Abstract
In a secondary analysis of data from three panel surveys from Germany, the author tries to extend and specify the `knowledge gap' hypothesis of Tichenor et al. (1970) and Ettema and Kline (1977). Education, interest and motivation, which have been advanced as the central factors in explaining the differential knowledge gain, are tested within all possible circumstances of widening, constant and closing gaps. Also tested are various routine and specific media variables. As a consequence of the low empirical value of these central factors, especially education, this analysis suggests a fundamental modification of the hypothesis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
