Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study explores the effects and influence of presumed influence of consuming recent lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)-inclusive TV on attitudes toward lesbians and gays (ATLG) and perceived attitudes toward lesbians and gays (PATLG) among peers. Adding to previous research, this study testifies to the modest yet positive effects of current entertainment narratives on viewers’ ATLG. The results demonstrate dynamics of “the rippled perceptions”: people’s own attitudes are the “origin of peer perceptions”; media consumption and interpersonal contact predict participants’ own attitudes; the influence of presumed influence attenuates as the analysis moves from self, to close friends, and those of the same age.

Keywords

TV entertainment peer perceptions attitudes toward lesbians and gays presumed media influence

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brewer

M. B.

(2007). The social psychology of intergroup relations: Social categorization, ingroup bias, and outgroup prejudice. In Kruglanski

A. W.

Higgins

E. T.

(Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 695-715). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Calzo

J. P.

Ward

L. M.

(2009a). Contributions of parents, peers, and media to attitudes toward homosexuality: Investigating sex and ethnic differences. Journal of Homosexuality, 56, 1101-1116. doi:10.1080/00918360903279338

Calzo

J. P.

Ward

L. M.

(2009b). Media exposure and viewers’ attitudes toward homosexuality: Evidence for mainstreaming or resonance? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53, 280-299. doi:10.1080/08838150902908049

Chia

S. C.

Gunther

A. C.

(2006). How media contribute to misperceptions of social norms about sex. Mass Communication and Society, 9, 301-320. doi:10.1207/s15327825mcs0903_3

Chock

T. M.

(2011). Is it seeing or believing? Exposure, perceived realism, and emerging adults’ perceptions of their own and others’ attitudes about relationships. Media Psychology, 14, 355-386. doi:10.1080/15213269.2011.620537

Cillizza

(2014, May, 5). Oppose gay marriage? You probably think everyone else does too. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/03/05/oppose-gay-marriage-you-probably-think-everyone-does-too/

Crandall

C. S.

Eshleman

(2003). A justification-suppression model of the expression and experience of prejudice. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 414-446. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.414

David

Liu

Myser

(2004). Methodological artifact or persistent bias? Testing the robustness of the third-person and reverse third-person effects for alcohol messages. Communication Research, 31, 206-233.

Davison

W. P.

(1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1-15.

10.

Diefenbach

D. L.

West

M. D.

(2007). Television and attitudes toward mental health issues: Cultivation analysis and the third-person effect. Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 181-195.

11.

Festinger

(1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140. doi:10.1177/001872675400700202

12.

Fields

J. M.

Schuman

(1976). Public beliefs about the beliefs of the public. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40, 427-448.

13.

Gays and Lesbians Alliance Against Defamation. (2015a). Accelerate acceptance (Executive summary). Harris Poll. Retrieved from https://www.glaad.org/publications/accelerating-acceptance-2015

14.

Gays and Lesbians Alliance Against Defamation. (2015b). Where we are on TV: GLAAD’s 19th annual diversity study previews the 2014–2015 primetime television season. Washington, DC: Author.

15.

Golan

G. J.

Day

A. G.

(2008). The first-person effect and its behavioral consequences: A new trend in the twenty-five year history of third-person effect research. Mass Communication and Society, 11, 539-556. doi:10.1080/15205430802368621

16.

Gunther

A. C.

(1998). The persuasive press inference: Effects of mass media on perceived public opinion. Communication Research, 25, 486-504. doi:10.1177/009365098025005002

17.

Gunther

A. C.

Miller

Liebhart

J. L.

(2009). Assimilation and contrast in a test of the hostile media effect. Communication Research, 36, 747-764. doi:10.1177/0093650209346804

18.

Gunther

A. C.

Mundy

(1993). Biased optimism and the third-person effect. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE. doi:10.1177/107769909307000107

19.

Gunther

A. C.

Storey

(2003). The influence of presumed influence. Journal of Communication, 53, 199-215. doi:10.1093/joc/53.2.199

20.

Hall

LaFrance

(2012). “That’s gay”: Sexual prejudice, gender identity, norms, and homophobic communication. Communication Quarterly, 60, 35-58. doi:10.1080/01463373.2012.641833

21.

Hawkins

R. P.

Pingree

(1982). Television’s influence on constructions of social reality. In Pearl

Bouthilet

Lazar

(Eds.), Television and behavior: Ten years of scientific progress and implications for the eighties (Vol. 2, pp. 224-247). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

22.

Herek

G. M.

(1984). Beyond “homophobia”: A social psychological perspective on attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 10, 1-21.

23.

Herek

G. M.

Capitanio

J. P.

(1996). “Some of my best friends” intergroup contact, concealable stigma, and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men and lesbians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 412-424. doi:10.1177/0146167296224007

24.

Herek

G. M.

(1998). The attitudes toward lesbians and gay men (ATLG) scale. In Davis

C.M.

Yarber

W.H.

Bauserman

Schreer

Davis

S.L.

(Eds.), Sexuality-related measures: A compendium. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

25.

Hetzel

C. J.

(2011). Exploring the relationship between public opinion and personal attitudes and behavior toward lesbians and gay men: Social conformity revisited. Journal of Homosexuality, 58, 1421-1441. doi:10.1080/00918369.2011.614910]

26.

Hilton-Morrow

Battles

(2015). Sexual identities and the media: An introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.

27.

Huge

M. E.

Glynn

C. J.

(2015). Perceiving Penn State: The formative role of interpersonal discussion in third-person perceptions in the wake of a sexual abuse scandal. Communication Research, 42(7), 922-938. doi: 10.1177/0093650214534970

28.

Lee

Hicks

G. R.

(2011). An analysis of factors affecting attitudes toward same-sex marriage: Do the media matter? Journal of Homosexuality, 58, 1391-1408. doi:10.1080/00918369.2011.614906

29.

Liebler

C. M.

Schwartz

Harper

(2009). Queer tales of morality: The press, same-sex marriage, and hegemonic framing. Journal of Communication, 59, 653-675. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01451.x

30.

McLeod

D. M.

Eveland

W. P.

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.

31.

Morgan

Shanahan

(2010). The state of cultivation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 54, 337-355. doi:10.1080/08838151003735018

32.

Moyer-Gusé

Nabi

R. L.

(2010). Explaining the effects of narrative in an entertainment television program: Overcoming resistance to persuasion. Human Communication Research, 36, 26-52. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01367.x

33.

Nisbet

E. C.

Myers

T. A.

(2012). Cultivating tolerance of homosexuals. In Morgan

Shanahan

Signorielli

(Eds.), Living with television now: Advances in cultivation theory & research (pp. 61-80). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

34.

Ortiz

Harwood

(2007). A social cognitive theory approach to the effects of mediated inter-group contact on intergroup attitudes. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 51, 615-631. doi:10.1080/08838150701626487

35.

Otten

Epstude

(2006). Overlapping mental representations of self, ingroup, and outgroup: Unraveling self-stereotyping and self-anchoring. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 957-969. doi:10.1177/0146167206287254

36.

Paek

Gunther

A. C.

(2007). How peer proximity moderates indirect media influence on adolescent smoking. Communication Research, 34, 407-432. doi:10.1177/0093650207302785

37.

Riggle

E. D.

Ellis

A. L.

Crawford

A. M.

(1996). The impact of “media contact” on attitudes toward gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 31(3), 55-69. doi:10.1300/J082v31n03_04

38.

Schiappa

Gregg

P. B.

Hewes

D. E.

(2006). Can one TV show make a difference? A Will & Grace and the parasocial contact hypothesis. Journal of Homosexuality, 51(4), 15-37. doi:10.1300/J082v51n04_02

39.

Shanahan

Scheufele

(2012). Cultivation and spiral of silence. In Morgan

Shanahan

Signorielli

(Eds.), Living with television now: Advances in cultivation theory & research (pp. 347-365). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

40.

Shen

Palmer

Mercer Kollar

L. M.

Comer

(2015). A social comparison explanation for the third-person perception. Communication Research, 42, 260-280. doi:10.1177/0093650212467644

41.

Sun

Pan

Shen

(2008). Understanding the third-person perception: Evidence from a meta- analysis. Journal of Communication, 58, 280-300. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00385.x

42.

Tajfel

Turner

J. C.

(1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In Worchel

Austin

L. W.

(Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.

43.

Tversky

Kahneman

(1971). Belief in law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 105-110.

44.

Ward

L. M.

Reed

Trinh

S. L.

Foust

(2013). Sexuality and entertainment media. In Tolman

D. L.

Diamond

L. M.

(Eds.), APA handbook of sexuality and psychology: Vol. 2. Contextual approaches (pp. 373-423). Philadelphia, PE: Taylor & Francis.

45.

Wei

V. H.

H. Y.

(2007). Reconsidering the relationship between the third-person perception and optimistic bias. Communication Research, 34, 665-684. doi:10.1177/0093650207307903

“The Rippled Perceptions”: The Effects of LGBT-Inclusive TV on Own Attitudes and Perceived Attitudes of Peers Toward Lesbians and Gays

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References