. (1991). Third-person effects and the differential impact in negative political advertising. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 680-688.
9.
Cohen, J.
, Mutz, D. C., Price, V., & Gunther, A. (1988). Perceived impact of defamation: An experiment on third-person effects. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 161-173.
10.
Conners, J. L.
(1994, August). The third-person perception and social distance: Exploring who are the “others.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Atlanta, GA.
11.
Conners, J. L.
(1995, May). Social distance vs. cognitive distance and the third-person effect. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Chicago.
12.
Cooper, C. A.
(1996). Violence on television: Congressional inquiry, public criticism and industry response, a policy analysis. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
13.
Dalton, R. M.
, Beck, P. A., & Huckfeldt, R. (1998). Partisan cues and the media: Information flows in the 1992 presidential election. American Political Science Review, 92, 111-126.
14.
David, P.
, & Johnson, M. (1998). The role of self and third-person effects about body image. Journal of Communication, 48(4), 37-58.
15.
Davies, G. K.
(1994). The need for liberal education. New Directions for Higher Education, 85, 61-64.
16.
Davison, W. P.
(1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1-15.
17.
Davison, W. P.
(1996). The third-person effect revisited. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 113-119.
18.
Domke, D.
, & Shah, D. V. (1993, August). Information presentation and issue salience: Their relationships with voter decision-making strategies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Kansas City, MO.
19.
Domke, D.
, & Shah, D. V. (1995). Interpretation of issues and voter decision-making strategies: A news perspective on “issue-oriented” election coverage. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 72, 45-71.
20.
Domke, D.
, Shah, D. V., & Wackman, D. B. (1998, August). News coverage of “moral” issues, priming of candidate integrity, and vote choice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Baltimore, MD.
21.
Dority, B.
(1991, January/February). Profile of a censor. Humanist, 51, 43-44.
22.
Driscoll, P. D.
, & Salwen, M. B. (1997). Self-perceived knowledge of the O. J. Simpson trial: Third-person perception and perceptions of guilt. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 541-556.
23.
Duck, J. M.
, Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. 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.
24.
Duck, J. M.
, Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1995). The perceived influence of AIDS advertising: The third-person effect in the context of positive media content. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 117-140.
25.
Dupagne, M.
, Salwen, M. B., & Paul, B. (1999, August). Impact of question order on the third-person effect. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, New Orleans, LA.
26.
Emde, R. N.
(1993). The horror! The horror! Reflections on our culture of violence and its implications for early development and morality. In D. Reiss, J. E. Richters, M. Radke-Yarrow, & D. Scharff (Eds.), Children and violence (pp. 119-123). New York: Guilford.
27.
Erskine, H.
(1970). The polls: Freedom of speech. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 483-496.
28.
Ettema, J. S.
, & Glasser, T. L. (1994). The irony in—and of—journalism. Journal of Communication, 44(2), 5-28.
29.
Eveland, W. P., Jr.
, & McLeod, D. M. (1999, May). The effects of social desirability on perceived media impact: Implications for third-person perceptions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Francisco.
30.
Eveland W. P., Jr.
, Nathanson, A. I., Detenber, B. H., & McLeod, D. M. (1999). Rethinking the social distance corollary: Perceived likelihood of exposure and the third-person perception. Communication Research, 26, 275-302.
31.
Frohnmayer, J.
(1994). Out of tune: Listening to the First Amendment. Nashville, TN: The Freedom Forum First Amendment Center, Vanderbilt University.
32.
Gibbon, P.
, & Durkin, K. (1995). The third-person effect: Social distance and perceived media bias. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 597-602.
33.
Giner-Sorolla, R.
, & Chaiken, S. (1994). The causes of hostile media judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 165-180.
34.
Glasser, T. L.
, & Ettema, J. S. (1994). The language of news and the end of morality. Argumentation, 8, 337-344.
35.
Glynn, C. J.
(1989). Perceptions of others' opinions as a component of public opinion. Social Science Research, 18, 53-69.
36.
Gorsuch, R. L.
(1974). Factor analysis. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.
37.
Griswold, W. F.
(1992, August). Third-person effect and voting intentions in a presidential primary election. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Montreal, Canada.
38.
Gunter, B.
(1994). The question of media violence. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 163-211). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39.
Gunther, A. C.
(1991). What we think others think: Cause and consequence in the third-person effect. Communication Research, 18, 355-372.
40.
Gunther, A. C.
(1995). Overrating the x-rating: The third-person perception and support for censorship of pornography. Journal of Communication, 45, 27-38.
41.
Gunther, A. C.
, & Ang, P. H. (1996). Public perceptions of television influence and opinions about censorship in Singapore. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 248-265.
42.
Gunther, A. C.
, & Christen, C. T. (1999, May). Projection of persuasive press? Effects of personal opinion and perceived news coverage on estimates of public opinion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Francisco.
43.
Gunther, A. C.
, & Mundy, P. (1993). Biased optimism and the third-person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 70, 58-67.
44.
Gunther, A. C.
, & Thorson, E. (1992). Perceived persuasive effects of commercials and public service announcements: The third-person effect in new domains. Communication Research, 19, 574-596.
45.
Hill, B. A.
(1994). The nature of liberal education today. New Directions for Higher Education, 85, 7-11.
46.
Hitchon, J. C.
, Chang, C., & Harris, R. (1997). Should women emote? Perceptual bias and opinion change in response to political ads for candidates of different genders. Political Communication, 14, 49-69.
47.
Hoorens, V.
, & Ruiter, S. (1996). The optimal impact phenomenon: Beyond the third-person effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 599-610.
48.
Howitt, E.
, Driscoll, P. D., & Salwen, M. B. (1998, February). The role of self-esteem, body satisfaction, and body image on female college students' third-person perceptions: An examination of the “thin ideal” myth. Paper presented at the annual Intercultural Communication Conference, Miami, FL.
49.
Hu, Y. W.
, & Wu, Y. C. (1998, August). The “critics,”“believers,” and “outsiders” of election polls: Comparing characteristics of the third-person effect, first-person effect and consensus effect. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Baltimore, MD.
50.
Huang, L. -N.
(1995, August). The role of the self in the third-person effect: A view from cognitive and motivational perspectives. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Washington, DC.
51.
Huffman, J. L.
, & Trauth, D. M. (1982, November). Pornography and the community's interest in morality: Is prior restraint an answer? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Louisville, KY.
52.
Innes, J. M.
, & Zeitz, H. (1988). The public's view of the impact of the mass media: A test of the “third person” effect. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 457-463.
53.
Katchadourian, H. A.
, & Boli, J. (1985). Careerism and intellectualism among college students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
54.
Kim, Y.
, Ahn, J., & Song, J. (1991, May). Perceived media influence on self and others on a controversial issue. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Chicago.
55.
Lambe, J. L.
, & Shah, D. V. (1999). Hate speech and the third-person effect: Susceptibility, severity, and the willingness to censor. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, New Orleans, LA.
56.
Lasorsa, D. L.
(1989). Real and perceived effects of “Amerika.”Journalism Quarterly, 66, 373-378, 529.
57.
Lasorsa, D. L.
(1992). Policymakers and the third-person effect. In J. D. Kennamer (Ed.), Public opinion, the press, and public policy (pp. 163-175). Westport, CT: Praeger.
58.
Lee, C.
, & Yang, S. (1996). Third-person perceptions and support for censorship of sexually explicit visual content. Sungkok Journalism Review, 7, 21-39.
59.
Lewis-Beck, M. S.
(1990). Applied regression: An introduction. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
60.
Lo, V.
, & Paddon, A. R. (1998, August). The third-person perception and support for restrictions of pornography: Some methodological problems. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Baltimore, MD.
61.
Mason, L.
(1995). Newspaper as repeater: An experiment on defamation and the third-person effect. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 72, 610-620.
62.
Matera, F.
, & Salwen, M. B. (1997, August). Issue salience and the third-person effect: Perceptions of illegal immigration in a Southwestern region. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Chicago.
63.
McLeod, D. M.
, Detenber, B. H., & Eveland, W. P., Jr. (1999, August). Behind the third-person effect: How people generate media impact assessments and link them to support for censorship. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, New Orleans, LA.
64.
McLeod, D. M.
, Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Nathanson, A. I. (1997). Support for censorship of violent and misogynic rap lyrics: An analysis of the third-person effect. Communication Research, 24, 153-174.
65.
Mutz, D. C.
(1989). The influence of perceptions of media influence: Third-person effects and the public expression of opinions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 1, 2-23.
66.
Osborne, B.
(1993). The morality of the mass media. Dallas: University of Texas at Dallas.
67.
Park, E.
(1997, July). Individualism / collectivism, cultural variations in self-concept and their implications for the false-uniqueness hypothesis: The cases of the third-person effect and optimistic illusion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Chicago.
68.
Pascarella, E. T.
, & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
69.
Paul, B.
, Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne, M. (1999, May). The third-person effect: A meta-analysis of the perceptual hypothesis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Francisco.
70.
Paxton, M. A. (1995). The third-person effect and attitudes toward freedom of expression. Dissertation Abstracts International, 57 (02), 498A.
71.
Paxton, M.
(1997, March). Media use, “experts” and the third-person effect. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southeast Colloquium of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Knoxville, TN.
72.
Peiser, W.
, & Peter, J. (1999, May). Third-person perception of television viewing behavior. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Francisco.
73.
Perloff, R. M.
(1989). Ego-involvement and the third-person effect of televised news coverage. Communication Research, 16, 236-262.
74.
Perloff, R. M.
(1993). Third-person effect research, 1983-1992: A review and synthesis. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 5, 167-184.
75.
Perloff, R. M.
(1996). Perceptions and conceptions of political media impact: The third-person effect and beyond. In A. N. Crigler (Ed.), The psychology of political communication (pp. 177-197). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
76.
Perloff, R. M.
, Neuendorf, K., Giles, D., Chang, T. K., & Jeffres, L. W. (1992). Perceptions of “Amerika.”Mass Comm Review, 19, 42-48.
77.
Peters, C. C.
(1933). Motion pictures and standards of morality. New York: Macmillan.
78.
Price, V.
, Huang, L. -N., & Tewksbury, D. (1997). Third-person effects of news coverage: Orientations toward media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 525-540.
79.
Price, V.
, & Tewksbury, D. (1996). Measuring the third-person effect of news: The impact of question order, contrast and knowledge. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 120-141.
80.
Price, V.
, Tewksbury, D., & Huang, L. -N. (1998). Third-person effects on publication of a Holocaust-denial advertisement. Journal of Communication, 48(2), 3-26.
81.
Price, V.
, Traugott, M., Lavrakas, P., & Presser, S. (1999, May). The perceived impact of polls. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Francisco.
Rojas, H.
, Shah, D. V., & Faber, R. J. (1996). For the good of others: Censorship and the third-person effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2, 163-186.
84.
Rucinski, D.
, & Salmon, C. T. (1990). The “other” as the vulnerable voter: A study of the third-person effect in the 1988 U.S. presidential campaign. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2, 345-368.
85.
Salmon, C. T.
(1989). Campaigns for social “improvement”: An overview of values, rationales, and impacts. In C. T. Salmon (Ed.), Information campaigns: Balancing social values and social change (pp. 19-53). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
86.
Salwen, M. B.
(1998). Perceptions of media influence and support for censorship: The third-person effect in the 1996 presidential election. Communication Research, 25, 259-285.
87.
Salwen, M. B.
, & Driscoll, P. D. (1997). Consequences of third-person perception in support of press restrictions in the O. J. Simpson trial. Journal of Communication, 47, 60-78.
88.
Shah, D.
, Domke, D., & Wackman, D. B. (1996). “To thine own self be true?” Values, framing, and voter decision-making strategies. Communication Research, 23, 509-560.
89.
Shah, D.
, Faber, R. J., & Youn, S. (1999). Susceptibility and sensitivity: Perceptual dimensions underlying the third-person effect. Communication Research, 26, 240-267.
90.
Shah, D.
, Faber, R. J., Youn, S. H., & Rojas, H. (1997, August). Censorship of political advertising: A third-person effect. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Chicago.
91.
Starker, S.
(1989). Evil influences: Crusades against the mass media. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
92.
Stenbjerre, M.
, & Leets, L. (1998, July). Central and peripheral routes to the third person effect: Media effects attributions to self and others as a function of message elaboration. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Jerusalem.
93.
Stevens, J.
(1996). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
94.
Tester, K.
(1994). Media, culture, and morality. New York: Routledge.
95.
Thompson, M. E.
, Chaffee, S. H., & Oshagan, H. (1990). Regulating pornography: A public dilemma. Journal of Communication, 40(3), 73-83.
96.
Thorson, E.
, & Coyle, J. (1994). The third-person effect in three genres of commercials: Product and greening ads, and public service announcements. In K. W. King (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1993 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising (pp. 103-111). Athens: University of Georgia.
97.
Tiedge, J. T.
, Silverblatt, A., Havice, M. J., & Rosenfeld, R. (1991). Discrepancy between perceived first-person and perceived third-person mass media effects. Journalism Quarterly, 68, 141-154.
98.
Tompson, T. N.
, & Lavrakas, P. J. (1998, May). I'm OK, but everyone else is going to the dogs: A comparison of public perceptions of societal morals and self-reported morals. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, St. Louis, MO.
99.
Trevarthen, C.
(1979). Communication and cooperation in early infancy: A description of primary intersubjectivity. In M. Bullowa (Ed.), The beginning of interpersonal communication (pp. 321-347). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
100.
Vallone, R.
, Ross, L., & Lepper, M. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 577-585.
101.
White, H. A.
(1997). Considering interacting factors in the third-person effect. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 557-564.
102.
Willnat, L.
(1996). Mass media and political outspokenness in Hong Kong: Linking the third-person effect and the spiral of silence. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 187-211.
103.
Zalkind, S. S.
(Ed.). (1975). Civil liberties [Special issue]. Journal of Social Issues, 31(2).
