Public Opinion in Context: a Multilevel Model of Media Effects
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PUBLIC OPINION IN CONTEXT: A MULTILEVEL MODEL OF MEDIA EFFECTS ON PERCEPTIONS OF PUBLIC OPINION AND POLITICAL BEHAVIOR DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Lindsay H. Hoffman, M.A. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2007 Dissertation Committee: Professor William P. Eveland, Jr., Adviser Approved by Professor Carroll J. Glynn Professor Michael D. Slater ____________________________ Professor Andrew F. Hayes Adviser Communication Graduate Program ABSTRACT Individuals do not live in an environment free of social and structural influences. Communication theorists have called for an assessment of multiple levels of analysis in order to build theory—in particular, media-effects theory—yet few have heeded that call and many continue to examine only micro- or macro-level effects or study both at the same level of analysis. This study will examine overall media effects on individual perceptions and behavior in a presidential campaign. An examination of such influences as media context can provide deeper theoretical insights into the analysis of media effects, and perceptual processes such as the persuasive press inference, false consensus, and social projection. This research addresses the relevance of context to the study of media effects on individual cognitions—specifically, perceptions of public opinion—and political behavior. I argue that citizens are variably influenced by information flow depending on their physical location within a media market. This approach applies advanced methodology in order to tap into previously unelaborated relationships. The 2004 American National Election Studies (ANES) face-to-face pre- and post-election surveys were utilized to explore these relationships. I included geographic data in order to place individuals within Designated Market Areas (DMAs). I then conducted a computerized ii content analysis of newspaper coverage in the communities of respondents from two weeks before the survey was administered, September 7, to the last day the survey was administered, November 1, 2004. Cross-level relationships among the contextual (content) and individual variables from the survey were assessed using multilevel modeling. Results showed that perceived public opinion varied significantly across media markets, and newspaper use as well as personal candidate preference had a significant effect on the likelihood of perceiving Kerry to be the state-winning candidate. The second model, predicting political behavior, revealed that newspaper use had a significant effect on rates of political participation, as has been supported in other research. Implications for the study of media content within a multilevel model and media-effects theory are discussed. Interpretations of the results are provided, along with limitations of the present study and suggestions for future research. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to extend my sincerest gratitude to my adviser, Dr. William “Chip” Eveland, Jr., for his guidance in this dissertation and throughout my graduate career at The Ohio State University. He has provided me with encouragement, scholarly stimulation, and a friendship that I hope will flourish as I continue on my academic pathway. I would also like to thank the three other members of my dissertation committee. First, I express warm thanks to Dr. Carroll J. Glynn, without whom I would not have been able to laugh at my trials and celebrate my successes. She has also been instrumental in guiding me at the beginning of my academic career. I would like to acknowledge Dr. Michael Slater, my supervisor, who has provided me with endless hours of inspiration and profoundly insightful advice on matters practical, methodological, and theoretical. His enthusiasm is surely contagious, and he has motivated me to continually challenge my thinking and aim for the stars—as long as they are within reasonable reach. I also thank Dr. Andrew Hayes, whose vast expertise in statistics and vigor for all things academic are truly inspiring. I have always admired his resolve, and I thank him for his candid feedback throughout my graduate career, as well as in this project. iv My family has been both kind and supportive throughout this process. I am grateful to my mother and stepfather, Constance and Martin Marger, for their firsthand understanding of the doctoral experience and for providing me with unconditional love and enthusiastic devotion. I also thank my father and stepmother, Marc and Paula Hoffman, whose confidence and pride have motivated me in immeasurable ways. My other family members also deserve thanks for their compassion and understanding: the Huges; Helen Hoffman; Brian, Bennett, Audrey, and Zoe Hoffman; and the Turner clan. My most heartfelt gratitude is reserved for my dear and patient husband, Michael Huge. His kindness and loyalty are invaluable, and his intellect challenges me to become a better scholar. These materials are based on work supported by, in alphabetical order: the National Science Foundation under grant SES-0118451, and the University of Michigan. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in these materials are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding organizations. v VITA November 23, 1976…………………………Born — Cleveland, Ohio 1999…………………………………………B.A. Journalism, University of Kentucky 2004…………………………………………M.A. Journalism & Communication, The Ohio State University 2002 – 2007…………………………………Graduate Teaching and Research Associate The Ohio State University PUBLICATIONS 1. Hoffman, L. H., Glynn, C. J., Huge, M. E., Thomson, T., & Seitman, R. B. (2007). The role of communication in public opinion processes: Understanding the impacts of individual, media, and social filters. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 19, 1-26. 2. Hoffman, L. H. & Slater, M. D. (2007). Evaluating public discourse in newspaper opinion articles: Values-framing and integrative complexity in substance and health policy issues. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84, 58-74. 3. Hoffman, L. H. (2006). Is Internet content different after all? A content analysis of mobilizing information in online and print newspapers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83, 53-76. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Communication vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract.......................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................iv Vita………..........................................................................................................................vi List of Tables..................................................................................................................xi List of Figures ............................................................................................................. xiii Chapters: 1. Introduction............................................................................................................1 2. Theoretical Framework...........................................................................................3 2.1 What Influences Perceptions of Public Opinion and Political Participation at the Individual Level? ...................................................................................3 2.2 Media and Interpersonal Communication Effects.............................................4 2.3 The Social Construction of Reality ..................................................................6 2.3.1 Defining Social Reality Perceptions......................................................7 2.3.2 Misperceptions of Public Opinion.......................................................10 2.3.3 The Influence of News Media Content................................................11 2.4 The Relationship between News Media Use and Political Participation..........13 3. The Contextual Level of Influence........................................................................18 vii 3.1 Conceptualizing “Context” ............................................................................18 3.1.1 Primitive Meanings............................................................................18 3.1.2 Scholarly Conceptualizations.............................................................19 3.2 Dimensions of Context ..................................................................................22 3.2.1 Compositional Variables....................................................................22 3.2.2 Structural Variables ...........................................................................25 3.2.3 Global Variables..............................................................................266 3.3 How Does Contextual Analysis Differ from Other Media Effects Research? ..........................................................................................29 3.4 Media Effects within Context: What Are Contextual Effects?........................31 3.4.1 Mechanisms for Contextual Effects ....................................................32 4. Linking Individual- and Contextual-Level Influences ...........Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1 Predicting Perceptions of Public Opinion.......................................................38 4.1.1 Information Processing Explanations.................................................40 4.1.1.1 Associative