The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Television Dramas and Support for Controversial Public Policies: Effects and Mechanisms
Abstract
In this experiment, we examine effects of television dramas on support for controversial public policies (gay marriage and the death penalty) and explore mechanisms that may explain such effects. The dramas influenced support for death penalty but not gay marriage. As predicted, exposure to the relevant drama eliminated the relationship between prior ideology (conceptualized as a continuous variable) and death penalty support. Moreover, the valence of the relationship between prior (increasingly liberal) ideology and salience of a relevant value (perceived importance of a safe and crime-free society) went from negative in the comparison condition to positive after exposure to the relevant drama. These and other results suggest that a television narrative can influence policy support by reframing the dramatic situation to reduce the effect of prior ideology and values and by minimizing processing of the story as intentionally persuasive discourse.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives.
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701 · Cited by 4,861
Cited by
Measuring Narrative Engagement
Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2009) · Media Psychology · doi:10.1080/15213260903287259 · Cited by 1,088
Identification with characters and narrative persuasion through fictional feature films
Igartua, J.-J. (2010) · Communications · doi:10.1515/comm.2010.019 · Cited by 262
Perceived Realism: Dimensions and Roles in Narrative Persuasion
Cho, H., Shen, L., & Wilson, K. (2014) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650212450585 · Cited by 244
The Role of Causality in Information Acceptance in Narratives: An Example From Science Communication
Dahlstrom, M. F. (2010) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650210362683 · Cited by 135
Cognitive dissonance, ego-involvement, and motivated reasoning
Carpenter, C. J. (2019) · Annals of the International Communication Association · doi:10.1080/23808985.2018.1564881 · Cited by 76
Metadata
- Authors
- Slater, M. D., Rouner, D., & Long, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Communication
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-04-26
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 235-252
- ISSN
- 0021-9916 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2466
- OpenAlex
- W2095876574
- Cited by
- 280
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 144.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Television Dramas and Support for Controversial Public Policies: Effects and Mechanisms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00017.x
- The paper
- Slater, M. D., Rouner, D., & Long, M. (2006). Television Dramas and Support for Controversial Public Policies: Effects and Mechanisms. Journal of Communication. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00017.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
