We propose that emotional responses to a media stimulus (e.g., a news article), in addition to presumed influence, can help explain one’s evaluation of the media stimulus. Our model was evaluated using data collected from 261 college students who read a news article discussing the harmful effects of multitasking. Structural equation modelling (SEM) analysis revealed that the participants’ emotional feelings (i.e., anger, guilt and happiness) after reading the message and perceptions of how professors and administrators’ perceived the researchers interviewed in the article directly predicted the evaluation of the news article. Presumed influence of the news article on neutral Americans and professors and administrators on campus did not directly predict participants’ evaluation of the news article, the influence of which was mediated by anger. Message evaluation and select emotions explained 58 per cent and 26 per cent of the variance in supporting publication of the article and intentions to avoid multitasking, respectively. Results support the inclusion of emotional responses in news evaluation research.
ArpanL. M., & NabiR. L. (2011). Exploring anger in the hostile media process: Effects on news preferences and source evaluation. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 88(1), 5–22.
2.
ArpanL. M., & RaneyA. A. (2003). An experimental investigation of news source and the hostile media effect. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(2), 265–281.
3.
BaumeisterR. F., StillwellA. M., & HeathertonT. F. (1994). Guilt: An interpersonal approach. Psychological Bulletin, 115(2), 243–267.
4.
BaumeisterR. F., VohsK. D., DeWallC. N., & ZhangL. (2007). How emotion shapes behavior: Feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(2), 167–203.
5.
BerkowitzL., & Harmon-JonesE. (2004). Toward an understanding of the determinants of anger. Emotion, 4(2), 107–130.
6.
BriñolP., PettyR. E., & BardenJ. (2007). Happiness versus sadness as a determinant of thought confidence in persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 711–727.
7.
ChaikenS. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In ZannaM. P., OlsonJ. M., & HermanC. P. (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8.
DillardJ. P., & ShenL. (2005). On the nature of reactance and its role in persuasive health communication. Communication Monographs, 72(2), 144–168.
9.
DillardJ. P., ShenL., & VailR. G. (2007). Does perceived message effectiveness cause persuasion or vice versa? 17 consistent answers. Human Communication Research, 33(4), 467–488.
10.
EllsworthP. C., & SchererK. R. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. In DavidsonR. J., SchererK. R., & GoldsmithH. H. (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 572–595). New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
FishbeinM., & AjzenI. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York: Psychology Press.
12.
GazianoC., & McGrathK. (1986). Measuring the concept of credibility. Journalism Quarterly, 63(3), 451–462.
13.
GrossK., & BrewerP. R. (2007). Sore losers: News frames, policy debates, and emotions. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12(1), 122–133.
14.
GuntherA. C., BoltD., BorzekowskiD. L., LiebhartJ. L., & DillardJ. P. (2006). Presumed influence on peer norms: How mass media indirectly affect adolescent smoking. Journal of Communication, 56(1), 52–68.
15.
GuntherA. C., & StoreyJ. D. (2003). The influence of presumed influence. Journal of Communication, 53(2), 199–215.
16.
GuntherA. C., & LiebhartJ. L. (2006). Broad reach or biased source? Decomposing the hostile media effect. Journal of Communication, 56(3), 449–466.
17.
HarthN. S., LeachC. W., & KesslerT. (2013). Guilt, anger, and pride about in-group environmental behaviour: Different emotions predict distinct intentions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 18–26.
18.
HullettC. R. (2004). Using functional theory to promote sexually transmitted disease (STD) testing: The impact of value-expressive messages and guilt. Communication Research, 31(4), 363–396.
19.
KimH. J., & CameronG. T. (2011). Emotions matter in crisis: The role of anger and sadness in the publics’ response to crisis news framing and corporate crisis response. Communication Research, 38, 826–855.
20.
KovachB., & RosenstielT. (2007). The elements of journalism: What newspeople should know and the public should expect. New York: Three Rivers Press.
21.
KühneR., & SchemerC. (2013). The emotional effects of news frames on information processing and opinion formation. Communication Research, 42(3), 387–407.
22.
LazarusR. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.
23.
LechelerS., SchuckA. R. T., & de VreeseC. H. (2013). Dealing with feelings: Positive and negative discrete emotions as mediators of news framing effects. Communications: The European Journal of Communication Research, 38(2), 189–209.
24.
LyubomirskyS., KingL., & DienerE. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success?Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803–855.
25.
MackieD. M., & WorthL. T. (1989). Processing deficits and the mediation of positive affect in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(1), 27–40.
26.
MeyerP. (1988). Defining and measuring credibility of newspapers: Developing an index. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 65(3), 567–574.
27.
NabiR. L. (2003). Exploring the framing effects of emotion do discrete emotions differentially influence information accessibility, information seeking, and policy preference?Communication Research, 30(2), 224–247.
28.
ParkS. (2005). The influence of presumed media influence on women’s desire to be thin. Communication Research, 32(5), 594–614.
29.
PettyR. E., & CacioppoJ. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123–205). New York: Academic Press.
30.
RosemanI. J., WiestC., & SwartzT. S. (1994). Phenomenology, behaviors, and goals differentiate discrete emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 206–221.
31.
SchererK. R., SchorrA., & JohnstoneT. (Eds.). (2001). Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research. USA: Oxford University Press.
32.
ShadishW. R., CookT. D., & CampbellD. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
33.
SmithC. A., & EllsworthP. C. (1985). Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 813–838.
34.
TomarkenA. J., & WallerN. G. (2003). Potential problems with ‘well fitting’ models. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112(4), 578–598.
35.
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(3), 577–585.
36.
ZillmannD. (2000). The coming of media entertainment. In ZillmannD. & VordererP. (Eds.), Media entertainment: The psychology of its appeals (pp. 1–20). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
