Reconceptualizing Cognitive Media Effects Theory and Research Under the Judged Usability Model

IF 6.3 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Byunggu Lee, D. McLeod
{"title":"Reconceptualizing Cognitive Media Effects Theory and Research Under the Judged Usability Model","authors":"Byunggu Lee, D. McLeod","doi":"10.12840/ISSN.2255-4165.022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This review synthesizes the existing literature on cognitive media effects, including agenda setting, framing, and priming, in order to identify their similarities, differences, and inherent commonalities. Based on this review, we argue that the theory and research on each of these cognitive effects share a common view that media affect audience members by influencing the relative importance of considerations used to make subsequent judgments (including their answers to post-exposure survey questions). In reviewing this literature, we note that one important factor is often ignored, the extent to which a consideration featured in the message is deemed usable for a given subsequent judgment, a factor called judged usability, which may be an important mediator of cognitive media effects like agenda setting, framing, and priming. Emphasizing judged usability leads to the revelation that media coverage may not just elevate a particular consideration, but may also actively suppress a consideration, rendering it less usable for subsequent judgments. Thus, it opens a new avenue for cognitive effects research. In the interest of integrating these strands of cognitive effects research, we propose the Judged Usability Model as a revision of past cognitive models.","PeriodicalId":43364,"journal":{"name":"Review of Communication Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Communication Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12840/ISSN.2255-4165.022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This review synthesizes the existing literature on cognitive media effects, including agenda setting, framing, and priming, in order to identify their similarities, differences, and inherent commonalities. Based on this review, we argue that the theory and research on each of these cognitive effects share a common view that media affect audience members by influencing the relative importance of considerations used to make subsequent judgments (including their answers to post-exposure survey questions). In reviewing this literature, we note that one important factor is often ignored, the extent to which a consideration featured in the message is deemed usable for a given subsequent judgment, a factor called judged usability, which may be an important mediator of cognitive media effects like agenda setting, framing, and priming. Emphasizing judged usability leads to the revelation that media coverage may not just elevate a particular consideration, but may also actively suppress a consideration, rendering it less usable for subsequent judgments. Thus, it opens a new avenue for cognitive effects research. In the interest of integrating these strands of cognitive effects research, we propose the Judged Usability Model as a revision of past cognitive models.
判断可用性模型下的认知媒介效应理论与研究
这篇综述综合了现有的关于认知媒体效应的文献,包括议程设置、框架和启动,以确定它们的相似性、差异性和内在共性。基于这篇综述,我们认为,关于每一种认知效应的理论和研究都有一个共同的观点,即媒体通过影响用于做出后续判断的考虑因素的相对重要性(包括他们对曝光后调查问题的回答)来影响受众。在回顾这些文献时,我们注意到一个重要因素经常被忽视,即信息中的考虑在多大程度上被认为可用于给定的后续判断,这一因素被称为判断可用性,它可能是认知媒体效应的重要中介,如议程设置、框架和启动。强调判断的可用性会揭示出,媒体报道不仅可能提升某个特定的考虑因素,还可能主动抑制某个考虑因素,使其不太适用于后续判断。从而为认知效应的研究开辟了一条新的途径。为了整合这些认知效应研究,我们提出了判断可用性模型,作为对过去认知模型的修正。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Review of Communication Research will publish an annual volume with comprehensive and authoritative reviews of the current state of the main topics and the most significant developments in the field of Communication. These comprehensive critical reviews will summarize the latest advances in the field, but also will root out errors and will provoke intellectual discussions among scholars. The journal seeks both evaluative (theorical) and quantitative (meta-analysis) papers that make a state of the art of issues in scientific communication. Integrative review articles that connect different areas of research are of special interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信