Content-Type: text/html

Religiosity and the Third-Person Effect

By:

Guy Golan
University of Florida






Correspondence:

Guy Golan
3620 North 53rd Ave
Hollywood, Fl, 33021
Phone: (954) 983-5046
e-mail:  <a href="/cgi-bin/wa?LOGON=A3%3Dind0109B%26L%3DAEJMC%26E%3D8bit%26P%3D1876398%26B%3D--%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D_260023826%253D%253D_%26T%3Dtext%252Fplain%3B%2520charset%3Diso-8859-1" >[log in to unmask]</a>


*Paper submitted to the Religion and Media Interest Group for consideration of presentation at the 2001 AEJMC annual convention in Washington DC.

** Golan is a second year doctoral student in the College of Journalism and Mass Communications at the University of Florida.


























Abstract:

During the past decade, the third person effect has emerged as an important area of research in the field of mass communications.  The current study provides the first empirical measurement of the influence of religion on the third person effect.  The study provides evidence that on moral issues, religiosity is positively associated with perceived media impact on others.  The study also provides evidence that on non-moral issues, religiosity is not associated with perceived media impact on self or others.













Religiosity and the Third-Person Effect
Nearly two decades have passed since Davidson hypothesized and demonstrated empirically that people perceive higher media effects on others than on themselves (Davidson, 1983).  Since that time, mass communication researchers have produced a considerable amount of empirical research that both solidified the original "third person hypothesis" and expanded its focus in new directions.   Unlike some fields of research in mass communication, which examine the influence of the mass media on audiences' issue or attribute saliency (agenda-setting, second-level agenda setting) or perceptions of the world (cultivation theory), third person effect research focuses on the media influence that people perceive over themselves and others.
                Much recent empirical research on third person effects has focused on the contingent conditions that influence the nature and magnitude of the third person effect.  Such studies demonstrate that such factors as age, education, media use, ethnicity and even the weather might have an influence on the manner in which individuals perceive the mass media's influence on themselves and on others.
        The current study is the first to measure the influence of religion as a contingent condition on the third person effect.    Research on the complex relationship between religion and the media has received relatively minimal attention from mass communication researchers over the past few decades, constituting a blind spot of media studies (Hoover, 1997).    This is especially true of research into the impact of religion on different media effects (Stout and Buddenbaum, 1996).  Nevertheless, mass communication research on religion and media is an emerging field of inquiry that presents great opportunity for the advancement of mass communication research as a whole.
Through a survey of undergraduate students, the current study aims to measure the influence that religion (defined as levels of religiosity) might have on the third person effect as a contingent condition.  The current study focuses on the manner through which individual's perceive the influence of television programs on themselves and others on a range of issues including crime, abortion, gay & lesbian issues, race, foreign affairs and others.  For the purposes of the current study, the issues covered by the survey were categorized as either "non-moral issues" or "moral issues".  A correlation between the two issue categories, perceived media effects and religiosity served as the emphasis for the measurement of religion as a contingent condition of the third person effect process.
Third-Person Effect
        Over the past two decades, third-person effect research has gained much attention in the field of mass communication. Third person effect research is conducted across most mass communication sub-fields including political communication, health communication, public relations and intercultural communication studies.   Many students of third person effects focus their research on the issue of censorship and media content restrictions  (Salwen, 1998; Rojas, Shah, Faber, 1996; Gunther 1991).  Yet, third person effect has provided a theoretical framework for mass communication research topics. encompassing such diverse topics as media fairness (Perloff, 1989); credibility (Atwood, 1994) impact on political advertising (Cohen & Davis, 1991)  to the media effects on opinions (Conners, 1994; Gunther, 1991; Hitchon, Chang, & Harris, 1997; Mason, 1995; Mutz, 1989; Stenbjerre & Leets, 1998).
        The main theoretical focus of most third person effect research generally involves the perceptual hypothesis and the behavioral hypothesis.  The perceptual hypothesis predicts that individuals will perceive higher media effects on others than on themselves.  The behavioral hypothesis predicts that people will endorse restrictions on media content due to the perceptual hypothesis.
        Empirical research has provided overwhelming support for the perceptual hypothesis (Perloff, 1993).  At least two studies reported over 90% of respondents perceived higher media effects on others than on themselves (Tiedge et al., 1991; Paxton 1995).    Research on the behavioral hypothesis enjoys less empirical support than the perceptual hypothesis.  Yet, such research is instrumental in understanding how people's perceptions of media effects lead to real life consequences (McLeod et Al., 1997).   A "Paternalism" explanation links the overestimation of media influence on others with support for restriction of  "harmful" media content (Baughman, 1989; Rojas, Shah, & Faber, 1996).   The two hypotheses are logically intertwined as people often react to communication based on how they think other people understand communication (Perloff 1989; Cohen and David 1991).
 With the lack of previous research on religion and the third person effect, the current study will focus only on the perceptual third person component and will leave the examination of religion and the behavioral component for future research.
 Anecdotally, there is evidence that religious conservatives regard censorship as necessary in order to safeguard moral values in society precisely because they regard most people, especially young people, as susceptible to media influence.   Such a perception is manifested in religious conservative support for such content restriction initiatives as the V-chip, advisory labels and ratings on music, television shows and movies and regulation of internet browsers in public schools and libraries.
Third person effect and contingent conditions
        The third person effect is a complex process through which individuals perceive media effects on themselves and on others.  There are many different variables that might possibly influence the outcomes of the third person effect.  For the purpose of this study, these variables will be referred to as contingent conditions.  As the third person effect has gained much empirical support over past years, much of the recent research in the field has focused on the impact that contingent conditions have on the third person effect process.
        Research into the contingent conditions has so far mostly focused on demographic variables such as gender (Howitt, Driscoll & Salwen, 1998), age (Tiedge, Silverblatt, Havice & Rosenfield, 1991), ethnicity (Matera & Salwen, 1997), education (Driscoll & Salwen, 1997; Glynn & Ostman, 1998; Gunther, 1995; Hu & Wu, 1996,1997; Schoenbach & Becker, 1995) but also included research into non demographic variables such as media use (Rucinski & Salmon, 1990; Innes & Zeitz, 1998; Paxton, 1997; Salwen  & Driscoll, 1995; Brosius and Engel, 1996).
Third person effect and morality
        One topic that has been of great interest to third person effect scholars has been the topic of morality.  Gunther and Mundy (1993) found evidence that third person effect manifests itself with messages that have "potentially harmful consequences for the audience" but not with messages that provide " useful, informative or beneficial purposes.  Tompson and Lavrakas (1998) reported that people believed that Americans' values and moral beliefs were on the decline while theirs were not.   Glasser and Ettema (1994) argued that the news media are ill-suited catalysts for shaping moral values.  Shah, Faber & Youn (1999) found that many voters attend to news reports using a moral-ethical outlook. Davidson (1983) argues that media messages dealing with faith and morals are particularly apropos to the behavioral hypothesis of the third person effect.
        The current study is directly related to other research on morality and the third person effect.  By understanding how religiosity influences people's perceived media effects on moral issues, the study provides some understanding of how the moral nature of issues can influence the third person effect.
Religiosity as a contingent condition
         The current study measures the influence of religiosity on the manner in which individuals perceive media effects on themselves and others.  The lack of previous research on the relationship between the third person effect and religiosity leads the current research to the following research question:

RQ#1 Do levels of religiosity directly influence the third person effect?
Religiosity
        The term religiosity has been defined differently by social scientists.  Shafranske and Malony (1990) defined religiosity as how much one accepts and performs the beliefs and rituals of an established church or religious organization.  Alston (1975) defined religiosity - as "the degree of one's connection or acceptance of their religious institution, participation in church attendance and activities, as well as one's regard for the leaders or the religion and church".
For the purpose of the current study, religiosity was measured by church attendance, religious guidance and importance of religion in an individual's life.   These measurements of religiosity were drawn and slightly modified by the author from the National Elections study 1996, University of Michigan.  Further detail of the construction of a religiosity measurement will be presented in the methods section.
Previous research on religiosity and the mass media has consistently demonstrated that levels of religiosity directly influence levels of media consumption and media credibility .    Previous research found that people who attend church are more likely to use newspapers and watch television than those who do not (Buddenbaum and Stout, 1996).
Research also shows that individuals of higher religiosity often feel threatened and distrustful of the mass media; specifically in relation to the presentation of moral issues and attributes.  In a 1992 telephone survey, Stout and Beddenbaum (1996) examined how influential the media are in the lives of those who consider themselves religious.  They found that while many religious groups subscribed to a newspaper on a regular basis, most had very little trust in what the newspapers published.
  Research indicates that mainline Protestants find fault in the overrepresentation of bad content such as shallow news, sex and violence at the expense of through and thoughtful entertainment (Buddenbaum, 1996).  Research also shows that evangelicals fear that the secular media threatens the values and believes of evangelical faith (Schultze, 1996).  Stout argued that Mormon Church leaders warn of the negative media effects on viewers morals and perceptions of the world (Stout, 1996).  A Freedom Forum (1994) claimed that those who consider themselves to be fundamentalists or "born again" Christians were likely to be very distrustful of what they saw or read in the media.
The low credibility of the media amongst those of higher religiosity might have a direct effect on the third person effect process.  Individuals of high religiosity often distrust what they read in the newspapers or see on television as supported by the above research.  The research also shows that religious people are most distrustful of the mass media in relation to issues of morality.  These patterns in lack of media credibility by people of higher religiosity logically justifies the following three hypotheses of the current research:
H1:  On moral issues, religiosity is negatively associated with perceived media impact on self.

H2: On moral issues, religiosity is positively associated with perceived media impact on others.

H3:  On non-moral issues, religiosity is not associated with perceived media impact on self or others.

Methodology
        A sample of 456 students was recruited from undergraduate introductory advertising and public relations courses at University of Florida during the 2000 fall semester.  The makeup of the sample was as follows:
ù       Student standing:  Freshman 5.5%, Sophomore 21.7%, Junior 34.4 %, Senior 36.8%, others 1.5%.
ù       College: Journalism & Mass Communications 49.6%, Business 18.9%, Liberal Arts & Science 15.4%, others 16.2%.
ù       Religiosity: low religiosity 50%, medium religiosity 28.2%, high religiosity 21.7%.

        The survey procedure was as follows.  Students filled in questionnaires that included 33 questions regarding perceived media effect on self and others and demographic information that included four questions regarding survey participants' levels of religiosity.
        The first set of questions focused on survey participants perceived media effects on themselves and were prefaced by the following instruction:
"Many people claim that television shows influence viewers' attitudes and perceptions of the subjects covered by the programs.  Please tell me how much influence do you think television shows have over your attitudes and perceptions of the following topics."
        Participants were than presented with a list of nine issues that fell in one of the following two subject categories:

Moral Issues Included: Crime, Abortion, Gay & Lesbian, Sexuality & pornography and Family values.  A reliability measurement of these variables produced alpha scores of  .721 (effects on self) and .769 (effects on others).

Non-moral issues included: Foreign Affairs, Healthcare, environment and race relations.  A reliability measurement of these variables produced alpha scores of  .634 (effects on self) and .665 (effects on others).

Survey participants were then asked how much influence they perceived television shows that dealt with these issues to have on their own attitudes and perceptions.  The available response options included: No influence, a little influence, some influence, quite a bit of influence and great deal of influence.
        The second part of the survey included questions concerning perceived media influence on others.  Following the same format as the first set of questions, survey participants were asked to describe how much influence they think television shows have over others in regard to the two issues categories as described in the first section (moral and regular issues).  The answer key in this section was the same as in the first section and included an ordinal scale of five possible levels of perceived media effects.
Religiosity Index
        In order to measure the levels of religiosity of survey participants,  an index of religiosity was constructed.  This index included three variables: church attendance, religious guidance and importance of religion in one's life.  These variables are widely used as a composite measure of religious commitment by social scientists (Guth and Green, 1993, page: 157-158).    The religiosity index was constructed in the following manner:  Participants who claimed that religion is very important in their lives were given one point.  Participants who claimed that religion provides them with a great deal of guidance in their lives were given one point.  Finally, participants who attend church either one or twice a month or more were given one point.  The religiosity index ranged from zero to three.  A score of zero indicated that the survey participant was of low levels of religiosity, while a score of two or three indicated higher levels of religiosity.  A reliability measurement of the
three variables produced an alpha score of  .80 signifying that the index variables tap a common dimension.
Correlations
        To assess the role of religiosity on third person effects, a series of correlation analyses were conducted.  The religiosity index was correlated with perceived media effects across all nine issue variables individually.  These correlations included perceived media effects on self and in another correlation, perceived media effects on others.
        After correlating the religiosity index with the individual issue variables (perceived effects on self, others), additional correlation tests correlated the religiosity index with a grouped variable defined as "moral" and "non-moral" issues.
The correlation test that was utilized for the research was a Pearson Correlation.  This measurement seemed most appropriate when considering the nature of the variables.  Some scholars might argue that a more appropriate correlation measurement for the current study might be a Kendall's Tau b that is usually used when measuring ordinal variables.  In order to control for difference in possible outcomes that might result from the difference in measurements (Pearson, Kendall's Tau b), a  parallel analysis using Kendall's tau b was conducted and its results were compared to those of the Pearson Correlation.  The results of the two measurement tests found virtually identical patterns across all variables indicating that the findings are not influenced by the selection of the correlation measurement.
Results
Religiosity and perceived media effects on self
Hypothesis 1 predicted that on moral issues, religiosity is negatively associated with perceived media impact on self.  The results of the Pearson correlation as expressed in Table 1 show that there is no correlation between religiosity and perceived media effects on self in relation to seven out of the nine issue variables.  Weak and non-significant correlation coefficients were found for abortion (.077,p= .102), gay and lesbian issues (.059, p=.211), foreign affairs (.022, p=.642), sexuality and pornography (.027,p=.561), health care (-.022,p= .642), family values (.033,p= .485), environment (.005,p= .912).  A statistically significant correlation was found between religiosity and perceived media effects on self on the issues of crime (.112,p= .017) and race relations (.104,p= .027).
Such correlations might be misleading, particularly since the direction of the two correlation coefficients is contrary to that of hypothesis 1.  H1 predicted that on moral issues, religiosity would be negatively associated with perceived media impact on self.   The lack of correlations and the counter-intuitive findings in table 1 bring one to reject H1 signifying that highly religious people are no more or less likely than others to regard themselves as susceptible to media influence.
Table 2 shows that when the grouped categories (non-moral/moral) are correlated with the religiosity index, the patterns remain the same.  The perceptions of media effects on self are statistically insignificant for both moral (.088,p= .061) and non- moral (.040,p= .390) issues.  These findings further point to the lack of relationship between religiosity and perceived media effects on self and provide reason to reject H1.
Religiosity and perceived media effects on others
        The Pearson correlation results in Table 3 show a significant correlation between perceived media effects on others and religiosity on moral issues.  Significant correlation scores between religiosity and perceived media effects on others were found for the issues of crime (.119, p=.011), abortion (.150, p=.001), gay and lesbian issues (.10, p=.032), sexuality and pornography (.132,p= .005) and family values (.143,p= .002).  In each case, the direction of the relationship was consistent with H2: As religiosity increased, so did the perception that other people are influenced by mass media stories that emphasize crime, sex, and related stimuli.  These significant correlations firmly support H2.
In comparison, Table3 clearly shows no substantial correlation between religiosity and perceived media effects on others in regard to non-moral issues.
Correlation coefficients along with p-value scores for foreign affairs (.015, p=.753), health care (.089, p=.059), environment (.008,p= .860) and race relations (.068,p= .150) along with the direction of the relationship are consistent with H3.
Table 3 provides further evidence to the correlation between religiosity and perceived media effects on others in regard to moral issues.   P values for all moral issues prove significant (p < .001) and all correlation coefficients prove significant (.119 crime, .150 abortion, .100 gay & lesbian, .132 sexuality and pornography and .143 family values).  These findings along with the positive direction of these correlations, clearly support Hypothesis 2.  On moral issues, religiosity is positively associated with perceived media impact on others.
Discussion
        The perceptual component of the third person hypothesis predicts that people will perceive higher media effects on others than on themselves.  Thus, two areas ought to be examined when conducting research on the perceptual hypothesis, perceived media effects on self and on others. The purpose of the current study was to examine the role of religiosity as a contingent condition that influences the third person effect.  The study focuses on the perceptual component of the third person effect and does not examine the behavior component.  A focus on the perceptual component of the third person effect was justified by the lack of previous empirical research on the topic.
The research question of interest to this study was: Do levels of religiosity directly influence the third person effect?  A series of Pearson Correlation tests proved that religiosity does indeed directly influence the third person effect for some issues.  These findings show that there is no relationship between religiosity and the manner in which people perceive media effects on themselves or on others for what are essentially non-moral issues.  The findings however show that on moral issues, there is a significant correlation between religiosity and the manner in which people perceive media effects on others.
Perceived media effects on self
        The lack of correlation between religiosity and perceived media effect on self is somewhat surprising.  Popular stereotypes often regard religious traditionalists as self-righteous moralists who believe that other people--but not themselves--need to be protected from their own worst instincts. If that were so, we should have found a negative relationship between religiosity and perceived media impact on self. In fact, the lack of relationship demonstrated that religious people were no more or less likely than the non-religious people to feel themselves influenced by the media.
One possible explanation for the lack of correlation might be an error in the stereotype itself.  Particularly in its Protestant form and among sectarian Christians, Christian faith is very much based on the concept of natural sin.  Following the logic that "we are all sinners" and need to be constantly watchful lest we fall out of grace, Christians of higher religiosity might well assume that they are just as likely to be influenced by the media as those who are not religious.  An analysis of the religious affiliation of the survey participants shows nearly 70% of those in the high religiosity category (on the religiosity index) are of either Protestant (43%)or Catholic (27%) affiliation (5% Jews, 25% others).
The only exceptions to the lack of correlation between religiosity and perceived media effects on self can be found on the issues of crime and race relations.  The statistically significant coefficients for crime and race relations point to a clear correlation between religiosity and perceived media influence on self on those issues.  This means that the more religious people are, the more likely they are to perceive high media effects on themselves when watching television shows on crime or race relations.  Previous research in third person effect does not offer any explanation why crime and race relations might be topics on which religiosity induces perceived media effects on self.  Such an explanation might be found in future third person effect research.
        The major findings of the study provide empirical evidence about the influence of religiosity on the perceptual component of the third person effect.  That is, the more religious people are, the more likely they are to perceive high media effects on others (on moral issues).  This finding might be very useful in explaining why religious people take such an active part in pro censorship political and social movements.
        Feeling that the mass media are undermining social values and are likely to have a strong influence on others (as proven by the current research), religious people might be inclined to support content regulation and censorship as a way to protect others from what might be viewed as immoral media content.
        The logical next step in future research would be to focus on the influence of religiosity on the behavioral component of the third person effect .

Limitations of current study
        The current study is the first to examine religion (religiosity) as a condition that influences the third person effect.  The lack of previous research on this topic made the current study an exploratory study in that it is exploring a research area that was never examined before.  A convenience sample of undergraduate students provided the data for the current study.  Many scholars view such samples as unrepresentative sample of the general population.  Thus, the issue of external validity might be raised when assessing the research findings.
Nevertheless, there are some compensating advantages in drawing on the third person perceptions of young people and their association with religiosity.  Recent controversies regarding religion, media and young people, such as the Columbine high school shootings, Internet pornography, violent video games and school violence stress the need for a deeper understanding of the issue.  Understanding how religiosity influences the perceptions of young people in relation to media effects might advance knowledge and understanding regarding some of the most controversial issues in society today.
The emerging research field of religion and media studies is an important field for the understanding of how the mass media and society influence one another.  Future research might draw upon a more representative sample in order to provide a more accurate measure of the influence of religiosity on the third person effect. Understanding the impact of religion on the third person effect can be valuable for research in mass communication, sociology and religious studies.  Despite the limitation caused by the nature of the sample, the current study is of importance as an exploratory study that analyzes the complex influence of religiosity on the third person effect.





















Table 1
Perceived media effect on self by issue

Correlations

Religiosity Index
Crime self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.112*
.017
 456
Abortion self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.077
.102
456
Gay & Lesbian self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.059
.211
456
Foreign affairs self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.022
.642
456
Sexuality and pornography self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.027
.561
456
Health care self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
-.022
.642
456
Family values self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.033
.485
456
Environment self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.005
.912
456
Race relations self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.104*
.027
456

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).


Table 2
Perceived media effect by issue category (moral / regular issues)

Religiosity Index
Moral issues self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.088
.061
456
Regular issues self
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.040
.390
456
Moral issues others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.179**
.000
456
Regular issues others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.062
.190
456

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).



















Table 3
Perceived media effect on others by issue


                                Correlations

Religiosity Index
Crime others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.119*
.011
 456
Abortion others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.150**
.001
456
Gay & Lesbian others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.100*
.032
456
Foreign affairs others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.015
.753
456
Sexuality and pornography others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.132**
.005
456
Health care others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.089
.059
456
Family values others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.143**
.002
456
Environment others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.008
.860
456
Race relations others
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
.068
.150
456

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

References

Alston, J. P. (1975). Review of  the polls.  Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,12, 165-168.

Atwood, L.E. (1994). Illusions of media power:  The third-person effect.  Journalism Quarterly, 71, 269-281.

Buddenbaum Judith M. (1996)  "Mainline Protestants and the Media" in Stout Daniel and Judith Beddenbaum Religion and Mass Media.  Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Page: 54.
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 (1/2), 12-19.
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.
Cohen J., & Davis R. G. (1991).  Third-person effects and the differential impact in negative political advertising. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 680-688.

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.

Davidson, W. P. (1983).  The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1-15.
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.
Freedom Forum (1994), "Religion and the News: A conference report." The Freedom Forum Media Studies Center.
Glasser, T. L., & Ettema, J. S. (1994). The language of news and the end of morality. Argumentation, 8, 337-344.
Glynn, C. J. & Ostman, R. E. (1998). Public opinion about public opinion. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 299-306.

Gunther, A. C. (1991) What we think others think: Cause and Consequence in the third-person effect.  Communication Research, 18, 355-372.
Gunther, A. C., & Mundy, P. (1993). Biased optimism and the third-person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 70, 58-67.
Guth, J. L and Green, J. C.  "Church involvement and political behavior." In Leege, D. C. and Kellstedt, L. A. Rediscovering the religious factor in American politics.  NY: Sharpe, 1993.
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.
Hoover M Stewart and Lundby Knut (1997). Rethinking Media, Religion, and Culture.  Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Page: 268.
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.
Hu, T. W., & Wu, Y. C. (1996, August). Testing a theoretical model on the third person effect: Perceived impacts of election polls.  Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Anaheim, CA.

Hu, T. W., & Wu, Y. C. (1997, August).  The third-person effect of election news: The synthesis of contingent factors into a causal model.  Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Chicago.
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.
Mason, L. (1995). Newspaper as repeater: An experiment on defamation and the third-person effect. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 72, 610-620
Perloff, R. M. (1989). Ego-involvement and the third-person effect of televised news coverage.  Communication Research, 16, 236-262.

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.
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.
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.

Paxton, M. A. (1995). The third-person effect and attitudes toward freedom of expression. Dissertation Abstracts International, 57 (02), 498A.
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.
Perloff, R. M. (1989). Ego-involvement and the third-person effect of televised news coverage. Communication Research, 16, 236-262.
Perloff, R. M. (1993). Third-person effect research, 1983-1992: A review and synthesis. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 5,167-184.
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.

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.

Salwen, M.B. (1998) Perceptions of media influence and support for censorship: The third-person effect in the 1996 presidential elections.  Communication Research 25, 259-285.

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.

Schoenback, K., & Becker, L. B. (1995). Origins and consequences of mediated public opinion.  In T. L. Glassser & C. T. Salmons, Public Opinion and the communication of consent (pp. 323-347). New York: Guilford.

Schultze Quentin J. (1996)  "Evangelicals' Uneasy Alliance With the Media" in Stout Daniel and Judith Beddenbaum Religion and Mass Media.  Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Page: 65.
Shah, D., Faber, R. J., & Youn, S. (1999). Susceptibility and sensitivity: Perceptual dimensions underlying the third-person effect. Communication Research, 26, 240-267.
Shafranske, E. P., & Malony, H. N. (1990). Clinical psychologists' religious and spiritual orientations and their practice of psychotherapy. Psychotherapy, 27(1), 72-78.

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.

Stout Daniel A. (1996). "Protecting the Family: Mormon Teachings About Mass Media" in Stout Daniel and Judith Beddenbaum. Religion and Mass Media.  Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Page: 92.

Stout Daniel and Beddenbaum Judith  (1996) Religion and Mass Media.  Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Page: 5.
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.
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.