Im Shop erwerben
, um zu prüfen, ob Sie einen Vollzugriff auf diese Publikation haben.
Monographie Kein Zugriff

Emotionale Framing-Effekte auf Einstellungen

Eine theoretische Modellierung und empirische Überprüfung der Wirkungsmechanismen
Autor:innen:
Verlag:
 2015

Zusammenfassung

Der wirkungsorientierte Framing-Ansatz fokussierte traditionell kognitive Effekte der Medienberichterstattung auf die Einstellungen von Rezipientinnen und Rezipienten. Aktuelle Befunde zeigen allerdings, dass in Rezeptions- und Meinungsbildungsprozessen auch Emotionen eine bedeutende Rolle spielen.

Der vorliegende Beitrag erweitert den klassischen Framing-Ansatz um emotionstheoretische Überlegungen und entwickelt ein integratives Modell kognitiver und emotionaler Framing-Effekte. Dieses postuliert, dass mediale Darstellungen gesellschaftlicher Themen sowohl kognitive als auch emotionale Reaktionen auslösen können, die ihrerseits die Einstellungen der Rezipientinnen und Rezipienten beeinflussen. Die theoretischen Annahmen werden in drei Experimenten sowie einer Inhaltsanalyse und Befragung getestet.

Publikation durchsuchen

Bibliographische Angaben

Copyrightjahr
2015
ISBN-Print
978-3-8487-1873-3
ISBN-Online
978-3-8452-5938-3
Verlag
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Reihe
Reihe Rezeptionsforschung
Band
33
Sprache
Deutsch
Seiten
417
Produkttyp
Monographie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

KapitelSeiten
  1. Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis Kein Zugriff 1 - 10
  2. Einleitung Kein Zugriff 11 - 23
  3. Begriffsbestimmungen Kein Zugriff 24 - 39
  4. Kognitive Framing-Prozesse Kein Zugriff 40 - 83
  5. Emotionale Framing-Prozesse Kein Zugriff 84 - 136
  6. Ein Modell kognitiver und emotionaler Framing-Effekte Kein Zugriff 137 - 190
  7. Experimentelle Überprüfung emotionaler Framing-Effekte Kein Zugriff 191 - 265
  8. Emotionale Framing-Effekte in einer öffentlichen Debatte Kein Zugriff 266 - 338
  9. Schlussdiskussion Kein Zugriff 339 - 353
  10. Literaturverzeichnis Kein Zugriff 354 - 387
  11. Anhang Kein Zugriff 388 - 417

Literaturverzeichnis (538)

  1. Aarøe, L. (2011). Investigating frame strength: The case of episodic and thematic frames. Political Communication, 28(2), 207–226. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2011.568041
  2. Abele-Brehm, A. & Brehm, W. (1986). Zur Konzeptualisierung und Messung von Befindlichkeit: Die Entwicklung der "Befindlichkeitsskalen" (BFS). Diagnostica, 32(3), 209–228. Google Scholar öffnen
  3. Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Google Scholar öffnen
  4. Albarracín, D. & Kumkale, T. G. (2003). Affect as information in persuasion: A model of affect identification and discounting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), 453–469. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.453
  5. Anderson, C. A. (1997). Effects of violent movies and trait hostility on hostile feelings and aggressive thoughts. Aggressive Behavior, 23(3), 161–178. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1997)23:3<161::AID-AB2>3.0.CO;2-P
  6. Anderson, J. C. & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
  7. Appel, M. (2008). Manche mögen’s heiss: Ergebnisse der deutschsprachigen Version eines Instruments zur Erfassung des Emotionsmotivs (need for emotion/need for affect). Diagnostica, 54(1), 2–15. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1026/0012-1924.54.1.2
  8. Arbuckle, J. L. (2012). IBM SPSS Amos 21 User’s Guide. Chicago, IL: IBM Software Group. Google Scholar öffnen
  9. Arnold, M. B. (1960). Emotion and personality. Volume 1: psychological aspects. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  10. Avnet, T., Pham, M. T. & Stephen, A. T. (2012). Consumers’ trust in feelings as information. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 720–735. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1086/664978
  11. Baden, C. (2010). Communication, contextualization, & cognition: Patterns & processes of frames' influence on people's interpretations of the EU constitution. Delft: Eburon Academic Publishers. Google Scholar öffnen
  12. Baden, C. & Lecheler, S. (2012). Fleeting, fading, or far-reaching? A knowledge-based model of the persistence of framing effects. Communication Theory, 22(4), 359–382. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01413.x
  13. Balmas, M. & Sheafer, T. (2010). Candidate image in election campaigns: Attribute agenda setting, affective priming, and voting intentions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(2), 204–229. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq009
  14. Bantimaroudis, P. & Ban, H. (2001). Covering the crisis in Somalia: Framing choices by the New York Times and the Manchester Guardian. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy & A. E. Grant (Hrsg.), Framing public life. Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (S. 175–184). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  15. Barnett, B. (2005). Feminists shaping news: A framing analysis of news releases from the national organization for women. Journal of Public Relations Research, 17(4), 341–362. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr1704_2
  16. Bartsch, A., Vorderer, P., Mangold, R. & Viehoff, R. (2008). Appraisal of emotions in media use: Toward a process model of meta-emotion and emotion regulation. Media Psychology, 11(1), 7–27. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/15213260701813447
  17. Baumann, K., Kessler, H. & Linden, M. (2005). Die Messung von Emotionen. Verhaltenstherapie und Verhaltensmedizin, 26(2), 169–197. Google Scholar öffnen
  18. Benford, R. D. & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611–639. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611
  19. Berger, C. R., Roloff, M. E. & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. (2010). What is communication science? In C. R. Berger, M. E. Roloff & D. R. Roskos-Ewoldsen (Hrsg.), The handbook of communication science (2. Auflage, S. 3–20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  20. Berkowitz, L. & Harmon-Jones, E. (2004). Toward an understanding of the determinants of anger. Emotion, 4(2), 107–130. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.4.2.107
  21. Berry, W. D. (1993). Understanding regression assumptions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.4135/9781412986427
  22. Betancourt, H. & Blair, I. (1992). A cognition (attribution)-emotion model of violence in conflict situations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(3), 343–350. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0146167292183011
  23. Bilandzic, H. & Busselle, R. (2013). Narrative persuasion. In J. P. Dillard & L. Shen (Hrsg.), The SAGE handbook of persuasion. Developments in theory and practice (2. Auflage, S. 200–219). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  24. Bizer, G. Y. & Krosnick, J. A. (2001). Exploring the structure of strength-related attitude features: The relation between attitude importance and attitude accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(4), 566–586. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.4.566
  25. Blanchette, I. & Richards, A. (2010). The influence of affect on higher level cognition: A review of research on interpretation, judgment, decision making and reasoning. Cognition and Emotion, 24(4), 561–595. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02699930903132496
  26. Bless, H., Mackie, D. M. & Schwarz, N. (1992). Mood effects on attitude judgments: Independent effects of mood before and after message elaboration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 585–595. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.585
  27. Blumler, J. G. & Kavanagh, D. (1999). The third age of political communication: Influences and features. Political Communication, 16(3), 209–230. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/105846099198596
  28. Böcking, S. (2008). Grenzen der Fiktion? Von Suspension of Disbelief zu einer Toleranztheorie für die Filmrezeption. Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  29. Böcking, T. (2009). Strategisches Framing: Gesellschaftliche Akteure und ihre Einflussnahmeversuche auf die mediale Debatte über die embryonale Stammzellforschung in Deutschland. Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  30. Bodenhausen, G. V. (1992). Information-processing functions of generic knowledge structures and their role in context effects in social judgment. In N. Schwarz & S. Sudman (Hrsg.), Context effects in social and psychological research (S. 267–277). New York, NY: Springer. Google Scholar öffnen
  31. Bodenhausen, G. V., Macrae, C. N. & Hugenberg, K. (2003). Social cognition. In T. Millon, M. J. Lerner & I. B. Weiner (Hrsg.), Handbook of psychology. Personality and social psychology (S. 257–282). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Google Scholar öffnen
  32. Bodenhausen, G. V., Mussweiler, T., Gabriel, S. & Moreno, K. N. (2001). Affective influences on stereotyping and intergroup relations. In J. P. Forgas (Hrsg.), Handbook of affect and social cognition (S. 319–343). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  33. Bodenhausen, G. V., Sheppard, L. A. & Kramer, G. P. (1994). Negative affect and social judgment: The differential impact of anger and sadness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24(1), 45–62. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420240104
  34. Bohner, G. & Dickel, N. (2011). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 391–417. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131609
  35. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley. Google Scholar öffnen
  36. Booth-Butterfield, M. & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1990). Conceptualizing affect as information in communication production. Human Communication Research, 16(4), 451–476. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1990.tb00219.x
  37. Booth‐Butterfield, M. & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1994). The affective orientation to communication: Conceptual and empirical distinctions. Communication Quarterly, 42(4), 331–344. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/01463379409369941
  38. Borah, P. (2011). Conceptual issues in framing theory: A systematic examination of a decade's literature. Journal of Communication, 61(2), 246–263. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01539.x
  39. Bortz, J. & Döring, N. (2006). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler (4. Auflage). Heidelberg: Springer. Google Scholar öffnen
  40. Bower, G. H. (1981). Mood and memory. American Psychologist, 36(2), 129–148. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.2.129
  41. Brader, T. (2005). Striking a responsive chord: How political ads motivate and persuade voters by appealing to emotions. American Journal of Political Science, 49(2), 388–405. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2005.00130.x
  42. Bradley, B. P., Mogg, K. & Lee, S. C. (1997). Attentional biases for negative information in induced and naturally occurring dysphoria. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 35(10), 911–927. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(97)00053-3
  43. Brambor, T., Clark, W. R. & Golder, M. (2006). Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14(1), 63–82. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpi014
  44. Breckler, S. J. (1984). Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1191–1205. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1191
  45. Brewer, P. R. (2001). Value words and lizard brains: Do citizens deliberate about appeals to their core values? Political Psychology, 22(1), 45–64. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00225
  46. Brewer, P. R., Graf, J. & Willnat, L. (2003). Priming or framing: Media influence on attitudes toward foreign countries. Gazette: The International Journal for Communication Studies, 65(6), 493–508. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0016549203065006005
  47. Brewer, P. R. & Gross, K. (2001). Studying the effects of framing on public opinion about policy issues: Does what we see depend on how we look? In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy & A. E. Grant (Hrsg.), Framing public life. Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (S. 159–186). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  48. British general election of 2010 (2013). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Abgerufen von http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1664742/British-general-election-of-2010 (21.12.13). Google Scholar öffnen
  49. Brosius, H.-B. & Eps, P. (1993). Verändern Schlüsselereignisse journalistische Selektionskriterien? Framing am Beispiel der Berichterstattung über Anschläge gegen Ausländer und Asylanten. Rundfunk und Fernsehen, 41(4), 512–530. Google Scholar öffnen
  50. Brosius, H.-B. & Rossmann, C. (2012). Experiment und Inhaltsanalyse: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen ihrer Kombination. In W. Loosen & A. Scholl (Hrsg.), Methodenkombinationen in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Methodologische Herausforderungen und empirische Praxis (S. 246–261). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  51. Brosius, H.-B. & Weimann, G. (1996). Who sets the agenda? Agenda-setting as a two-step flow. Communication Research, 23(5), 561–580. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/009365096023005002
  52. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  53. Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  54. Bulkow, K. & Schweiger, W. (2013). Agenda Setting: Zwischen gesellschaftlichem Phänomen und individuellem Prozess. In W. Schweiger & A. Fahr (Hrsg.), Handbuch Medienwirkungsforschung (S. 171–190). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  55. Bulkow, K., Urban, J. & Schweiger, W. (2013). The duality of agenda-setting: The role of information processing. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 25(1), 43–63. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/eds003
  56. Burdein, I., Lodge, M. & Taber, C. (2006). Experiments on the Automaticity of Political Beliefs and Attitudes. Political Psychology, 27(3), 359–371. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2006.00504.x
  57. Burkholder, G. J. & Harlow, L. L. (2003). An illustration of a longitudinal cross-lagged design for larger structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling, 10(3), 465–486. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM1003_8
  58. Bushman, B. J. (1998). Priming effects of media violence on the accessibility of aggressive constructs in memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(5), 537–545. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0146167298245009
  59. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2. Auflage). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen
  60. Callaghan, K. & Schnell, F. (2001). Assessing the democratic debate: How the news media frame elite policy discourse. Political Communication, 18(2), 183–213. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/105846001750322970
  61. Cappella, J. N. & Jamieson, K. H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  62. Carrera, P. & Oceja, L. (2007). Drawing mixed emotions: Sequential or simultaneous experiences? Cognition & Emotion, 21(2), 422–441. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02699930600557904
  63. Cavanaugh, L. A., Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F. & Payne, J. W. (2007). Appraising the appraisal-tendency framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(3), 169–173. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70024-4
  64. Ceulemans, E., Kuppens, P. & van Mechelen, I. (2012). Capturing the structure of distinct types of individual differences in the situation-specific experience of emotions: The case of anger. European Journal of Personality, 26(5), 484–495. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1002/per.847
  65. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752–766. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.752
  66. Chaiken, S. & Stangor, C. (1987). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 575–630. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.38.020187.003043
  67. Chang, C. (2008). Ad framing effects for consumption products: An affect priming process. Psychology and Marketing, 25(1), 24–46. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1002/mar.20199
  68. Chen, F. F. (2008). What happens if we compare chopsticks with forks? The impact of making inappropriate comparisons in cross-cultural research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1005–1018. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/a0013193
  69. Chen, S. & Chaiken, S. (1999). The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Hrsg.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (S. 73–96). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  70. Cheung, G. W. & Rensvold, R. B. (1999). Testing factorial invariance across groups: A reconceptualization and proposed new method. Journal of Management, 25(1), 1–27. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/014920639902500101
  71. Cho, H. & Boster, F. J. (2008). Effects of gain versus loss frame antidrug ads on adolescents. Journal of Communication, 58(3), 428–446. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00393.x
  72. Cho, J., Boyle, M. P., Keum, H., Shevy, M. D., McLeod, D. M., Shah, D. V. & Pan, Z. (2003). Media, terrorism, and emotionality: Emotional differences in media content and public reactions to the September 11th terrorist attacks. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47(3), 309–327. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4703_1
  73. Chong, D. & Druckman, J. N. (2007a). A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 99–118. Google Scholar öffnen
  74. Chong, D. & Druckman, J. N. (2007b). Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. American Political Science Review, 101(4), 637–655. Google Scholar öffnen
  75. Chong, D. & Druckman, J. N. (2007c). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103–126. Google Scholar öffnen
  76. Christians, C. G., Glasser, T. L., McQuail, D., Nordenstreng, K. & White, R. A. (2009). Normative theories of the media: Journalism in democratic societies. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  77. Cialdini, R. B. & Kenrick, D. T. (1976). Altruism as hedonism: A social development perspective on the relationship of negative mood state and helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(5), 907–914. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.34.5.907
  78. Clark, M. S. (1982). A role for arousal in the link between feeling states, judgments, and behavior. In M. S. Clark & S. T. Fiske (Hrsg.), Affect and cognition. The seventeenth annual Carnegie Symposium on cognition (S. 263–289). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  79. Clore, G. L. & Colcombe, S. (2003). The parallel worlds of affective concepts and feelings. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Hrsg.), The psychology of evaluation. Affective processes in cognition and emotion (S. 335–369). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  80. Clore, G. L. & Huntsinger, J. R. (2009). How the object of affect guides its impact. Emotion Review, 1(1), 39–54. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1754073908097185
  81. Clore, G. L. & Schnall, S. (2005). The influence of affect on attitude. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson & M. P. Zanna (Hrsg.), The handbook of attitudes (S. 437–489). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  82. Cobb, M. D. (2005). Framing effects on public opinion about nanotechnology. Science Communication, 27(2), 221–239. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1075547005281473
  83. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G. & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3. Auflage). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  84. Cole, D. A. & Maxwell, S. E. (2003). Testing mediational models with longitudinal data: Questions and tips in the use of structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112(4), 558–577. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.112.4.558
  85. Coleman, R., Thorson, E., & Wilkins, L. (2011). Testing the effect of framing and sourcing in health news stories. Journal of Health Communication, 16(9), 941–954. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2011.561918
  86. Collins, A. M. & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407–428. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.82.6.407
  87. Coxe, S., West, S. G. & Aiken, L. S. (2009). The analysis of count data: A gentle introduction to poisson regression and its alternatives. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(2), 121–136. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/00223890802634175
  88. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
  89. Cunningham, F. (2002). Theories of democracy: A critical introduction. London: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.4324/9780203466247
  90. Curran, P. J., West, S. G. & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 16–29. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.16
  91. Dahinden, U. (2006). Framing: Eine integrative Theorie der Massenkommunikation. Konstanz: UVK. Google Scholar öffnen
  92. Dalbert, C. (1992). Subjektives Wohlbefinden junger Erwachsener: Theoretische und empirische Analysen der Struktur und Stabilität. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 13(4), 207–220. Google Scholar öffnen
  93. Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes' error. New York, NY: Putnam's Sons. Google Scholar öffnen
  94. D'Angelo, P. (2002). News framing as a multiparadigmatic research program: A response to Entman. Journal of Communication, 52(4), 870–888. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02578.x
  95. D'Angelo, P. (2012). Studying framing in political communication with an integrative approach. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 353–364. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426332
  96. Das, E., Bushman, B. J., Bezemer, M. D., Kerkhof, P. & Vermeulen, I. E. (2009). How terrorism news reports increase prejudice against outgroups: A terror management account. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(3), 453–459. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.12.001
  97. de Vreese, C. H. (2003). Framing Europe: Television news and European integration. Amsterdam: Aksant Academic Publishers. Google Scholar öffnen
  98. de Vreese, C. H. (2005). News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal + Document Design, 13(1), 51–62. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1075/idjdd.13.1.06vre
  99. de Vreese, C. H., Boomgaarden, H. G. & Semetko, H. A. (2011). (In)direct framing effects: The effects of news media framing on public support for Turkish membership in the European Union. Communication Research, 38(2), 179–205. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0093650210384934
  100. de Vreese, C. & Boomgaarden, H. (2003). Valenced news frames and public support for the EU. Communications, 28(4), 361–381. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1515/comm.2003.024
  101. de Vreese, C. & Elenbaas, M. (2008). Media in the game of politics: Strategic metacoverage on political cynicism. International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(3), 285–309. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1940161208319650
  102. de Wied, M., Zillmann, D. & Ordman, V. (1995). The role of empathic distress in the enjoyment of cinematic tragedy. Poetics, 23(1–2), 91–106. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/0304-422X(94)00010-4
  103. Dernbach, B. (2000). Themen der Publizistik — Wie entsteht die Agenda öffentlicher Kommunikation? Publizistik, 45(1), 38–50. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/s11616-000-0049-z
  104. DeSteno, D., Petty, R. E., Rucker, D. D., Wegener, D. T. & Braverman, J. (2004). Discrete emotions and persuasion: The role of emotion-induced expectancies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(1), 43–56. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.43
  105. Dimitrova, D. V. & Strömbäck, J. (2005). Mission accomplished? Framing of the Iraq war in the elite newspapers in Sweden and the United States. International Communication Gazette, 67(5), 399–417. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0016549205056050
  106. Domke, D., Shah, D. V. & Wackman, D. B. (1998). Media priming effects: Accessibility, association, and activation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 10(1), 51–74. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/10.1.51
  107. Döveling, K. & Sommer, D. (2008). Social Appraisal in der dynamischen Transaktion: Emotionale Aushandlungsprozesse und ihre komplexe Dynamik. In C. Wünsch, W. Früh & V. Gehrau (Hrsg.), Integrative Modelle in der Rezeptions- und Wirkungsforschung. Dynamische und transaktionale Perspektiven. Reihe Rezeptionsforschung Band 14 (S. 173–196). München: Verlag Reinhard Fischer. Google Scholar öffnen
  108. Druckman, J. N. (2001a). On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? The Journal of Politics, 63(4), 1041–1066. Google Scholar öffnen
  109. Druckman, J. N. (2001b). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23(3), 225–256. Google Scholar öffnen
  110. Druckman, J. N. (2004). Political preference formation: Competition, deliberation, and the (ir)relevance of framing effects. American Political Science Review, 98(4), 671–686. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S0003055404041413
  111. Druckman, J. N. & McDermott, R. (2008). Emotion and the framing of risky choice. Political Behavior, 30(3), 297–321. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/s11109-008-9056-y
  112. Druckman, J. N. & Nelson, K. R. (2003). Framing and deliberation: How citizens' conversations limit elite influence. American Journal of Political Science, 47(4), 729–745. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/1540-5907.00051
  113. Eagly, A. H. & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Google Scholar öffnen
  114. Eagly, A. H. & Chaiken, S. (2007). The advantages of an inclusive definition of attitude. Social Cognition, 25(5), 582–602. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.582
  115. Edelstein, A. S. (1993). Thinking about the criterion variable in agenda-setting research. Journal of Communication, 43(2), 85–99. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01264.x
  116. Edy, J. A. & Meirick, P. C. (2007). Wanted, dead or alive: Media frames, frame adoption, and support for the war in Afghanistan. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 119–141. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00332.x
  117. Eichhorn, W. (2005). Agenda-Setting-Prozesse: Eine theoretische Analyse individueller und gesellschaftlicher Themenstrukturierung (2. Auflage). München: Verlag Reinhard Fischer. Google Scholar öffnen
  118. Eid, M. & Diener, E. (2001). Norms for experiencing emotions in different cultures: Inter- and intranational differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(5), 869–885. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.869
  119. Eilders, C. (1997). Nachrichtenfaktoren und Rezeption: Eine empirische Analyse zur Auswahl und Verarbeitung politischer Information. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  120. Elenbaas, M. & de Vreese, C. (2008). The effects of strategic news on political cynicism and vote choice among young voters. Journal of Communication, 58(3), 550–567. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00399.x
  121. Ellsworth, P. C. & Scherer, K. R. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer & H. H. Goldsmith (Hrsg.), Handbook of affective sciences (S. 572–595). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  122. Enders, C. K. (2001). A Primer on maximum likelihood algorithms available for use with missing data. Structural Equation Modeling, 8(1), 128–141. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0801_7
  123. Enders, C. K. & Bandalos, D. L. (2001). The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling, 8(3), 430–457. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0803_5
  124. Engelmann, I. (2009). Frames und Positionen zur EU-Osterweiterung: Eine Argument- und Framing-Analyse ausgewählter EU-Beitritte. Publizistik, 54(1), 82–102. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/s11616-009-0021-5
  125. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
  126. Entman, R. M. (2003). Cascading activation: Contesting the White House's frame after 9/11. Political Communication, 20(4), 415–432. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/10584600390244176
  127. Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. foreign policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  128. Entman, R. M. (2007). Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 163–173. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00336.x
  129. Entman, R. M., Matthes, J. & Pellicano, L. (2009). Nature, sources, and effects of news framing. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen & T. Hanitzsch (Hrsg.), The Handbook of Journalism Studies (S. 175–190). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen
  130. Epstein, S. (1990). Cognitive-experiential self-theory. In L. A. Pervin (Hrsg.), Handbook of personality. Theory and research (S. 165–192). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  131. Eysenck, M. W. & Keane, M. T. (2010). Cognitive psychology: A student's handbook (6. Auflage). Hove: Psychology Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  132. Fabrigar, L. R., MacDonald, T. K. & Wegener, D. T. (2005). The structure of attitudes. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson & M. P. Zanna (Hrsg.), The handbook of attitudes (S. 79–124). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  133. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C. & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272
  134. Fahr, A. & Hofer, M. (2013). Psychophysiologische Messmethoden. In W. Möhring & D. Schlütz (Hrsg.), Handbuch standardisierte Erhebungsverfahren in der Kommunikationswissenschaft (S. 347–365). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  135. Fazio, R. H. (2001). On the automatic activation of associated evaluations: An overview. Cognition and Emotion, 15(2), 115–141. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02699930125908
  136. Fazio, R. H. & Olson, M. A. (2003). Attitudes: Foundations, functions, and consequences. In M. Hogg & J. M. Cooper (Hrsg.), The Sage handbook of social psychology (S. 139–160). London: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  137. Ferree, M. M., Gamson, W. A., Gerhards, J. & Rucht, D. (2002). Four models of the public sphere in modern democracies. Theory and Society, 31(3), 289–324. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1023/A:1016284431021
  138. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4. Auflage). London: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  139. Finch, J. F., West, S. G. & MacKinnon, D. P. (1997). Effects of sample size and nonnormality on the estimation of mediated effects in latent variable models. Structural Equation Modeling, 4(2), 87–107. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/10705519709540063
  140. Finkel, S. E. (1995). Causal analysis with panel data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.4135/9781412983594
  141. Fischhoff, B., Gonzalez, R. M., Lerner, J. S. & Small, D. A. (2005). Evolving judgments of terror risks: Foresight, hindsight, and emotion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11(2), 124–139. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.11.2.124
  142. Forgas, J. P. (1983). What is social about social cognition? British Journal of Social Psychology, 22(2), 129–144. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1983.tb00574.x
  143. Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM). Psychological Bulletin, 117(1), 39–66. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.39
  144. Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P. & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effects in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(1), 115–134. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.51.1.115
  145. Frick, R. W. (1998). Interpreting statistical testing: Process and propensity, not population and random sampling. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 30(3), 527–535. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.3758/BF03200686
  146. Frijda, N. H. (1988). The laws of emotion. American Psychologist, 43(5), 349–358. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.43.5.349
  147. Frijda, N. H. (1993). Moods, emotion episodes, and emotions. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland (Hrsg.), Handbook of emotions (S. 381–403). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  148. Frijda, N. H. & Mesquita, B. (2000). Beliefs through emotions. In N. H. Frijda, A. S. R. Manstead & S. Bem (Hrsg.), Emotions and beliefs. How feelings influence thoughts (S. 45–77). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511659904
  149. Früh, W. (2007). Inhaltsanalyse: Theorie und Praxis (6. Auflage). Konstanz: UVK. Google Scholar öffnen
  150. Galtung, J. & Ruge, M. H. (1965). The structure of foreign news: The presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus crises in four Norwegian newspapers. Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64–90. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/002234336500200104
  151. Gamson, W. A. & Modigliani, A. (1987). The changing culture of affirmative action. In R. G. Braungart & M. M. Braungart (Hrsg.), Research in political sociology. A research annual (Band 3, S. 137–177). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  152. Gault, B. A. & Sabini, J. (2000). The roles of empathy, anger, and gender in predicting attitudes towards punitive, reparative, and preventative public policies. Cognition and Emotion, 14(4), 495–520. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/026999300402772
  153. Gawronski, B. & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 692–731. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.692
  154. Gawronski, B. & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2007). Unraveling the processes underlying evaluation: Attitudes from the pespective of the APE model. Social Cognition, 25(5), 687–717. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.687
  155. Gearhart, S., Craig, C. & Steed, C. (2012). Network news coverage of obesity in two time periods: An analysis of issues, sources, and frames. Health Communication, 27(7), 653–662. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2011.629406
  156. Geiser, C. (2011). Datenanalyse mit Mplus: Ein anwendungsorientierte Einführung (2. Auflage). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93192-0
  157. Geneva Emotion Research Group. (2002). Genfer Appraisal Fragebogen (GAF): Format, Entwicklung und Einsatzmöglichkeiten. Genf: Universität Genf. Google Scholar öffnen
  158. Gerbner, G. & Gross, L. (1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal of Communication, 26(2), 172–194. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1976.tb01397.x
  159. Gerhards, J. (1997). Diskursive versus liberale Öffentlichkeit: Eine empirische Auseinandersetzung mit Jürgen Habermas. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 49(1), 1–34. Google Scholar öffnen
  160. Gerhards, J. & Neidhardt, F. (1990). Strukturen und Funktionen moderner Öffentlichkeit: Fragestellungen und Ansätze. Discussion Paper FS III 90–101, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin. Google Scholar öffnen
  161. Gerhards, J. & Rucht, D. (1992). Mesomobilization: Organizing and framing in two protest campaigns in West Germany. American Journal of Sociology, 98(3), 555–595. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1086/230049
  162. Gerth, M. A. & Siegert, G. (2012). Patterns of consistence and constriction: How news media frame the coverage of direct democratic campaigns. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 279–299. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426326
  163. Giner-Sorolla, R. (1999). Affect in attitude: Immediate and deliberative perspectives. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Hrsg.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (S. 441–461). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  164. Girden, E. R. (1992). ANOVA: Repeated measures. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.4135/9781412983419
  165. Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making & unmaking of the new left. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  166. Gladstein, G. A. (1983). Understanding empathy: Integrating counseling, developmental, and social psychology perspectives. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30(4), 467–482. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.30.4.467
  167. Glass, G. V., Peckham, P. D. & Sanders, J. R. (1972). Consequences of failure to meet assumptions underlying the fixed effects analyses of variance and covariance. Review of Educational Research, 42(3), 237–288. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.3102/00346543042003237
  168. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  169. Golan, G. & Wanta, W. (2001). Second-level agenda setting in the New Hampshire primary: A comparison of coverage in three newspapers and public perceptions of candidates. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(2), 247–259. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/107769900107800203
  170. Goldberg, J. H., Lerner, J. S. & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Rage and reason: The psychology of the intuitive prosecutor. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(5-6), 781–795. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199908/09)29:5/6<781::AID-EJSP960>3.0.CO;2-3
  171. Goodall, C. E., Slater, M. D. & Myers, T. A. (2013). Fear and anger responses to local news coverage of alcohol-related crimes, accidents, and injuries: Explaining news effects on policy support using a representative sample of messages and people. Journal of Communication, 63(2), 373–392. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12020
  172. Graham, J. M. (2006). Congeneric and (essentially) tau-equivalent estimates of score reliability: What they are and how to use them. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(6), 930–944. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0013164406288165
  173. Gray, J. A. (1990). Brain systems that mediate both emotion and cognition. Cognition and Emotion, 4(3), 269–288. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02699939008410799
  174. Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R., Rudman, L. A., Farnham, S. D., Nosek, B. A. & Mellott, D. S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109(1), 3–25. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.3
  175. Griskevicius, V., Shiota, M. N. & Neufeld, S. L. (2010). Influence of different positive emotions on persuasion processing: A functional evolutionary approach. Emotion, 10(2), 190–206. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/a0018421
  176. Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 271–299. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.271
  177. Gross, K. (2008). Framing persuasive appeals: Episodic and thematic framing, emotional response, and policy opinion. Political Psychology, 29(2), 169–192. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00622.x
  178. Gross, K. & Brewer, P. R. (2007). Sore losers: News frames, policy debates, and emotions. Press/Politics, 12(1), 122–133. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1081180X06297231
  179. Gross, K. & D'Ambrosio, L. (2004). Framing emotional response. Political Psychology, 25(1), 1–29. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00354.x
  180. Habermas, J. (1998). Faktizität und Geltung: Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Google Scholar öffnen
  181. Habermas, J. (1999). Die Einbeziehung des Anderen. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. Google Scholar öffnen
  182. Haddock, G. & Huskinson, T. L. H. (2004). Individual differences in attitude structure. In G. Haddock & G. R. Maio (Hrsg.), Contemporary perspectives on the psychology of attitudes (S. 36–56). Hove: Psychology Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  183. Hall, C. (2007). Recognizing the passion in deliberation: Toward a more democratic theory of deliberative democracy. Hypatia, 22(4), 81–95. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2007.tb01321.x
  184. Hänggli, R. (2012). Key factors in frame building. In H. Kriesi (Hrsg.), Political communication in direct democratic campaigns. Enlightening or manipulating? (S. 125–142). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  185. Hänggli, R., Bernhard, L. & Kriesi, H. (2012). Construction of frames. In H. Kriesi (Hrsg.), Political communication in direct democratic campaigns. Enlightening or manipulating? (S. 69–81). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  186. Han, S., Lerner, J. S. & Keltner, D. (2007). Feelings and consumer decision making: The appraisal-tendency-framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(3), 158–168. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70023-2
  187. Harden, L. (2002). Rahmen der Orientierung: Eine Längsschnittanalyse von Frames in der Philosophieberichterstattung deutscher Qualitätsmedien. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-08903-2
  188. Harmon-Jones, E., Harmon-Jones, C., Amodio, D. M. & Gable, P. A. (2011). Attitudes toward emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(6), 1332–1350. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/a0024951
  189. Hart, P. S. (2011). One or many? The influence of episodic and thematic climate change frames on policy preferences and individual behavior change. Science Communication, 33(1), 28–51. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1075547010366400
  190. Ha, S. (2011). Attribute priming effects and presidential candidate evaluation: The conditionality of political sophistication. Mass Communication and Society, 14(3), 315–342. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2010.490894
  191. Hastie, R. & Park, B. (1986). The relationship between memory and judgment depends on whether the judgment task is memory-based or on-line. Psychological Review, 93(3), 258–268. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.258
  192. Hayes, A. F. (2005). Statistical methods for communication science. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  193. Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millenium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408–420. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360
  194. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  195. Hayes, A. F. & Cai, L. (2007). Using heteroskedasticity-consistent standard error estimators in OLS regression: An introduction and software estimation. Behavior Research Methods, 39(4), 709–722. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.3758/BF03192961
  196. Hayes, A. F., Glynn, C. J. & Huge, M. E. (2012). Cautions regarding the interpretation of regression coefficients and hypothesis tests in linear models with interactions. Communication Methods and Measures, 6(1), 1–11. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2012.651415
  197. Hofer, M. & Wirth, W. (2012). It’s right to be sad: The role of meta-appraisals in the sad-film paradox - a multiple mediator model. Journal of Media Psychology, 24(2), 43–54. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000061
  198. Hoggett, P. & Thompson, S. (2002). Toward a democracy of the emotions. Constellations, 9(1), 106–126. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.00269
  199. Holbert, R. L. & Stephenson, M. T. (2001). The importance of indirect effects on media effects research: Testing for mediation in structural equation modeling. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47(4), 556–572. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4704_5
  200. Holbert, R. L. & Stephenson, M. T. (2008). Commentary on the uses and misuses of structural equation modeling in communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater & L. B. Snyder (Hrsg.), The Sage sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research (S. 185–218). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  201. Holt, L. F. & Major, L. H. (2010). Frame and blame: An analysis of how national and local newspapers framed the Jena Six controversy. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 87(3–4), 582–597. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/107769901008700309
  202. Hove, T., Paek, H.-J., Isaacson, T. & Cole, R. T. (2013). Newspaper portrayals of child abuse: Frequency of coverage and frames of the issue. Mass Communication and Society, 16(1), 89–108. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2011.632105
  203. Hu, L. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  204. Hu, L.-t. & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
  205. Igartua, J.-J., Moral-Toranzo, F. & Fernández, I. (2011). Cognitive, attitudinal, and emotional effects of news frame and group cues, on processing news about immigration. Journal of Media Psychology, 23(4), 174–185. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000050
  206. Innes-Ker, Å. & Niedenthal, P. M. (2002). Emotion concepts and emotional states in social judgment and categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), 804–816. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.804
  207. Iyengar, S. (1990). The accessibility bias in politics: Television news and public opinion. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2(1), 1–15. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/2.1.1
  208. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226388533.001.0001
  209. Iyengar, S. (1996). Framing responsibility for political issues. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546(1), 59–70. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0002716296546001006
  210. Iyengar, S. & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News that matters: Television and American opinion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  211. Iyengar, S., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D. & Krosnick, J. A. (1984). The evening news and presidential evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(4), 778–787. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.778
  212. Iyengar, S. & Simon, A. (1993). News coverage of the gulf crisis and public opinion: A study of agenda-Setting, priming, and framing. Communication Research, 20(3), 365–383. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/009365093020003002
  213. Izard, C. E. (1993). Four systems for emotion activation: Cognitive and noncognitive processes. Psychological Review, 100(1), 68–90. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.1.68
  214. Izard, C. E. (2009). Emotion theory and research: Highlights, unanswered questions, and emerging issues. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 1–25. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163539
  215. Jackson, S. & Jacobs, S. (1983). Generalizing about messages: Suggestions for design and analysis of experiments. Human Communication Research, 9(2), 169–191. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1983.tb00691.x
  216. Jarvis, W. B. G. & Petty, R. E. (1996). The need to evaluate. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 172–194. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.172
  217. Jonides, J., Lewis, R. L., Nee, D. E., Lustig, C. A., Berman, M. G. & Moore, K. S. (2008). The mind and brain of short-term memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 193–224. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093615
  218. Joormann, J. & Gotlib, I. H. (2007). Selective attention to emotional faces following recovery from depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116(1), 80–85. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.116.1.80
  219. Keltner, D., Ellsworth, P. C. & Edwards, K. (1993). Beyond simple pessimism: Effects of sadness and anger on social perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(5), 740–752. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.5.740
  220. Kepplinger, H. M. (2001). Der Ereignisbegriff in der Publizistikwissenschaft. Publizistik, 46(2), 117–139. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/s11616-001-0032-3
  221. Kepplinger, H. M., Brosius, H.-B. & Staab, J. F. (1991). Opinion formation in mediated conflicts and crises: A theory of cognitive-affective media effects. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 3(2), 132–156. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/3.2.132
  222. Kepplinger, H. M., Geiss, S. & Siebert, S. (2012). Framing scandals: Cognitive and emotional media effects. Journal of Communication, 62(4), 659–681. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01653.x
  223. Kepplinger, H. M. & Maurer, M. (2001). Saldo oder Mittelwert? Eine vorläufige Antwort auf eine ungestellte Frage. In F. Marcinkowski (Hrsg.), Die Politik der Massenmedien. Heribert Schatz zum 65. Geburtstag (S. 166–180). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  224. Kim, H. J. & Cameron, G. T. (2011). Emotions matter in crisis: The role of anger and sadness in the publics' response to crisis news framing and corporate crisis response. Communication Research, 38(6), 826–855. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0093650210385813
  225. Kim, S.-H., Han, M. & Scheufele, D. A. (2010). Thinking about him this way: Priming, news media, and South Koreans' evaluation of the president. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(3), 299–319. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edp057
  226. Kincaid, D. L. (2002). Drama, emotion, and cultural convergence. Communication Theory, 12(2), 136–152. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2002.tb00263.x
  227. Kinder, D. R. (1998). Opinion and action in the realm of politics. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske & G. Lindzey (Hrsg.), The handbook of social psychology (4. Auflage, Band 2, S. 778–867). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar öffnen
  228. Kinder, D. R. (2007). Curmudgeonly advice. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 155–162. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00335.x
  229. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163–182. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163
  230. Kiousis, S., Bantimaroudis, P. & Ban, H. (1999). Candidate image attributes: Experiments on the substantive dimension of second level agenda setting. Communication Research, 26(4), 414–428. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/009365099026004003
  231. Klapper, J. T. (1969). The effects of mass communication (10. Auflage). New York, NY: The Free Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  232. Kleinginna, P. R. & Kleinginna, A. M. (1981). A categorized list of emotion definitions, with suggestions for a consensual definition. Motivation and Emotion, 5(4), 345–379. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/BF00992553
  233. Klimmt, C. & Weber, R. (2013). Das Experiment in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. In W. Möhring & D. Schlütz (Hrsg.), Handbuch standardisierte Erhebungsverfahren in der Kommunikationswissenschaft (S. 125–144). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  234. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3. Auflage). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  235. Knobloch, S., Patzig, G., Mende, A.-M. & Hastall, M. (2004). Affective news: Effects of discourse structure in narratives on suspense, curiosity, and enjoyment while reading news and novels. Communication Research, 31(3), 259–287. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0093650203261517
  236. Kriesi, H. (2012). Political communication: An integrated approach. In H. Kriesi (Hrsg.), Political communication in direct democratic campaigns. Enlightening or manipulating? (S. 1–16). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  237. Kromrey, H. (1998). Empirische Sozialforschung: Modelle und Methoden der Datenerhebung und Datenauswertung (8. Auflage). Opladen: Leske + Budrich. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-85563-3
  238. Kromrey, H. (2009). Empirische Sozialforschung: Modelle und Methoden der standardisierten Datenerhebung und Datenauswertung (12. Auflage). Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius. Google Scholar öffnen
  239. Krosnick, J. A. & Brannon, L. A. (1993). The impact of the Gulf War on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Multidimensional effects of political involvement. American Political Science Review, 87(4), 963–975. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/2938828
  240. Krosnick, J. A., Judd, C. M. & Wittenbrink, B. (2005). The measurement of attitudes. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson & M. P. Zanna (Hrsg.), The handbook of attitudes (S. 21–76). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  241. Krosnick, J. A. & Kinder, D. R. (1990). Altering the foundations of support for the president through priming. American Political Science Review, 84(2), 497–512. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/1963531
  242. Kuhlmann, C. (2007). Die vieldimensionale Welt: Themenanalysen und das Problem der Kommunikationswissenschaft mit der Realität. In W. Wirth, H.-J. Stiehler & C. Wünsch (Hrsg.), Dynamisch-transaktional denken. Theorie und Empirie der Kommunikationswissenschaft (S. 126–152). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  243. Kühne, R. (2010). Dem Zufall auf der Spur: Zur Verwendung statistischer Testverfahren bei Convenience-Samples und Vollerhebungen. In N. Jackob, T. Zerback, O. Jandura & M. Maurer (Hrsg.), Das Internet als Forschungsinstrument und -gegenstand in der Kommunikationswissenschaft (S. 227–245). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  244. Kühne, R. (2012). Media-induced affects and opinion formation: How related and unrelated affects influence political opinions. Living Reviews in Democracy, 3. Google Scholar öffnen
  245. Kühne, R. (2013a). Emotionale Framing-Effekte auf Einstellungen: Ein integratives Modell. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 61(1), 5–20. Google Scholar öffnen
  246. Kühne, R. (2013b). Konzeptspezifikation und Messung. In W. Möhring & D. Schlütz (Hrsg.), Handbuch standardisierte Erhebungsverfahren in der Kommunikationswissenschaft (S. 23–40). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  247. Kühne, R. (2013c). Testing measurement invariance in media psychological research. Journal of Media Psychology, 25(4), 153–159. Google Scholar öffnen
  248. Kühne, R. (2014). Emotionale Wirkungen von Kommunikatoren- und Journalisten-Frames. In W. Loosen & M. Dohle (Hrsg.), Journalismus und (sein) Publikum. Schnittstellen zwischen Journalismusforschung und Rezeptions- und Wirkungsforschung (S. 301–316). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  249. Kühne, R. & Schemer, C. (2013). The emotional effects of news frames on information processing and opinion formation. Communication Research. Advance online publication. Google Scholar öffnen
  250. Kühne, R., Schemer, C. & Matthes, J. (2012). Messinvarianz in der komparativen Forschung: Eine Bestandsaufnahme. In B. Stark, M. Magin, O. Jandura & M. Maurer (Hrsg.), Methodische Herausforderungen komparativer Forschungsansätze (S. 238–257). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  251. Kühne, R., Schemer, C., Matthes, J. & Wirth, W. (2011). Affective priming in political campaigns: How campaign-induced emotions prime political opinions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 23(4), 485–507. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edr004
  252. Kühne, R., Sommer, K. & Weber, P. (in Druck). Kognitive und emotionale Framing-Effekte auf Einstellungen: Überlegungen zur Relevanz der Untersuchung von Mediationsprozessen und eine empirische Überprüfung. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft. Google Scholar öffnen
  253. Kühne, R., Weber, P. & Sommer, K. (in Druck). Beyond cognitive framing processes: Anger mediates the effects of responsibility framing on the preference for punitive measures. Journal of Communication. Google Scholar öffnen
  254. Kuppens, P. & Tong, E. M. W. (2010). An appraisal account of individual differences in emotional experience. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(12), 1138–1150. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00324.x
  255. Kuppens, P., van Mechelen, I., Smits, D. J. M. & De Boeck, P. (2003). The appraisal basis of anger: Specificity, necessity, and sufficiency of components. Emotion, 2(3), 254–269. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.3.3.254
  256. Lang, A. (2013). Discipline in crisis? The shifting paradigm of mass communication research. Communication Theory, 23(1), 10–24. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/comt.12000
  257. Lang, A., Bolls, P., Potter, R. F. & Kawahara, K. (1999). The effects of production pacing and arousing content on the information processing of television messages. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43(4), 451–475. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/08838159909364504
  258. Lang, A. & Ewoldsen, D. R. (2011). The measurement of positive and negative affect in media research. In K. Döveling, C. von Scheve & E. A. Konijn (Hrsg.), The Routledge handbook of emotions and mass media (S. 79–98). London: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen
  259. Lang, A., Zhou, S., Schwartz, N., Bolls, P. D. & Potter, R. F. (2000). The effects of edits on arousal, attention, and memory for television messages: When an edit is an edit can an edit be too much? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(1), 94–109. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4401_7
  260. Lau, R. R., Smith, R. A. & Fiske, S. T. (1991). Political beliefs, policy interpretations, and political persuasion. The Journal of Politics, 53(3), 644–675. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/2131574
  261. Laurent, S. M., Clark, B. A. M., Walker, S. & Wiseman, K. D. (2014). Punishing hypocrisy: The roles of hypocrisy and moral emotions in deciding culpability and punishment of criminal and civil moral transgressors. Cognition & Emotion, 28(1), 59–83. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2013.801339
  262. Laux, L., Glanzmann, P., Schaffner, P. & Spielberger, C. D. (1981). Das State-Trait-Angstinventar: Theoretische Grundlagen und Handanweisung. Weinheim: Beltz Test. Google Scholar öffnen
  263. Lazarus, R. S. (1984). On the primacy of cognition. American Psychologist, 39(2), 124–129. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.39.2.124
  264. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion & adaptation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  265. Lecheler, S. & de Vreese, C. H. (2010). Framing Serbia: The effects of news framing on public support for EU enlargement. European Political Science Review, 2(1), 73–93. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S1755773909990233
  266. Lecheler, S. & de Vreese, C. H. (2012). News framing and public opinion: A mediation analysis of framing effects on political attitudes. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 89(2), 185–204. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1077699011430064
  267. Lecheler, S., de Vreese, C. & Slothuus, R. (2009). Issue importance as a moderator of framing effects. Communication Research, 36(3), 400–425. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0093650209333028
  268. Lecheler, S., Schuck, A. R. T. & de Vreese, C. H. (2013). Dealing with feelings: Positive and negative discrete emotions as mediators of news framing effects. Communications, 38(2), 189–209. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1515/commun-2013-0011
  269. Lecheler, S., Schuck, A. R. T., de Vreese, C. H., Nelson, T. E. & de Lange, M. (2012). Happy go lucky: Mood as moderator of political news framing effects. Paper presented at the 2012 annual meetings of the International Communication Association (ICA), Phoenix, AZ, Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1077699011430064
  270. LeDoux, J. E. (1999). The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings of emotional life. London: Phoenix. Google Scholar öffnen
  271. Lench, H. C., Flores, S. A. & Bench, S. W. (2011). Discrete emotions predict changes in cognition, judgment, experience, behavior, and physiology: A meta-analysis of experimental emotion elicitations. Psychological Bulletin, 137(5), 834–855. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/a0024244
  272. Leonarz, M. (2006). Gentechnik im Fernsehen: Eine Framing-Analyse. Konstanz: UVK. Google Scholar öffnen
  273. Lerner, J. S., Goldberg, J. H. & Tetlock, P. E. (1998). Sober second thought: The effects of accountability, anger, and authoritarianism on attributions of responsibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(6), 563–574. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0146167298246001
  274. Lerner, J. S., Gonzalez, R. M., Small, D. A. & Fischhoff, B. (2003). Effects of fear and anger on perceived risks of terrorism: A national field experiment. Psychological Science, 14(2), 144–150. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.01433
  275. Lerner, J. S., Han, S. & Keltner, D. (2007). Feelings and consumer decision making: Extending the appraisal-tendency framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(3), 181–187. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70027-X
  276. Lerner, J. S. & Keltner, D. (2000). Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgment and choice. Cognition and Emotion, 14(4), 473–493. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/026999300402763
  277. Lerner, J. S. & Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 146–159. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.146
  278. Lerner, J. S. & Tiedens, L. Z. (2006). Portrait of the angry decision maker: How appraisal tendencies shape anger's influence on cognition. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19(2), 115–137. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1002/bdm.515
  279. Leventhal, H. (1982). A perceptual motor theory of emotion. Social Science Information, 21(6), 819–845. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/053901882021006003
  280. Leventhal, H. (1984). A perceptual-motor theory of emotion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 117–182. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60119-7
  281. Leventhal, H. & Scherer, K. (1987). The relationship of emotion to cognition: A functional approach to a semantic controversy. Cognition and Emotion, 1(1), 3–28. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02699938708408361
  282. Lewis, S. C. & Reese, S. D. (2009). What is the war on terror? Framing through the eyes of journalists. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(1), 85–102. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/107769900908600106
  283. Lieberman, M. D., Gaunt, R., Gilbert, D. T. & Trope, Y. (2002). Reflexion and reflection: A social cognitive neuroscience approach to attributional inference. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 199–249. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80006-5
  284. Lieberman, M. D., Schreiber, D. & Ochsner, K. N. (2003). Is political cognition like riding a bicycle? How cognitive neuroscience can inform research on political thinking. Political Psychology, 24(4), 681–704. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-9221.2003.00347.x
  285. Loewenstein, G. (1996). Out of control: Visceral influences on behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65(3), 272–292. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.0028
  286. Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J. & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Communication Research, 28(4), 587–604. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00826.x
  287. Lucas, J. W. (2003). Theory-testing, generalization, and the problem of external validity. Sociological Theory, 21(3), 236–253. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/1467-9558.00187
  288. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S. & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84–99. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84
  289. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L. & Lockwood, C. M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding and suppression effect. Prevention Science, 1(4), 173–181. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1023/A:1026595011371
  290. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M. & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1), 99–128. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4
  291. Macrae, C. N. & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 93–120. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.93
  292. Maio, G. R. & Esses, V. M. (2001). The need for affect: Individual differences in the motivation to approach or avoid emotions. Journal of Personality, 69(4), 583–615. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.694156
  293. Major, L. H. (2009). Break it to me harshly: The effects of intersecting news frames in lung cancer and obesity coverage. Journal of Health Communication, 14(2), 174–188. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/10810730802659939
  294. Major, L. H. (2011). The mediating role of emotions in the relationship between frames and attribution of responsibility for health problems. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 88(3), 502–522. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/107769901108800303
  295. Mangold, R., Unz, D. & Winterhoff-Spurk, P. (2001). Zur Erklärung emotionaler Medienwirkungen: Leistungsfähigkeit, empirische Überprüfung und Fortentwicklung theoretischer Ansätze. In P. Rössler, U. Hasebrink & M. Jäckel (Hrsg.), Theoretische Perspektiven der Rezeptionsforschung (S. 163–180). München: Verlag Reinhard Fischer. Google Scholar öffnen
  296. Manucia, G. K., Baumann, D. J. & Cialdini, R. B. (1984). Mood influences on helping: Direct effects or side effects? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(2), 357–364. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.2.357
  297. Marcus, G. E. (2002). The sentimental citizen: Emotion in democratic politics. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  298. Marcus, G. E. & MacKuen, M. B. (1993). Anxiety, enthusiasm, and the vote: The emotional underpinnings of learning and involvement during presidential campaigns. The American Political Science Review, 87(3), 672–685. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/2938743
  299. Martin, J. P. & Grubb, D. (2001). What works and for whom: A review of OECD countries' experiences with active labour market policies. Swedish Economic Policy Review, 8(2), 9–56. Google Scholar öffnen
  300. Martin, R., Watson, D. & Wan, C. K. (2000). A three-factor model of trait anger: Dimensions of affect, behavior, and cognition. Journal of Personality, 68(5), 869–897. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00119
  301. Martinsen, R. (2009). Öffentlichkeit in der "Mediendemokratie" aus der Perspektive konkurrierender Demokratietheorien. In F. Marcinkowski & B. Pfetsch (Hrsg.), Politische Viertelsjahresschrift. Politik in der Mediendemokratie (S. 37–59). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  302. Matthes, J. (2004). Die Schema-Theorie in der Medienwirkungsforschung: Ein unscharfer Blick in die "Black Box"? Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 52(4), 545–568. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2004-4-545
  303. Matthes, J. (2007a). Beyond accessibility? Toward an on-line and memory-based model of framing effects. Communications, 32(1), 51–78. Google Scholar öffnen
  304. Matthes, J. (2007b). Framing-Effekte: Zum Einfluss der Politikberichterstattung auf die Einstellungen der Rezipienten. Reihe Rezeptionsforschung Band 13. München: Verlag Reinhard Fischer. Google Scholar öffnen
  305. Matthes, J. (2008a). Medien-Frames inhaltsynalytisch (be)greifen: Eine Analyse von 135 nationalen und internationalen Fachzeitschriftenaufsätzen, 1990–2005. In J. Matthes, W. Wirth, G. Daschmann & A. Fahr (Hrsg.), Methoden und Forschungslogik der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Band 3: Die Brücke zwischen Theorie und Empirie. Operationalisierung, Messung und Validierung in der Kommunikationswissenschaft (S. 157–177). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  306. Matthes, J. (2008b). Need for orientation as a predictor of agenda-setting effects: Causal evidence from a two-wave panel study. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20(4), 440–453. Google Scholar öffnen
  307. Matthes, J. (2009a). Framing responsibility for political issues: The preference for dispositional attributions and the effects of news frames. Communication Research Reports, 26(1), 82–86. Google Scholar öffnen
  308. Matthes, J. (2009b). What's in a frame? A content analysis of media framing studies in the world's leading communication journals, 1990–2005. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(2), 349–367. Google Scholar öffnen
  309. Matthes, J. (2012). Framing Politics: An Integrative Approach. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 247–259. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426324
  310. Matthes, J. & Kohring, M. (2003). Operationalisierung von Vertrauen in Journalismus. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 51(1), 5–23. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2003-1-5
  311. Matthes, J. & Kohring, M. (2004). Die empirische Erfassung von Medien-Frames. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 52(1), 56–75. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2004-1-56
  312. Matthes, J. & Kohring, M. (2008). The content analysis of media frames: Toward improving reliability and validity. Journal of Communication, 58(2), 258–279. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00384.x
  313. Maurer, M. (2012). Die Kombination von Inhaltsanalyse- und Befragungsdaten in der Medienwirkungsforschung: Theoretische Überlegungen und methodische Entscheidungs-prozesse. In W. Loosen & A. Scholl (Hrsg.), Methodenkombinationen in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Methodologische Herausforderungen und empirische Praxis (S. 89–101). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  314. Mazzoleni, G. & Schulz, W. (1999). "Mediatization" of politics: A challenge for democracy? Political Communication, 16(3), 247–261. Google Scholar öffnen
  315. McCombs, M. (2004). Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion. Cambridge: Polity Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  316. McCombs, M. E. & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1086/267990
  317. McCombs, M. & Ghanem, S. I. (2001). The convergence of agenda setting and framing. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy & A. E. Grant (Hrsg.), Framing public life. Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (S. 67–81). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  318. McCombs, M., Llamas, J. P., Lopez-Escobar, E. & Rey, F. (1997). Candidate images in Spanish elections: Second-level agenda-setting effects. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(4), 703–717. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/107769909707400404
  319. McCombs, M., Lopez-Escobar, E. & Llamas, J. P. (2000). Setting the agenda of attributes in the 1996 Spanish general election. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 77–92. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02842.x
  320. McCombs, M., Shaw, D. L. & Weaver, D. (Hrsg.). (1997). Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda-setting theory. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  321. McDermott, R. (2004). The feeling of rationality: The meaning of neuroscientific advances for political science. Perspectives on Politics, 2(4), 691–706. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S1537592704040459
  322. McKay, A., Campbell, J., Thomson, E. & Ross, S. (2013). Economic recession and recovery in the UK: What's gender got to do with it? Feminist Economics, 19(3), 108–123. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2013.808762
  323. McLeod, J. M., Becker, L. B. & Byrnes, J. E. (1974). Another Look At the Agenda-Setting Function of the Press. Communication Research, 1(2), 131–166. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/009365027400100201
  324. McNemar, Q. (1946). Opinion-attitude methodology. Psychological Bulletin, 43(4), 289–374. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/h0060985
  325. Meijnders, A. L., Midden, C. J. H. & Wilke, H. A. M. (2001). Role of negative emotion in communication about CO2 risks. Risk Analysis, 21(5), 955–966. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.215164
  326. Meyer, W.-U., Reisenzein, R. & Schützwohl, A. (1997). Toward a process analysis of emotions: The case of surprise. Motivation and Emotion, 21(3), 251–274. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1023/A:1024422330338
  327. Millar, M. G. & Millar, K. U. (1990). Attitude change as a function of attitude type and argument type. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(2), 217–228. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.2.217
  328. Miller, A. H., Goldenberg, E. N. & Erbrbing, L. (1979). Type-set politics: Impact of newspapers on public confidence. The American Political Science Review, 73(1), 67–84. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/1954731
  329. Miller, J. M. (2007). Examining the mediators of agenda setting: A new experimental paradigm reveals the role of emotions. Political Psychology, 28(6), 689–717. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00600.x
  330. Miller, J. M. & Krosnick, J. A. (2000). News media impact on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Politically knowledgeable citizens are guided by a trusted source. American Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 295–309. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/2669312
  331. Miller, M. M., Andsager, J. L. & Riechert, B. P. (1998). Framing the candidates in presidential primaries: Issues and images in press releases and news coverage. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 75(2), 312–324. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/107769909807500207
  332. Mitchell, M. M., Brown, K. M., Morris-Villagran, M. & Villagran, P. D. (2001). The effects of anger, sadness and happiness on persuasive message processing: A test of the negative state relief model. Communication Monographs, 68(4), 347–359. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/03637750128070
  333. Monahan, J. L., Shtrulis, I. & Givens, S. B. (2005). Priming Welfare Queens and Other Stereotypes: The Transference of Media Images into Interpersonal Contexts A previous version of this manuscript was presented at the 48th annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Diego (2004). Communication Research Reports, 22(3), 199–205. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/00036810500207014
  334. Moors, A. (2009). Theories of emotion causation: A review. Cognition and Emotion, 23(4), 625–662. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02699930802645739
  335. Moors, A. (2013). On the causal role of appraisal in emotion. Emotion Review, 5(2), 132–140. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1754073912463601
  336. Moors, A., Ellsworth, P. C., Scherer, K. R. & Frijda, N. H. (2013). Appraisal theories of emotion: State of the art and future development. Emotion Review, 5(2), 119–124. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1754073912468165
  337. Murray, M. & Millar, R. (1992). Lay explanations of and solutions to unemployment in Northern Ireland. Work & Stress, 6(4), 367–378. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02678379208259967
  338. Nabi, R. L. (1999). A cognitive-functional model for the effects of discrete negative emotions on information processing, attitude change, and recall. Communication Theory, 9(3), 292–320. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00172.x
  339. Nabi, R. L. (2002). Anger, fear, uncertainty, and attitudes: A test of the cognitive-functional model. Communication Monographs, 69(3), 204–216. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/03637750216541
  340. Nabi, R. L. (2003). Exploring the framing effects of emotion: Do discrete emotions differently influence information accessibility, information seeking, and policy preference. Communication Research, 30(2), 224–247. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0093650202250881
  341. Nabi, R. L. (2007). Emotion and persuasion: A social-cognitive perspective. In D. R. Roskos-Ewoldsen & J. L. Monahan (Hrsg.), Communication and social cognition. Theories and methods (S. 377–398). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  342. Nabi, R. L. (2009). Emotion and media effects. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Hrsg.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and effects (S. 205–221). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  343. Nabi, R. L. (2010). The case for emphasizing discrete emotions in communication research. Communication Monographs, 77(2), 153–159. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/03637751003790444
  344. Neidhardt, F. (1994). Öffentlichkeit, öffentliche Meinung, soziale Bewegungen. In F. Neidhardt (Hrsg.), Öffentlichkeit, öffentliche Meinung, soziale Bewegungen (S. 7–41). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  345. Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A. & Oxley, Z. M. (1997). Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91(3), 567–583. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/2952075
  346. Nelson, T. E. & Kinder, D. R. (1996). Issue frames and group-centrism in American public opinion. The Journal of Politics, 58(4), 1055–1078. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/2960149
  347. Nelson, T. E. & Oxley, Z. M. (1999). Issue framing effects on belief importance and opinion. The Journal of Politics, 61(4), 1040–1067. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.2307/2647553
  348. Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M. & Clawson, R. A. (1997). Toward a psychology of framing effects. Political Behavior, 19(3), 221–246. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1023/A:1024834831093
  349. Nelson, T. E. & Willey, E. A. (2001). Issue frames that strike a value balance: A political psychology perspective. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy & A. E. Grant (Hrsg.), Framing public life. Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (S. 245–266). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  350. Nerb, J. (2000). Die Bewertung von Umweltschäden: Kognitive und emotionale Folgen von Medienmeldungen. Bern: Hans Huber. Google Scholar öffnen
  351. Nerb, J. & Spada, H. (2001). Evaluation of environmental problems: A coherence model of cognition and emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 15(4), 521–551. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02699930126254
  352. Nerb, J., Spada, H. & Lay, K. (2001). Environmental risk in the media: Modeling the reactions of the audience. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, 9, 57–85. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/S0196-1152(01)80024-7
  353. Nerb, J., Spada, H. & Wahl, S. (1998). Kognition und Emotion bei der Bewertung von Umweltschadensfällen: Modellierung und Empirie. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 45(4), 251–269. Google Scholar öffnen
  354. Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  355. Neuman, W. R., Just, M. R. & Crigler, A. N. (1992). Common knowledge: News and the construction of political meaning. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  356. Nickel-Bacon, I., Groeben, N. & Schreier, M. (2000). Fiktionssignale pragmatisch: Ein medienübergreifendes Modell zur Unterscheidung von Fiktion(en) und Realität(en), 32(3–4), 267–299. Google Scholar öffnen
  357. Nickell, S. (1997). Unemployment and labor market rigidities: Europe versus North America. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(3), 55–74. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1257/jep.11.3.55
  358. Oatley, K. & Jenkins, J. M. (1996). Understanding emotions. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Google Scholar öffnen
  359. Oatley, K. & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1987). Towards a cognitive theory of emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 1(1), 29–50. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02699938708408362
  360. O'Keefe, D. J. (2003). Message properties, mediating states, and manipulation checks: Claims, evidence, and data analysis in experimental persuasive message effects research. Communication Theory, 13(3), 251–274. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2003.tb00292.x
  361. O'Keefe, D. J. (2009). Theories of persuasion. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Hrsg.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and effects (S. 269–282). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  362. Oliver, M. B. (1993). Exploring the paradox of the enjoyment of sad films. Human Communication Research, 19(3), 315–342. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1993.tb00304.x
  363. Oliver, M. B. & Bartsch, A. (2010). Appreciation as audience response: Exploring entertainment gratifications beyond hedonism. Human Communication Research, 36(1), 53–81. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01368.x
  364. Ortony, A., Clore, G. L. & Collins, A. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571299
  365. Ostrom, T. M. (1969). The relationship between the affective, behavioral, and cognitive components of attitude. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5(1), 12–30. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(69)90003-1
  366. Otto, J. H., Euler, H. A. & Mandl, H. (2000a). Begriffsbestimmungen. In J. H. Otto, H. A. Euler & H. Mandl (Hrsg.), Emotionspsychologie. Ein Handbuch (S. 11–18). Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union. Google Scholar öffnen
  367. Otto, J. H., Euler, H. A. & Mandl, H. (Hrsg.) (2000b). Emotionspsychologie: Ein Handbuch. Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union. Google Scholar öffnen
  368. Palazzolo, K. E. & Roberto, A. J. (2011). Media representations of intimate partner violence and punishment preferences: Exploring the role of attributions and emotions. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 39(1), 1–18. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2010.536843
  369. Pan, Z. & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10(1), 55–75. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/10584609.1993.9962963
  370. Pan, Z. & Kosicki, G. M. (1997). Priming and media impact on the evaluations of the president's performance. Communication Research, 24(1), 3–30. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/009365097024001001
  371. Pan, Z. & Kosicki, G. M. (2001). Framing as a strategic action in public deliberation. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy & A. E. Grant (Hrsg.), Framing public life. Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (S. 35–65). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  372. Pan, Z. & Kosicki, G. M. (2005). Framing and the understanding of citizenship. In S. Dunwoody, L. B. Becker, D. M. McLeod & G. M. Kosicki (Hrsg.), The evolution of key mass communication concepts. Honoring Jack M. McLeod (S. 165–204). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  373. Parmelee, J. (2002). Presidential primary videocassettes: How candidates in the 2000 U.S. presidential primary elections framed their early campaigns. Political Communication, 19(3), 317–331. Google Scholar öffnen
  374. Patterson, T. E. (1993). Out of order. New York, NY: Vintage Books. Google Scholar öffnen
  375. Peter, J. (2002). Medien-Priming: Grundlagen, Befunde und Forschungstendenzen. Publizistik, 47(1), 21–44. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/s11616-002-0002-4
  376. Peters, B. (1994). Der Sinn von Öffentlichkeit. In F. Neidhardt (Hrsg.), Öffentlichkeit, öffentliche Meinung, soziale Bewegungen (S. 42–76). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  377. Peterson, R. A. & Kim, Y. (2013). On the relationship between coefficient alpha and composite reliability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(1), 194–198. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/a0030767
  378. Petty, R. E. & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approach. Dubuque, IA: Brown. Google Scholar öffnen
  379. Petty, R. E. & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123–205. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2
  380. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T. & Kasmer, J. A. (1988). The role of affect in the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Donohew, H. E. Sypher & T. E. Higgins (Hrsg.), Communication, social cognition, and affect (S. 117–146). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  381. Petty, R. E., DeSteno, D. & Rucker, D. D. (2001). The role of affect in attitude change. In J. P. Forgas (Hrsg.), Handbook of affect and social cognition (S. 212–233). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  382. Petty, R. E., Gleicher, F. & Baker, S. M. (1991). Multiple roles for affect in persuasion. In J. P. Forgas (Hrsg.), Emotion and social judgments (S. 181–200). Oxford: Pergamon Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  383. Petty, R. E., Schumann, D. W., Richman, S. A. & Strathman, A. J. (1993). Positive mood and persuasion: Different roles for affect under high- and low-elaboration conditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(1), 5–20. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.1.5
  384. Petty, R. E., Wegener, D. T. & Fabrigar, L. R. (1997). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 609–647. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.609
  385. Pfeiffer, T., Manz, S. & Nerb, J. (2005). Wer den Schaden macht, hat auch das Wissen: Kohärenzeffekte der kognitiven und emotionalen Bewertung von Umweltschäden. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 213(1), 44–58. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1026/0044-3409.213.1.44
  386. Pham, M. T. (2007). Emotion and rationality: A critical review and interpretation of empirical evidence. Review of General Psychology, 11(2), 155–178. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.11.2.155
  387. Ping, R. A. (2009). Estimating endogenous interactions. Abgerufen von www.wright.edu/ ~robert.ping/endog_ints2.doc (21.12.13) Google Scholar öffnen
  388. Potthoff, M. (2012). Medien-Frames und ihre Entstehung. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-19648-0
  389. Preacher, K. J. & Hayes, A. F. (2008a). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. Google Scholar öffnen
  390. Preacher, K. J. & Hayes, A. F. (2008b). Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in communication research. In A. F. Hayes, M. D. Slater & L. B. Snyder (Hrsg.), The Sage sourcebook of advanced data analysis methods for communication research (S. 13–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen
  391. Preston, S. D. & de Waal, F. B. M. (2001). Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(1), 1–72. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X02000018
  392. Price, V. & Tewksbury, D. (1997). News values and public opinion: A theoretical account of media priming and framing. In G. A. Barnett & F. J. Boster (Hrsg.), Progress in Communication Sciences: Band 13. Advances in Persuasion (S. 173–212). Greenwich, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Google Scholar öffnen
  393. Price, V., Tewksbury, D. & Powers, E. (1997). Switching trains of thought: The impact of news frames on readers' cognitive responses. Communication Research, 24(5), 481–506. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/009365097024005002
  394. Raghunathan, R. & Pham, M. T. (1999). All negative moods are not equal: Motivational influences of anxiety and sadness on decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79(1), 56–77. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1999.2838
  395. Raghunathan, R., Pham, M. T. & Corfman, K. P. (2006). Informational properties of anxiety and sadness, and displaced coping. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 596–601. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1086/500491
  396. Raykov, T. (1997). Scale reliability, Cronbach's coefficient alpha, and violations of essential tau-equivalence with fixed congeneric components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32(4), 329–353. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3204_2
  397. Reese, S. D. (2001). Prologue – Framing public life: A bridging model for media research. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy & A. E. Grant (Hrsg.), Framing public life. Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (S. 7–31). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  398. Reese, S. D. (2007). The framing project: A bridging model for media research revisited. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 148–154. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00334.x
  399. Reinecke, J. (2005). Strukturgleichungsmodelle in den Sozialwissenschaften. München: Oldenbourg. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1524/9783486710830
  400. Reisenzein, R. (2000). Einschätzungstheoretische Ansätze. In J. H. Otto, H. A. Euler & H. Mandl (Hrsg.), Emotionspsychologie. Ein Handbuch (S. 117–138). Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union. Google Scholar öffnen
  401. Roseman, I. J. (2001). A model of appraisal in the emotion system: Integrating research, theory, and applications. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr & T. Johnstone (Hrsg.), Appraisal processes in emotion. Theory, methods, research (S. 68–91). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  402. Roseman, I. J. (2013). Appraisal in the emotion system: Coherence in strategies for coping. Emotion Review, 5(2), 141–149. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1754073912469591
  403. Roseman, I. J. & Smith, C. A. (2001). Appraisal theory: Overview, assumptions, varieties, controversies. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr & T. Johnstone (Hrsg.), Appraisal processes in emotion. Theory, methods, research (S. 3–19). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  404. Roseman, I. J., Spindel, M. S. & Jose, P. E. (1990). Appraisals of emotion-eliciting events: Testing a theory of discrete emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 899–915. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.899
  405. Roseman, I. J., Wiest, C. & Swartz, T. S. (1994). Phenomenology, behaviors, and goals differentiate discrete emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 206–221. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.206
  406. Rosenberg, M. J. (1956). Cognitive structure and attitudinal affect. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53(3), 367–372. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/h0044579
  407. Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R., Roskos-Ewoldsen, B. & Carpentier, F. D. (2009). Media Priming: An updated synthesis. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Hrsg.), Media effects. Advances in theory and research (3. Auflage, S. 74–93). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen
  408. Rössler, P. (1999). The individual agenda-designing process: How interpersonal communication, egocentric networks, and mass media shape the perception of political issues by individuals. Communication Research, 26(6), 666–700. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/009365099026006002
  409. Rössler, P. (2005). Inhaltsanalyse. Konstanz: UTB. Google Scholar öffnen
  410. Rössler, P. (2006). Zur Logik der Agenda-Setting-Forschung. In W. Wirth, A. Fahr & E. Lauf (Hrsg.), Forschungslogik und -design in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Anwendungsfelder in der Kommunikationswissenschaft (Band 2, S. 139–167). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  411. Rössler, P. & Schenk, M. (2000). Cognitive bonding and the German reunification: Agenda-setting and persuasion effects of mass media. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 12(1), 29–47. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/12.1.29
  412. Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). Schemata: Building blocks of cognition. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce & W. F. Brewer (Hrsg.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension. Perspectives from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education (S. 33–58). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  413. Sawyer, M. (2012). The tragedy of UK fiscal policy in the aftermath of the financial crisis. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36(1), 205–221. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/cje/ber043
  414. Saxer, U. & Märki-Koepp, M. (1992). Medien-Gefühlskultur: Zielgruppenspezifische Gefühlsdramaturgie als journalistische Produktionsroutine. München: Ölschläger. Google Scholar öffnen
  415. Schaal, G. S. & Heidenreich, F. (2013). Politik der Gefühle: Zur Rolle von Emotionen in der Demokratie. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, 63(32–33), 3–11. Google Scholar öffnen
  416. Schemer, C. (2009). Politische Kampagnen für Herz und Verstand: Affektive und kognitive Einflüsse der Massenmedien auf politische Einstellungen. Reihe Rezeptionsforschung Band 19. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/9783845220574
  417. Schemer, C. (2013). Priming, Framing, Stereotype. In W. Schweiger & A. Fahr (Hrsg.), Handbuch Medienwirkungsforschung (S. 153–169). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  418. Schemer, C. & Wirth, W. (2013). Methods report for the cross-national survey project "The strategies and processes of attitude formation and public participation in comparative perspective". Manuskript, Universität Zürich. Google Scholar öffnen
  419. Schemer, C., Wirth, W. & Matthes, J. (2012). Value resonance and value framing effects on voting intentions in direct-democratic campaigns. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 334–352. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426329
  420. Schenk, M. (2007). Medienwirkungsforschung (3. Auflage). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-151656-6
  421. Scherer, K. R. (1987). Toward a dynamic theory of emotion: The component process model of affective states. Geneva Studies in Emotion and Communication, 1(1), 1–98. Google Scholar öffnen
  422. Scherer, K. R. (2001a). Appraisal considered as a process of multilevel sequential checking. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr & T. Johnstone (Hrsg.), Appraisal processes in emotion. Theory, methods, research (S. 92–120). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  423. Scherer, K. R. (2001b). The nature and study of appraisal: A review of the issues. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr & T. Johnstone (Hrsg.), Appraisal processes in emotion. Theory, methods, research (S. 369–391). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  424. Scherer, K. R. (2004). Feelings integrate the central representation of appraisal-driven response organization. In A. S. R. Manstead, N. H. Frijda & A. H. Fischer (Hrsg.), Feelings and emotions. The Amsterdam symposium (S. 136–157). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  425. Scherer, K. R. (2005). What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Social Science Information, 44(4), 695–729. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0539018405058216
  426. Scherer, K. R. (2009a). Emotions are emergent processes: They require a dynamic computational architecture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 364(1535), 3459–3474. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0141
  427. Scherer, K. R. (2009b). The dynamic architecture of emotion: Evidence for the component process model. Cognition and Emotion, 23(7), 1307–1351. Google Scholar öffnen
  428. Schermelleh-Engel, K. & Moosbrugger, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74. Google Scholar öffnen
  429. Scheufele, B. (2003). Frames – Framing – Framing-Effekte: Theoretische und methodische Grundlegung des Framing-Ansatzes sowie empirische Befunde zur Nachrichtenproduktion. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-86656-1
  430. Scheufele, B. (2004a). Framing-effects approach: A theoretical and methodological critique. Communications, 29(4), 401–428. Google Scholar öffnen
  431. Scheufele, B. (2004b). Framing-Effekte auf dem Prüfstand: Eine theoretische, methodische und empirische Auseinandersetzung mit der Wirkungsperspektive des Framing-Ansatzes. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 52(1), 30–55. Google Scholar öffnen
  432. Scheufele, B. (2004c). Kurzfristige Effekte inhaltlicher Medien-Frames. Zeitschrift für Medienpsychologie, 16(4), 135–141. Google Scholar öffnen
  433. Scheufele, B. (2010). Verknüpfen und Urteilen: Ein Experiment zur Wirkung medialer Value-Frames, 58(1), 26–44. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2010-1-26
  434. Scheufele, B. & Gasteiger, C. (2007). Berichterstattung, Emotionen und politische Legitimierung: Eine experimentelle Untersuchung zum Einfluss der Politikbericherstattung auf die Legitimierung politischer Entscheidungen am Beispiel von Bundeswehreinsätzen. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 55(4), 534–554. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2007-4-534
  435. Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103–122. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x
  436. Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication and Society, 3(2&3), 297–316. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0323_07
  437. Scheufele, D. A. & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9–20. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00326.x
  438. Schlomer, G. L., Bauman, S. & Card, N. A. (2010). Best practices for missing data management in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57(1), 1–10. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/a0018082
  439. Schlueter, E., Davidov, E. & Schmidt, P. (2006). Applying autoregressive cross-Lagged and latent growth curve models to a three-wave panel study. In K. Montfort, H. Oud & A. Satorra (Hrsg.), Longitudinal models in the behavioral and related sciences (S. 315–336). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  440. Schmitt, A. & Mees, U. (2000). Trauer. In J. H. Otto, H. A. Euler & H. Mandl (Hrsg.), Emotionspsychologie. Ein Handbuch (S. 209–220). Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union. Google Scholar öffnen
  441. Schnell, R., Hill, P. B. & Esser, E. (1999). Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung (6. Auflage). München: Oldenbourg. Google Scholar öffnen
  442. Schorr, A. (2001). Appraisal: The evolution of an idea. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr & T. Johnstone (Hrsg.), Appraisal processes in emotion. Theory, methods, research (S. 20–34). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  443. Schramm, H. & Wirth, W. (2008). A case for an integrative view on affect regulation through media usage. Communications, 33(1), 27–46. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1515/COMMUN.2008.002
  444. Schroeder, L. D., Sjoquist, D. L. & Stephan, P. D. (1986). Understanding regression analysis: An introductory guide. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.4135/9781412986410
  445. Schuck, A. R. T. & de Vreese, C. H. (2006). Between risk and opportunity: News framing and its effects on public support for EU enlargement. European Journal of Communication, 21(1), 5–32. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0267323106060987
  446. Schuck, A. R. T. & Vreese, C. H. de. (2012). When good news is bad news: Explicating the moderated mediation dynamic behind the reversed mobilization effect. Journal of Communication, 62(1), 57–77. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01624.x
  447. Schultheiss, B. M. & Jenzowsky, S. A. (2000). Infotainment: Der Einfluss emotionalisierend-affekt-orientierter Darstellung auf die Glaubwürdigkeit. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 48(1), 63–84. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2000-1-63
  448. Schulz, W. (1990). Die Konstruktion von Realität in den Nachrichtenmedien: Analyse der aktuellen Berichterstattung (2. Auflage): Verlag Karl Alber. Google Scholar öffnen
  449. Schulz, W. (2007). Inhaltsanalyse plus: Ansätze zur Integration von Mitteilungs- und Rezipientendaten. In W. Wirth, H.-J. Stiehler & C. Wünsch (Hrsg.), Dynamisch-transaktional denken. Theorie und Empirie der Kommunikationswissenschaft (S. 108–125). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  450. Schwarz, N. (1990). Feelings as information: Informational and motivational functions of affective states. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Hrsg.), Handbook of motivation and cognition. Foundations of social behavior (S. 527–561). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  451. Schwarz, N. (2007). Attitude construction: Evaluation in context. Social Cognition, 25(5), 638–656. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.638
  452. Schwenkmezger, P., Hodapp, V. & Spielberger, C. D. (1992). Das State-Trait-Ärgerausdrucks-Inventar STAXI. Bern: Hans Huber. Google Scholar öffnen
  453. Semetko, H. A. & Valkenburg, P. M. (2000). Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 93–109. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02843.x
  454. Sheafer, T. (2007). How to evaluate it: The role of story-evaluative tone in agenda setting and priming. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 21–39. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9916.2007.00327.x
  455. Shen, F. (2004). Chronic accessibility and individual cognitions: Examining the effects of message frames in political advertisements. Journal of Communication, 54(1), 123–137. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02617.x
  456. Shen, L. & Dillard, J. P. (2007). The influence of behavioral inhibition/approach systems and message framing on the processing of persuasive health messages. Communication Research, 34(4), 433–467. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0093650207302787
  457. Shen, F., Lee, S. Y., Sipes, C. & Hu, F. (2012). Effects of media framing of obesity among adolescents. Communication Research Reports, 29(1), 26–33. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2011.639910
  458. Shiv, B. (2007). Emotions, decisions, and the brain. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(3), 174–178. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70025-6
  459. Shoemaker, P. J., Eichholz, M., Kim, E. & Wrigley, B. (2001). Individual and Routine Forces in gatekeeping. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(2), 233–246. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/107769900107800202
  460. Siegert, G. & von Rimscha, B. (2013). Economic bases of communication. In P. Cobley & P. J. Schulz (Hrsg.), Theories and models of communication (S. 123–146). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar öffnen
  461. Siemer, M., Mauss, I. & Gross, J. J. (2007). Same situation – different emotions: How appraisals shape our emotions. Emotion, 7(3), 592–600. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.3.592
  462. Simon, A. & Xenos, M. (2000). Media framing and effective public deliberation. Political Communication, 17(4), 363–376. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/10584600050178979
  463. Skitka, L. J. & Tetlock, P. E. (1993). Providing public assistance: Cognitive and motivational processes underlying liberal and conservative policy preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(6), 1205–1223. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.6.1205
  464. Slater, M. D. & Rouner, D. (2002). Entertainment-education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion. Communication Theory, 12(2), 173–191. Google Scholar öffnen
  465. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 3–22. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.3
  466. Slothuus, R. (2008). More than weighting cognitive importance: A dual-process model of issue framing effects. Political Psychology, 29(1), 1–28. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00610.x
  467. Small, D. A. & Lerner, J. S. (2008). Emotional policy: Personal sadness and anger shape judgments about a welfare case. Political Psychology, 29(2), 149–168. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00621.x
  468. Small, D. A., Lerner, J. S. & Fischhoff, B. (2006). Emotion priming and attributions for terrorism: Americans' reactions in a national field experiment. Political Psychology, 27(2), 289–298. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2006.00007.x
  469. Smith, C. A. & Ellsworth, P. C. (1985). Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 813–838. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.4.813
  470. Smith, C. A. & Kirby, L. D. (2000). Consequences require antecedents: Toward a process model of emotion elicitation. In J. P. Forgas (Hrsg.), Feeling and thinking. The role of affect in social cognition (S. 83-106). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  471. Smith, C. A. & Kirby, L. D. (2001a). Affect and cognitive appraisal processes. In J. P. Forgas (Hrsg.), Handbook of affect and social cognition (S. 75–92). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  472. Smith, C. A. & Kirby, L. D. (2001b). Toward delivering on the promise of appraisal theory. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr & T. Johnstone (Hrsg.), Appraisal processes in emotion. Theory, methods, research (S. 121–138). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  473. Smith, C. A. & Kirby, L. D. (2009). Putting appraisal in context: Toward a relational model of appraisal and emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 23(7), 1352–1372. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/02699930902860386
  474. Smith, C. A. & Lazarus, R. S. (1990). Emotion and adaptation. In L. A. Pervin (Hrsg.), Handbook of personality. Theory and research (S. 609–637). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  475. Smith, E. R. & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(2), 108–131. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_01
  476. Smith, E. R. & Neumann, R. (2005). Emotion processes considered from the perspective of dual-process models. In L. Feldman Barrett, P. M. Niedenthal & P. Winkielman (Hrsg.), Emotion and consciousness (S. 287–311). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  477. Smith, T. W., Glazer, K., Ruiz, J. M. & Gallo, L. C. (2004). Hostility, anger, aggressiveness, and coronary heart disease: An interpersonal perspective on personality, emotion, and health. Journal of Personality, 72(6), 1217–1270. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00296.x
  478. Sniderman, P. M. & Theriault, S. M. (2004). The structure of political argument and the logic of issue framing. In W. E. Saris & P. M. Sniderman (Hrsg.), Studies in public opinion. Attitudes, nonattitudes, measurement error, and change (S. 133–165). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  479. Snow, D. A. & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participation mobilization. In B. Klandermans, H. Kriesi & S. Tarrow (Hrsg.), International social movement research. A research annual (Band 1, S. 197–217). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  480. Spence, L. K. (2010). Episodic frames, HIV/AIDS, and African American public opinion. Political Research Quarterly, 63(2), 257–268. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/1065912908330727
  481. Stangor, C. (1990). Arousal, accessibility of trait constructs and person perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(4), 305–321. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(90)90041-J
  482. Stapel, D. A., Koomen, W. & Zeelenberg, M. (1998). The impact of accuracy motivation on interpretation, comparison, and correction processes: Accuracy × knowledge accessibility effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(4), 878–893. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.878
  483. Steenbergen, M. R., Bächtiger, A., Spörndli, M. & Steiner, J. (2003). Measuring political deliberation: A discourse quality index. Comparative European Politics, 1(1), 21–48. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cep.6110002
  484. Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M. & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–90. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1086/209528
  485. Steinmetz, H., Schmidt, P., Tinah-Booh, A., Wieczorek, S. & Schwartz, S. H. (2009). Testing measurement invariance using multigroup CFA: Differences between educational groups in human values measurement. Quality & Quantity, 43(4), 599–616. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/s11135-007-9143-x
  486. Strack, F. & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(3), 220–247. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0803_1
  487. Takeshita, T. (2006). Current critical problems in agenda-setting research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18(3), 275–296. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edh104
  488. Tankard, J. W. (2001). The empirical approach to the study of media framing. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy & A. E. Grant (Hrsg.), Framing public life. Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (S. 95–106). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  489. Taylor-Gooby, P. (2012). Root and branch restructuring to achieve major cuts: The social policy programme of the 2010 UK coalition government. Social Policy & Administration, 46(1), 61–82. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2011.00797.x
  490. Tewksbury, D., Jones, J., Peske, M. W., Raymond, A. & Vig, W. (2000). The interaction of news and advocate frames: Manipulating audience perceptions of a local public policy issue. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(4), 804–829. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/107769900007700406
  491. Thompson, S. & Hoggett, P. (2001). The emotional dynamics of deliberative democracy. Policy & Politics, 29(3), 351–364. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1332/0305573012501396
  492. Thurstone, L. L. (1928). Attitudes can be measured. The American Journal of Sociology, 33(4), 529–554. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1086/214483
  493. Tiedens, L. Z. & Linton, S. (2001). Judgment under emotional certainty and uncertainty: The effects of specific emotions on information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 973–988. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.973
  494. Tong, E. M. W. (2010). The sufficiency and necessity of appraisals for negative emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 24(4), 692–701. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/13854040902933601
  495. Trepte, S. & Wirth, W. (2004). Kommunikationswissenschaftliche Experimentalforschung im Spannungsverhältnis zwischen interner und externer Validität. In W. Wirth, E. Lauf & A. Fahr (Hrsg.), Forschungslogik und -design in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Einführung, Problematisierung und Aspekte der Methodenlogik aus kommunikationswissenschaftlicher Perspektive (S. 60–87). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  496. Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207–232. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9
  497. Ulich, D. & Mayring, P. (2003). Psychologie der Emotionen (2. überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage). Grundriss der Psychologie: Band 5. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. Google Scholar öffnen
  498. Urban, D. (2000). Längsschnittanalysen mit latenten Wachstumskurvenmodellen in der politischen Sozialisationsforschung. Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Sozialwissenschaften der Universität Stuttgart. Stuttgart: Universität Stuttgart. Google Scholar öffnen
  499. Uribe, R. & Gunter, B. (2007). Are 'sensational' news stories more likely to trigger viewers' emotions than non-sensational news stories? A content analysis of British TV news. European Journal of Communication, 22(2), 207–228. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0267323107076770
  500. Valentino, N. A., Brader, T., Groenendyk, E. W., Gregorowicz, K. & Hutchings, V. L. (2011). Election night’s alright for fighting: The role of emotions in political participation. The Journal of Politics, 73(1), 156–170. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S0022381610000939
  501. Valentino, N. A., Hutchings, V. L., Banks, A. J. & Davis, A. K. (2008). Is a worried citizen a good citizen? Emotions, political information seeking, and learning via the internet. Political Psychology, 29(2), 247–273. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00625.x
  502. Valentino, N. A., Hutchings, V. L. & White, I. K. (2002). Cues that matter: How political ads prime racial attitudes during campaigns. American Political Science Review, 96(1), 75–90. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1017/S0003055402004240
  503. Valenzuela, S. (2009). Variations in media priming: The moderating role of knowledge, interest, news attention, and discussion. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(4), 756–774. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/107769900908600403
  504. Valkenburg, P. M. & Peter, J. (2013). The differential susceptibility to media effects model. Journal of Communication, 63(2), 221–243. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12024
  505. Valkenburg, P. M., Semetko, H. A. & de Vreese, C. H. de. (1999). The effects of news frames on readers' thoughts and recall. Communication Research, 26(5), 550–569. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/009365099026005002
  506. van Gorp, B. (2005). Where is the frame? Victims and intruders in the Belgian press coverage of the asylum issue. European Journal of Communication, 20(4), 484–507. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0267323105058253
  507. van Gorp, B. (2007). The constructionist approach to framing. Bringing culture back in. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 60–78. Google Scholar öffnen
  508. van Mechelen, I. & Hennes, K. (2009). The appraisal basis of anger occurence and intensity revisited. Cognition and Emotion, 23(7), 1273–1388. Google Scholar öffnen
  509. Vliegenthart, R. & van Zoonen, L. (2011). Power to the frame: Bringing sociology back to frame analysis. European Journal of Communication, 26(2), 101–115. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/0267323111404838
  510. Way, B. M. & Masters, R. D. (1996). Political attitudes: Interactions of cognition and affect. Motivation and Emotion, 20(3), 205–236. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1007/BF02251887
  511. Weiner, B. (1995). Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  512. Weiss, W. & Fine, B. J. (1956). The effect of induced aggressiveness on opinion change. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52(1), 109–114. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/h0043948
  513. Wettstein, M. (2012). Angrist: Dokumentation und Anleitung für die Programmierung des Codierer-Interface. Manuskript, Universität Zürich. Google Scholar öffnen
  514. Wildt, A. T. & Ahtola, O. (1978). Analysis of covariance. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.4135/9781412983297
  515. Wilkowski, B. M., Robinson, M. D., Gordon, R. D. & Troop-Gordon, W. (2007). Tracking the evil eye: Trait anger and selective attention within ambiguously hostile scenes. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(3), 650–666. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.07.003
  516. Williams, J. & MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Resampling and distribution of the product methods for testing indirect effects in complex models. Structural Equation Modeling, 15(1), 23–51. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1080/10705510701758166
  517. Williams, P. & Aaker, J. L. (2002). Can mixed emotions peacfully coexist? Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4). 636–649 Google Scholar öffnen
  518. Wirth, W. (2001). Der Codierprozess als gelenkte Rezeption: Bausteine für eine Theorie des Codierens. In W. Wirth & E. Lauf (Hrsg.), Inhaltsanalyse. Perspektiven, Probleme, Potentiale (S. 157–182). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  519. Wirth, W. (2013a). Emotion. In C. Wünsch, H. Schramm, V. Gehrau & H. Bilandzic (Hrsg.), Handbuch Medienrezeption. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Google Scholar öffnen
  520. Wirth, W. (2013b). Grundlagen emotionaler Medienwirkungen. In W. Schweiger & A. Fahr (Hrsg.), Handbuch Medienwirkungsforschung (S. 227–246). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  521. Wirth, W. & Kühne, R. (2013). Grundlagen der Persuasionsforschung: Konzepte, Theorien und zentrale Einflussfaktoren. In W. Schweiger & A. Fahr (Hrsg.), Handbuch Medienwirkungsforschung (S. 313–332). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar öffnen
  522. Wirth, W., Matthes, J., Schemer, C., Wettstein, M., Friemel, T., Hänggli, R. & Siegert, G. (2010). Agenda building and setting in a referendum campaign: Investigating the flow of arguments among campaigners, the media, and the public. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 87(2), 328–345. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1177/107769901008700207
  523. Wirth, W. & Schramm, H. (2005). Media and emotions. Communication Research Trends, 24(3), 3–39. Google Scholar öffnen
  524. Wirth, W. & Schramm, H. (2007a). Emotionen, Metaemotionen und Regulationsstrategien bei der Medienrezeption: Ein integratives Modell. In W. Wirth, H.-J. Stiehler & C. Wünsch (Hrsg.), Dynamisch-transaktional denken. Theorie und Empirie der Kommunikationswissenschaft (S. 153–184). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  525. Wirth, W. & Schramm, H. (2007b). Emotionen und Emotionsregulation bei der Medienrezeption aus appraisaltheoretischer Perspektive. In S. Trepte & E. H. Witte (Hrsg.), Sozialpsychologie und Medien – Beiträge des 22. Hamburger Symposions zur Methodologie der Sozialpsychologie (S. 35-59). Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers. Google Scholar öffnen
  526. Wirth, W. & Wettstein, M. (2012). Final report: Content analysis NCCR II Module IV. Manuskript, Universität Zürich. Google Scholar öffnen
  527. Wirth, W., Wettstein, M., Reichel, K. & Kühne, R. (2012). Codebuch: Changing processes and strategies of political participation and representation. Manuskript, Universität Zürich. Google Scholar öffnen
  528. Wolling, J. (2002). Methodenkombination in der Medienwirkungsforschung: Der Entscheidungsprozess bei der Verknüpfung von Umfrage- und Inhaltsanalysedaten. ZUMA-Nachrichten, 26, 54–85. Google Scholar öffnen
  529. Wolling, J. & Wirth, W. (2012). Die Verknüpfung von Umfrage- und Inhaltsanalysedaten in der Medienwirkungsforschung. In W. Loosen & A. Scholl (Hrsg.), Methodenkombinationen in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Methodologische Herausforderungen und empirische Praxis (S. 68–88). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  530. Wothke, W. (2000). Longitudinal and multi-group modeling with missing data. In T. D. Little, K. U. Schnabel & J. Baumert (Hrsg.), Modeling longitudinal and multilevel data. Practical issues, applied approaches, and specific examples (S. 219–240). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar öffnen
  531. Yan, C., Dillard, J. P. & Shen, F. (2010). The effects of mood, message framing, and behavioral advocacy on persuasion. Journal of Communication, 60(2), 344–363. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01485.x
  532. Yan, C., Dillard, J. P. & Shen, F. (2012). Emotion, motivation, and the persuasive effects of message framing. Journal of Communication, 62(4), 682–700. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01655.x
  533. Yang, Y. & Green, S. B. (2011). Coefficient alpha: A reliability coefficient for the 21st century? Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29(4), 377–392. Google Scholar öffnen
  534. Yates, F. J. (2007). Emotion appraisal tendencies and carryover: How, why, and … therefore? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(3), 179–183. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70026-8
  535. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35(2), 151–175. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.35.2.151
  536. Zajonc, R. B. (1984). On the primacy of affect. American Psychologist, 39(2), 117–123. Google Scholar öffnen doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.39.2.117
  537. Zajonc, R. B. (1998). Emotions. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske & G. Lindzey (Hrsg.), The handbook of social psychology (4. Auflage, S. 591–632). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Google Scholar öffnen
  538. Zanna, M. P. & Rempel, J. K. (1988). Attitudes: A new look at an old concept. In D. Bar-Tal & A. W. Kruglanski (Hrsg.), The social psychology of knowledge (S. 315–334). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar öffnen

Ähnliche Veröffentlichungen

aus dem Schwerpunkt "Medienwirkungsforschung & Mediennutzungsforschung", "Medienwissenschaft, Kommunikationsforschung"
Cover des Buchs: Israel in deutschen Medien
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Jonas Hessenauer, Lukas Uwira
Israel in deutschen Medien
Cover des Buchs: Medienmanagement
Lehrbuch Kein Zugriff
Ingo Knuth, Thomas Kilian
Medienmanagement
Cover des Buchs: Konstruktiver Journalismus
Monographie Vollzugriff
Julia Faltermeier
Konstruktiver Journalismus
Cover des Buchs: Trennen – Verbinden – Takten
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Patrick Wöhrle, Stephan Hein, Stefan Meißner
Trennen – Verbinden – Takten
Cover des Buchs: Partizipative Kommunikation im interkulturell-doppeltblickenden Kontext
Sammelband Kein Zugriff
Akila Ahouli, Constant Kpao Sarè, Gesine Lenore Schiewer
Partizipative Kommunikation im interkulturell-doppeltblickenden Kontext

Hinweis

Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt und darf nur nach den Vorgaben der Nutzungs- und Lizenzvereinbarung genutzt werden. Jede darüber hinaus gehende Nutzung des Werkes ist ausdrücklich untersagt und wird verfolgt.

Feedback geben

Wir freuen uns über Ihr Feedback zu Inhalten und Funktionen. Ihre Nachricht hilft uns, unseren Service stetig zu verbessern.

Bewertung
Bild anhängen
oder hier ablegen
PNG oder JPG (max. 3 MB)

Anmelden

Passwort vergessen?
Login via Open Athens
Noch kein Benutzerkonto?
Jetzt registrieren

Publikation zitieren

Download: RIS BibTex