Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 361

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Campaigns, Reflection, and Deliberation: Advancing an O-S-R-O-R Model of Communication Effects

Cho, Jaeho, Shah, Dhavan V., McLeod, Jack M., McLeod, Douglas M., Scholl, Rosanne M., Gotlieb, Melissa R.·2009·Communication Theory

Abstract

Recent communication research concerning participatory politics has found that the effects of media, especially campaign ads, conventional news, and online political resources, are largely mediated through interpersonal discussion about politics. This article extends this line of theorizing about the role of political conversation in citizen competence by testing an O-S-R-O-R model of campaign communication mediation, a modification and extension of the longstanding O-S-O-R model of communication effects. This model combines insights from iterations of the communication mediation model (McLeod et al., 2001; Shah et al., 2007) and cognitive mediation model (Eveland, 2001; Eveland, Shah, & Kwak, 2003) to theorize a set of the interrelated reasoning (R) processes that channel the influences of campaign exposure and news consumption on political engagement. Three key mediators of campaign and news influence are postulated: face-to-face political conversation, online political messaging, and cognitive reflection. We provide empirical evidence to test this model by merging two datasets: (1) tracking of the content and placement of campaign messages in the 2000 and 2004 election cycles, and (2) surveys of traditional and digital media consumption and levels of campaign participation during these same elections. Findings reveal that political conversation, political messaging, and cognitive reflection mediate the effects of campaign advertising exposure and news consumption on political participation and knowledge, providing considerable support for our theory. This O-S-R-O-R model helps organize a large body of theorizing and research on campaigns and conversation in the communication sciences.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.01333.x

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 74 references

Metadata

Authors
Cho, J., Shah, D. V., McLeod, J. M., McLeod, D. M., Scholl, R. M., & Gotlieb, M. R.
Venue
Communication Theory
Published
2009-02
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
66-88
ISSN
  • 1050-3293 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2885
OpenAlex
W2153653987
Cited by
361
References
74
FWCI
43.37
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: Campaigns, Reflection, and Deliberation: Advancing an O-S-R-O-R Model of Communication Effects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.01333.x
The paper
Cho, J., Shah, D. V., McLeod, J. M., McLeod, D. M., Scholl, R. M., & Gotlieb, M. R. (2009). Campaigns, Reflection, and Deliberation: Advancing an O-S-R-O-R Model of Communication Effects. Communication Theory. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.01333.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.