CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 119News Media Framing and Political CommunicationMedia Influence and PoliticsCommunication and COVID-19 Impact

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Primacy Effects of The Daily Show and National TV News Viewing: Young Viewers, Political Gratifications, and Internal Political Self-Efficacy

Holbert, R. Lance, Lambe, Jennifer L., Dudo, Anthony D., Carlton, Kristin A.·2007·Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media
DOI 10.1080/08838150701308002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study examines program ordering effects derived from viewing CNN television news relative to The Daily Show on the political gratifications associated with both types of information sources. Internal political self-efficacy is assessed as an individual-difference moderator. Main primacy effects are found on the gratifications associated with both national television news viewing and The Daily Show viewing. However, The Daily Show primacy effect on the political gratifications associated with national television news viewing was isolated among those participants who retain low internal political self-efficacy. Ramifications for these findings are outlined and future lines of research are summarized.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08838150701308002

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 52 references

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Bauer D. 2004 . “ And now the news: For many young viewers it's Jon Stewart. ” . Associated Press. . Retrieved July 15 2004 from the Lexis-Nexis database. March 1
  2. Delli Carpini , M. X. and Williams , B. A. 1996 . “ Constructing public opinion: The uses of fictional and nonfictional television in conversations about the environment. ” . In The psychology of political communication , Edited by: Crigler , A. 149 – 176 . Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press. .
  3. Eagly , A. H. and Chaiken , S. 1993 . The psychology of attitudes. , Forth Worth, TX : Harcourt Brace Jovanovich .
  4. Hovland , C. I. and Mandel , W. 1957 . “ Is there a “law of primacy” in persuasion? ” . In The order of presentation in persuasion , Edited by: Hovland , C. I. 1 – 22 . New Haven, CT : Yale University Press. .
  5. Luchins , A. S. 1957 . “ Primacy-recency in impression formation. ” . In The order of presentation in persuasion , Edited by: Hovland , C. I. 33 – 61 . New Haven, CT : Yale University Press .
  6. McCombs , M. and Reynolds , A. 2002 . “ News influences on our pictures of the world. ” . In Media effects: Advances in theory and research , 2nd ed. Edited by: Bryant , J. and Zillmann , D. 1 – 18 . Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. .
  7. McLeod , J. M. and Becker , L. B. 1974 . “ Testing the validity of gratification measures through political effects analysis. ” . In The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research , Edited by: Blumler , J. G. and Katz , E. 137 – 164 . Beverly Hills, CA : Sage .
  8. McLeod , J. M. and Becker , L. B. 1981 . “ The uses and gratifications approach. ” . In Handbook of political communication , Edited by: Nimmo , D. D. and Sanders , K. R. 67 – 100 . Beverly Hills, CA : Sage .
  9. McLeod , J. M. and Reeves , B. 1980 . “ On the nature of mass media effects. ” . In Television and social behavior: Beyond violence and children , Edited by: Withey , S. B. and Abeles , R. P. 17 – 54 . Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. .
  10. Olien , C. N. , Donohue , G. A. and Tichenor , P. J. 1995 . “ Conflict, consensus, and public opinion. ” . In Public opinion and the communication of consent , Edited by: Glasser , T. L. and Salmon , C. T. 301 – 322 . New York : Guilford .
  11. Perse , E. M. 1994 . “ Political media gratifications scale. ” . In Communication research measures , Edited by: Rubin , R. B. , Palmgreen , P. and Sypher , H. E. 296 – 300 . New York : Guilford .
  12. Peyser , M. A. 2004 . “ Red, white, funny: The new year will bring a host of intriguing faces front and center. ” . In Newsweek 70 – 77 . January 5
  13. Romano , A. 2002 . “ Headline News fixes the fix. ” . In Broadcasting & Cable 25 July 29
  14. Rutenberg , J. 2000 . “ News is the comedy. ” . In The New York Times E17 November 22
  15. Trigoboff , D. 2001 . Peabodys can take a joke. . Broadcasting & Cable , 131 : 12 April 2

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–119 of 119

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Holbert, R. L., Lambe, J. L., Dudo, A. D., & Carlton, K. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Florida State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2007-04-10
Volume
51
Issue
1
Pages
20-38
ISSN
  • 0883-8151 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-6878
DOI
10.1080/08838150701308002
OpenAlex
W2140837457
Semantic Scholar
6a66beb70a23cb8047b7afe9df2c1d35a9a279e3
Cited by
119
References
52
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 11
FWCI
27.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › News Media Framing and Political Communication
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
Keywords
primacy effect, The Daily Show, television news viewing, young audiences, individual differences

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review