Dynamic norms for dynamic times? An experiment on the effects of dynamic and static norms messages on COVID-19 vaccination intention

Table of contents

Bibliographic information

Cover of Volume: SCM Studies in Communication and Media Volume 11 (2022), Issue 3
Open Access Full access

SCM Studies in Communication and Media

Volume 11 (2022), Issue 3

Authors:
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyright Year
2022
ISSN-Online
2192-4007
ISSN-Print
2192-4007

Chapter information

Open Access Full access

Volume 11 (2022), Issue 3

Dynamic norms for dynamic times? An experiment on the effects of dynamic and static norms messages on COVID-19 vaccination intention

Authors:
ISSN-Print
2192-4007
ISSN-Online
2192-4007
Preview:

Social norms messages may motivate COVID-19 preventive behaviors, such as getting vaccinated. To date, however, the research has mainly focused on the established concept of static norms and widely ignored the potential of dynamic norms. Dynamic norms convey information about how norms are developing over time and have been shown to promote change when the behavior is not yet the majority norm. The present study investigated the potential of dynamic norms in the context of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. It examined (a) the effects of static and dynamic norms messages on vaccination intention, (b) the mechanisms through which dynamic norms may influence vaccination intention, and (c) the potential of dynamic norms to increase vaccination intention of vaccine-hesitant people. We conducted a preregistered online experiment with three conditions (static norm, dynamic norm, control message) among people who were not yet vaccinated (N = 2,289, 16-60 years) in May 2021, during the early vaccine roll-out period for the general population in Switzerland. We found no effects of exposure to the static or dynamic norms messages on vaccination intention and no specific influence mechanisms of dynamic norms (e.g., via perceived future norm) - neither for participants who were willing to get vaccinated nor for the vaccine-hesitant group. However, further analyses showed that, among vaccine-hesitant participants, the normative perception that formerly vaccine-critical people were changing their minds was correlated with a stronger vaccination intention. We discuss potential reasons why social norms messages did not show an effect in our study and derive theoretical and practical implications.

Bibliography

  1. Albæk, E. (2011). The interaction between experts and journalists in news journalism. Journalism, 12(3), 335–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884910392851 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  2. Albæk, E., Christiansen, P. M., & Togeby, L. (2003). Experts in the mass media: Researchers as sources in Danish daily newspapers, 1961–2001. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(4), 937–948. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900308000412 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  3. Albrecht, S. (2010). Reflexionsspiele: Deliberative Demokratie und die Wirklichkeit politischer Diskurse im Internet [Reflective Games: Deliberative democracy and the reality of political discourses on the internet] (1. Aufl.). Sozialtheorie. transcript. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kxp/detail.action?docID=6695179 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  4. Anter, L. (2021). Mein Text, meine Meinung, meine Wissenschaftlerin? Eine qualitative Untersuchung zur Nutzung von Wissenschaftler*innen als opportune Zeugen [My Text, my opinion, my scientist? A qualitative study on the use of scientists as opportune witnesses]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 69(3), 397–415. https://doi. org/10.5771/1615-634X-2021-3-397 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  5. Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft: Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. [Risk society: On the way to another modernity]. Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  6. Blöbaum, B. (2017). Wissenschaftsjournalismus [Science journalism]. In H. Bonfadelli, B. Fähnrich, C. Lüthje, J. Milde, M. Rhomberg, & M. S. Schäfer (Hrsg.), Forschungsfeld Wissenschaftskommunikation [Research area science communication] (S. 221–238). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-12898-2_12 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  7. Blöbaum, B., Görke, A., & Wied, K. (2004). Quellen der Wissenschaftsberichterstattung: Inhaltsanalyse und Befragung [Sources of science reporting: Content analysis and survey]. Universität Münster. https://www.uni-bamberg.de/fileadmin/uni/fakultaeten/split_ lehrstuehle/kommunikationswissenschaften_1/Dateien/Downloads/Veroeff/Kristina_ Wied/Studie_Quellen_des_Wijo_2004.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  8. Bucher, H.-J. (2017). Massenmedien als Handlungsfeld I: Printmedien [Mass media as field of action I: Printed media]. In K. S. Roth, M. Wengeler, & A. Ziem (Hrsg.), Handbuch Sprache in Politik und Gesellschaft (S. 298-333). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/ 9783110296310-014 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  9. Catalan-Matamoros, D. & Elías, C. (2020). Vaccine hesitancy in the age of coronavirus and fake news: Analysis of journalistic sources in the Spanish quality press. International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(21). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218136 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  10. Donsbach, W. (1987). Journalismusforschung in der Bundesrepublik: Offene Fragen trotz Forschungsboom [Journalism research in the Federal Republic: Open questions despite research boom]. In J. Wilke (Hrsg.), Zwischenbilanz der Journalistenausbildung (S. 105–142). Ölschläger. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  11. Easton, D. (1990). The analysis of political structure. Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  12. Eilders, C. (2011). Zivilgesellschaftliche Beteiligung im Medienbereich [Civil society participation in the media]. In H. J. Kleinsteuber (Hrsg.), Media Governance in Europa: Regulierung - Partizipation - Mitbestimmung (S. 159–181). VS Verl. für Sozialwissenschaften. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  13. Eisenegger, M., Oehmer, F., Udris, L., & Vogler, D. (2020). Die Qualität der Medienberichterstattung zur Corona-Pandemie (Qualität der Medien 1/2020) [The quality of media coverage of the Corona pandemic]. Universität Zürich. https://www.foeg.uzh.ch/ dam/jcr:b87084ac-5b5b-4f76-aba7-2e6fe2703e81/200731_Studie%20Leitmedien%20 Corona.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  14. Engelmann, I. (2016). Gatekeeping. Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845263533 Esser, F. (1998). Die Kräfte hinter den Schlagzeilen: Englischer und deutscher Journalismus Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  15. im Vergleich [The forces behind the headlines: English and German journalism compared]. Alber. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  16. Evensen, D. T., & Clarke, C. E. (2012). Efficacy information in media coverage of infectious disease risks. Science Communication, 34(3), 392–418. https://doi. org/10.1177/1075547011421020 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  17. 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. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  18. Gerhards, J. (2002). Das Öffentlichkeitsdefizit der EU im Horizont normativer Öffentlichkeitstheorien [The public deficit of the EU in the horizon of normative public theories]. In H. Kaelble, M. Kirsch, & A. Schmidt-Gernig (Hrsg.), Transnationale Öffentlichkeiten und Identitäten im 20. Jahrhundert (S. 135–158). Campus. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  19. Gerhards, J., Neidhardt, F., & Rucht, D. (1998). Zwischen Palaver und Diskurs: Strukturen öffentlicher Meinungsbildung am Beispiel der deutschen Diskussion zur Abtreibung [Between palaver and discourse: Structures of public opinion formation using the example of the German discussion on abortion]. Westdeutscher Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  20. Habermas, J. (1969). Technik und Wissenschaft als „Ideologie“ [Technology and science as “ideology“]. Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  21. Habermas, J. (1990). Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit: Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft [The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society]. Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  22. Habermas, J. (1992). Faktizität und Geltung: Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats [Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy] (2. Aufl.). Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  23. Hagen, L. M. (1993). Opportune witnesses: An analysis of balance in the selection of sources and arguments in the leading German newspapers’ coverage of the census issue. European Journal of Communication, 8(3), 317–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323193008003004 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  24. Haring, S. (2010). Herrschaft der Experten oder Herrschaft des Sachzwangs? Technokratie als politikwissenschaftliches »ProblemEnsemble« [Rule of the experts or rule of constraint? Technocracy as a political science “problem ensemble”]. Zeitschrift Für Politik, 57(3), 243–264. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  25. Hayman, D. (2020). IPBES Workshop on Biodiversity and Pandemics: Workshop Report. https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/2020-10/20201028%20IPBES%20Pandemics%20 Workshop%20Report%20Plain%20Text%20Final_0.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  26. Hermida, A. (2011). Fluid spaces, fluid journalism: The role of the “active recipient” in participatory journalism. In J. B. Singer, D. Domingo, A. Heinonen, A. Hermida, S. Paulussen, T. Quandt, Z. Reich, & M. Vujnovic (Hrsg.), Participatory journalism: Guarding open gates at online newspapers (S. 177–191). Wiley-Blackwell. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  27. Huber, B. (2014). Öffentliche Experten: Über die Medienpräsenz von Fachleuten [Public experts: About the media presence of experts]. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  28. Kepplinger, H. M., Brosius, H.-B., & Staab, J. F. (1991). Instrumental actualization: A theory of mediated conflicts. European Journal of Communication, 6(3), 263–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323191006003002 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  29. Kevenhörster, P. (2021). Politikberatung [Political consulting]. In U. Andersen, J. Bogumil, S. Marschall, & W. Woyke (Hrsg.), Handwörterbuch des politischen Systems der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (S. 720–727). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-658-23666-3_108 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  30. Kohring, M. (2016). Journalismus als Leistungssystem der Öffentlichkeit [Journalism as a performance system of the public]. In M. Löffelholz & L. Rothenberger (Hrsg.), Handbuch Journalismustheorien (S. 165–176). Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  31. Kolb, S. (2005). Mediale Thematisierung in Zyklen: Theoretischer Entwurf und empirische Anwendung [Medial thematization in cycles: Theoretical outline and empirical application]. Herbert von Halem. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  32. Kropp, S. (2020). Corona-Krise: Wie wichtig ist Expertenwissen in der Politik? [Corona crisis: How important is expert knowledge in politics?]. https://www.bpb.de/politik/ innenpolitik/coronavirus/310712/expertenwissen Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  33. Lehmkuhl, M (2021). Covid-19 und der Journalismus: Problemzonen im Verhältnis zwischen Wissenschaft und Öffentlichkeit [COVID-19 and journalism: Problem areas in the relationship between science and the public]. In Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung (Hrsg.), Corona: Pandemie und Krise (S. 266-276). Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  34. Lehmkuhl, M., & Leidecker-Sandmann, M. (2019). „Visible scientists revisited“: Zum Zusammenhang von wissenschaftlicher Reputation und der Präsenz wissenschaftlicher Experten in der Medienberichterstattung über Infektionskrankheiten [“Visible scientists revisited”: On the relationship between scientific reputation and the public presence of scientific experts in mass media coverage of infectious diseases]. Publizistik, 64, 479–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-019-00530-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  35. Leidecker-Sandmann, M., Attar, P., Schütz, A., & Lehmkuhl, M. (2022). Selected by expertise? Scientific experts in German news coverage of COVID-19 compared to other pandemics. Public Understanding of Science, 31(7), 847–866. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 09636625221095740 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  36. Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Holford, D. L., Finn, A., Leask, J., Thomson, A., Lombardi, D., Al-Rawi, A. K., Amazeen, M. A., Anderson, E. C., Armaos, K. D., Betsch, C., Bruns, H. H. B., Ecker, U. K. H., Sah, S., Sinatra, G. M., Tapper, K., & Vraga, E. K. (2021). The COVID-19 Vaccine Communication Handbook: A practical guide for improving vaccine communication and fighting misinformation. https://sks.to/c19vax Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  37. Maelzer, D. (2014). Politik gut beraten? Lernprozesse in deutschen Gesundheitsreformen [Politics well advised? Learning processes in German health care reforms]. Nomos. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  38. Maier, M., Stengel, K., & Marschall, J. (2010). Nachrichtenwerttheorie [News value theory] Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845260365 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  39. Matthes, J. (2014). Framing. Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845260259 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  40. Maurer, M., Reinemann, C., & Kruschinski, S. (2021). Einseitig, unkritisch, regierungsnah? Eine empirische Studie zur Qualität der journalistischen Berichterstattung über die Corona-Pandemie [One-sided, uncritical, pro-government? An empirical study on the quality of journalistic coverage of the corona pandemic]. https://rudolf-augstein- stiftung.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Studie-einseitig-unkritisch-regierungsnah- reinemann-rudolf-augstein-stiftung.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  41. Neidhardt, F. (1994). Öffentlichkeit, öffentliche Meinung, soziale Bewegungen [Public, public opinion, social movements]. In F. Neidhardt (Hrsg.), Öffentlichkeit, öffentliche Meinung, soziale Bewegungen: Sonderheft 34 der Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (S. 7–41). Westdeutscher Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  42. Nelkin, D. (1987). Risk and the press. Industrial Crisis Quarterly, 1(2), 3–9. https://doi. org/10.1177/108602668700100202 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  43. Nölleke, D. (2013). Experten im Journalismus: Systemtheoretischer Entwurf und em- pirische Bestandsaufnahme [Experts in Journalism: System-theoretical outline and em- pirical survey]. Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845245317 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  44. Peters, B., Schultz, T., & Wimmel, A. (2004). Publizistische Beiträge zu einer diskursiven Öffentlichkeit: Eine themenübergeifende Inaltsanalyse deutscher Zeitungen und Zeitschriften [Journalistic contributions to a discursive public sphere: A cross-thematic analysis of German newspapers and magazines]. (InIIS-Arbeitspapiere Nr. 30). Universität Bremen. https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/bitstream/handle/document/67356/ssoar-2004-peters_et_al-Publizistische_Beitrage_zu_einer_diskursiven.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y&lnkname=ssoar-2004-peters_et_al-Publizistische_Beitrage_zu_einer_diskursiven.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  45. Peters, H. P. (1994). Wissenschaftliche Experten in der öffentlichen Kommunikation über Technik, Umwelt und Risiken [Scientific experts in public communication about technology, environment and risks]. In F. Neidhardt (Hrsg.), Öffentlichkeit, öffentliche Meinung, soziale Bewegungen: Sonderheft 34 der Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (S. 162–190). Westdeutscher Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  46. Peters, H. P., Brossard, D., Cheveigné, S. de, Dunwoody, S., Kallfass, M., Miller, S., & Tsuchida, S. (2008). Science communication: Interactions with the mass media. Science, 321(5886), 204–205. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1157780 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  47. Post, S. (2015). Scientific objectivity in journalism? How journalists and academics define objectivity, assess its attainability, and rate its desirability. Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism, 16(6), 730–749. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884914541067 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  48. Quandt, T., Boberg, S., Schatto-Eckrodt, T., & Frischlich, L. (2020). Pandemic news: Facebook pages of mainstream news media and the coronavirus crisis – a computational content analysis. http://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.13290v2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  49. Radkau, J. (2011). Die Ära der Ökologie: Eine Weltgeschichte [The era of ecology: A world history]. C.H.Beck. https://doi.org/10.17104/9783406619021 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  50. Reese, S. D. (2001). Understanding the global journalist: A hierarchy-of-influences approach. Journalism Studies, 2, 173-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700118394 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  51. Schäfer, M. S. (2007). Wissenschaft in den Medien: Die Medialisierung naturwissenschaftlicher Themen [Science in the media: The medialization of scientific topics]. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  52. Schelsky, H. (1961). Der Mensch in der wissenschaftlichen Zivilisation [Man in scientific civilization]. Westdeutscher Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  53. Scheufele, B., & Engelmann, I. (2013). Die publizistische Vermittlung von Wertehorizonten der Parteien: Normatives Modell und empirische Befunde zum Value-Framing und News Bias der Qualitäts- und Boulevardpresse bei vier Bundestagswahlen [The journalistic communication of parties’ value horizons: Normative model and empirical findings on value framing and news bias of the quality and tabloid press in four German parliament elections]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 61(4), 532–550. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2013-4-532 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  54. Soley, L. C. (1994). Pundits in print: “Experts” and their use in newspaper stories. Newspaper Research Journal, 15(2), 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/07395329940150020 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  55. Stark, B., Magin, M., Jandura, O., & Maurer, M. (2012). Zur Einführung: Methodische Probleme komparativer Kommunikationsforschung und mögliche Lösungsansätze [Introduction: Methodological problems of comparative communication research and possible solutions]. In B. Stark, M. Magin, O. Jandura, & M. Maurer (Hrsg.), Methodische Herausforderungen komparativer Forschungsansätze (S. 9–17). Herbert von Halem. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  56. Tejedor, S., Cervi, L., Tusa, F., Portales, M., & Zabotina, M. (2020). Information on the COVID-19 pandemic in daily newspapers’ front pages: Case study of Spain and Italy. International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(17). https://doi. org/10.3390/ijerph17176330 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  57. Volpers, A.-M., & Summ, A. (2015). Der Wandel des einst verspäteten Ressorts – Konstanten und Veränderungen der Wissenschaftsberichterstattung in deutschen Printmedien [The transformation of the once belated department: Constants and changes in science reporting in German print media]. In M. S. Schäfer (Hrsg.), Wissenschaftskommunikation im Wandel (pp. 233–257). Herbert von Halem. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  58. Walli, T. (2021, 12. März). Politik und Wissenschaft: Eine schwierige Beziehung [Politics and science: A difficult relationship]. Der Standard. https://www.derstandard.de/sto- ry/2000124970898/politik-und-wissenschaft-eine-schwierige-beziehung Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  59. Washer, P. (2010). Emerging infectious diseases and society. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230277182 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  60. Weber, M. (1922). Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre [Collected essays on the theory of science]. Mohr. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  61. Weingart, P. (2006). ‚Demokratisierung‘ der wissenschaftlichen Politikberatung: Eine Antwort auf die Legitimationsdilemmata von Wissenschaft und Politik? [‘Democratization’ of scientific policy advice: A response to the legitimacy dilemmas of science and politics?]. In Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften (Hrsg.), Politikberatung in Deutschland (S. 73–84). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  62. Weingart, P. (2019). Wissensgesellschaft und wissenschaftliche Politikberatung [Knowledge society and science policy advice]. In S. Falk, M. Glaab, A. Römmele, H. Schober, & M. Thunert (Hrsg.), Handbuch Politikberatung (S. 1–12). Springer VS. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-658-07461-6_2-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  63. Weisband, M. (2021, 9. Juni). Problem „False Balance“. Journalisten sollen einordnen [False balance problem: Journalists should classify]. Deutschlandfunk. https://www. deutschlandfunk.de/problem-false-balance-journalisten-sollen-einordnen-100.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  64. Weischenberg, S. (1992). Journalistik: Theorie und Praxis aktueller Medienkommunikation. Band 1: Mediensysteme, Medienethik, Medieninstitutionen [Journalism: Theory and practice of contemporary media communication. Volume 1: Media systems, media ethics, media institutions]. Westdeutscher Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  65. Welker, M. (2016). Journalismus als Inklusions- und Partizipationsleistung [Journalism as an inclusive and participatory service]. In M. Löffelholz & L. Rothenberger (Hrsg.), Handbuch Journalismustheorien (S. 385–402). Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  66. Wissenschaft im Dialog (WiD). (Hrsg.). (2020). Wissenschaftsbarometer Corona Spezial [Science barometer corona special]. https://www.wissenschaft-im-dialog.de/projekte/ wissenschaftsbarometer/wissenschaftsbarometer-corona-spezial/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  67. Wissenschaft im Dialog (WiD), Deutsches Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung (DZHW), & Nationales Institut für Wissenschaftskommunikation (NaWiK). (Hrsg.). (2021). Wissenschaftskommunikation in Deutschland. Ergebnisse einer Befragung unter Wissenschaftler:innen [Science communication in Germany: Results of a survey among scientists]. https://www.nawik.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021_WisskommBefragung_Ergebnisbroschuere_WiD_DZHW_NaWik.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-337
  68. Barr, M., & Copeland-Stewart, A. (2021). Playing video games during the COVID-19 pandemic and effects on players’ well-being. Games and Culture, 17(1), 122–139. https:// doi.org/10.1177/15554120211017036 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  69. Bausinger, H. (1983). Alltag, Technik, Medien [Everyday life, technology, media]. In H. Pross & C.-D. Rath (Hrsg.), Rituale der Medienkommunikation: Gänge durch den Medienalltag (S. 24–36). Guttandin & Hoppe. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  70. Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft: Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne [Risk society: Towards a different modernity]. Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  71. Berg, M. (2017). Kommunikative Mobilität. Die mediale Vernetzung beruflich mobiler Menschen [Communicative mobility: The media connectedness of professionally mobile people]. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-15941-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  72. Birkel, M., Kerkau, F., Reichert, M., & Scholl, E. (2021). Deutscher Pay-VoD-Markt profitiert von Corona-Krise: Markt und Nutzung kostenpflichtiger Streamingdienste [German paid VoD market benefits from Corona crisis: market and usage of paid streaming services]. Media Perspektiven, (2), 98–108. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  73. Bruns, A. (2009). Produtzung: Von medialer zu politischer Partizipation [Produsage: From media to political participation]. In C. Bieber, M. Eifert, T. Groß, & J. Lamla (Hrsg.), Interaktiva: Bd. 7. Soziale Netze in der digitalen Welt: Das Internet zwischen egalitärer Teilhabe und ökonomischer Macht (S. 65–85). Campus. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  74. Bundesagentur für Arbeit. (2022). Beschäftigte nach Berufen (KldB 2010) (Zeitreihe Quartalszahlen). Deutschland. Stichtag 30. Juni 2021 [Employees by occupation (KldB 2010) (time series, quarterly figures). Germany. Reporting date June 30, 2021]. https:// statistik.arbeitsagentur.de/Statistikdaten/Detail/Aktuell/iiia6/beschaeftigung-soz- be-kldb2010-zeitreihe/kldb2010-zeitreihe-d-0-xlsx.xlsx Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  75. Certeau, M. de. (1988). Kunst des Handelns [The practice of everyday life]. Merve-Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  76. Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2017). The Mediated Construction of Reality. Polity. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  77. Düvel, C. (2016). Transkulturelle Vernetzungen: Zur Nutzung digitaler Medien durch junge russische Migranten in Deutschland [Transcultural networking: On the use of digital media by young russian migrants in Germany]. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93357-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  78. Haddad, D., Hartmann, L., & Zubayr, C. (2021). Tendenzen im Zuschauerverhalten: Nutzungsgewohnheiten und Reichweiten im Jahr 2020 [Trends in audience behavior: Usage patterns and coverage in the year 2020]. Media Perspektiven, (3), 138–151. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  79. Hardley, J., & Richardson, I. (2021). Digital placemaking and networked corporeality: Embodied mobile media practices in domestic space during Covid-19. Convergence, 27(3), 625–636. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856520979963 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  80. Hasebrink, U., & Popp, J. (2006). Media repertoires as a result of selective media use. A conceptual approach to the analysis of patterns of exposure. Communications, 31(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1515/COMMUN.2006.023 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  81. Hepp, A. (2010). Mediatisierung und Kulturwandel: Kulturelle Kontextfelder und die Prägkräfte der Medien [Mediatization and cultural change: Cultural contexts and the molding forces of the media]. In M. Hartmann & A. Hepp (Hrsg.), Die Mediatisierung der Alltagswelt (S. 65–84). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-531-92014-6_5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  82. Hepp, A. (2012). Mediatization and the ‘molding force’ of the media. Communications, 37(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2012-0001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  83. Hepp, A. (2020). Deep mediatization. Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  84. Hepp, A., Hjarvard, S., & Lundby, K. (2015). Mediatization: Theorizing the interplay between media, culture and society. Media, Culture & Society, 37(2), 314–324. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0163443715573835 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  85. Hepp, A., & Krotz, F. (2012). Mediatisierte Welten: Forschungsfelder und Beschreibungsansätze – Zur Einleitung [Mediatized worlds: Research fields and approaches – An introduction]. In F. Krotz & A. Hepp (Hrsg.), Mediatisierte Welten: Forschungsfelder und Beschreibungsansätze (S. 7–23). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-94332-9_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  86. Hepp, A., & Röser, J. (2014). Beharrung in Mediatisierungsprozessen: Das mediatisierte Zuhause und die mediatisierte Vergemeinschaftung [Persistence in mediatization processes: The mediatized home and the mediatized communitization]. In F. Krotz, C. Despotović, & M.-M. Kruse (Hrsg.), Die Mediatisierung sozialer Welten: Synergien empirischer Forschung (S. 165–187). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04077-2_8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  87. Höflich, J. R. (2016). Der Mensch und seine Medien: Mediatisierte interpersonale Kommunikation. Eine Einführung [Man and his media: Mediatized interpersonal communication: An introduction]. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-18683-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  88. ifo Institut – Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung an der Universität München e.V. (2021, 23. April). Handel mit Bekleidung und Haushaltsgeräten wandert ins Internet ab [Trade in clothing and household appliances moves to the Internet] [Pressemitteilung]. https://www.ifo.de/pressemitteilung/2021-04-23/handel-mit-bekleidung-und- haushaltsgeraeten-wandert-ins-internet-ab Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  89. Kaltenbrunner, A., Fronaschütz, D. A., & Luef, S. (2021). Sehr konfliktär: Nachrichtennutzung junger RezipientInnen zu Covid-19 [Highly conflictual: Young recipients’ news use on Covid-19.]. MedienJournal, 45(2), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.24989/ medienjournal.v45i2.1987 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  90. Krotz, F. (2007). Mediatisierung: Fallstudien zum Wandel von Kommunikation [Mediatization: Case Studies on the transformation of communication]. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90414-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  91. Krotz, F. (2012). Von der Entdeckung der Zentralperspektive zur Augmented Reality: Wie Mediatisierung funktioniert [From the discovery of central perspective to augmented reality: How mediatization works]. In F. Krotz & A. Hepp (Hrsg.), Mediatisierte Welten: Forschungsfelder und Beschreibungsansätze (S. 27–55). Springer VS. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-531-94332-9_2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  92. Krotz, F. (2014). Mediatization as a mover in modernity: Social and cultural change in the context of media change. In K. Lundby (Hrsg.), Handbooks of communication science: Bd. 21. Mediatization of Communication (S. 131–162). De Gruyter Mouton. https:// doi.org/10.1515/9783110272215.131 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  93. Krotz, F. (2017a). Mediatisierung: Ein Forschungskonzept [Mediatization: A concept for research]. In F. Krotz, C. Despotović, & M.-M. Kruse (Hrsg.), Mediatisierung als Metaprozess: Transformationen, Formen der Entwicklung und die Generierung von Neuem (S. 13–32). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16084-5_2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  94. Krotz, F. (2017b). Pfade der Mediatisierung: Bedingungsgeflechte für die Transformationen von Medien, Alltag, Kultur und Gesellschaft [Paths of mediatization: Relational networks for the transformations of media, everyday life, culture and society]. In F. Krotz, Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  95. C. Despotović, & M.-M. Kruse (Hrsg.), Mediatisierung als Metaprozess: Transformationen, Formen der Entwicklung und die Generierung von Neuem (S. 347–364). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16084-5_16 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  96. Krotz, F. (2018). Mediatisierung [Mediatization]. In D. Hoffmann & R. Winter (Hrsg.), Mediensoziologie: Handbuch für Wissenschaft und Studium (S. 86–99). Nomos. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  97. Krotz, F., & Thomas, T. (2007). Domestizierung, Alltag, Mediatisierung: Ein Ansatz zu einer theoriegerichteten Verständigung [Domestication, everyday life, mediatization: An approach to a theory-based understanding]. In J. Röser (Hrsg.), MedienAlltag: Domestizierungsprozesse alter und neuer Medien (S. 31–42). VS Verl. für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28282-0_3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  98. Lachance, E. L. (2021). COVID-19 and its impact on volunteering: Moving towards virtual volunteering. Leisure Sciences, 43(1-2), 104–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2020.1773990 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  99. Linke, C. (2010). Medien im Alltag von Paaren: Eine Studie zur Mediatisierung der Kommunikation in Paarbeziehungen [Media in couples everyday life: A study on the mediatization of communication in romantic relationships]. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92332-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  100. Lundby, K. (Hrsg.). (2014). Handbooks of communication science: Bd. 21. Mediatization of communication. De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110272215 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  101. Meyen, M. (2014). Medialisierung des deutschen Spitzenfußballs. Eine Fallstudie zur Anpassung von sozialen Funktionssystemen an die Handlungslogik der Massenmedien [Mediatization of German premier soccer: A case study on the adaptation of social systems to the logic of the mass media]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 62(3), 377–394. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2014-3-377 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  102. Möll, G., & Hitzler, R. (2017). Zwischen spekulativen Strategien und strategischen Spekulationen. Zur reflexiven Mediatisierung riskanter Geldverausgabung [Between speculative strategies and strategic speculations: On the reflexive mediatization of risky monetary spending]. In F. Krotz, C. Despotović, & M.-M. Kruse (Hrsg.), Mediatisierung als Metaprozess: Transformationen, Formen der Entwicklung und die Generierung von Neuem (S. 211–232). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16084-5_10 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  103. Müller, K. F. (2018). „Ein schön schrecklicher Fortschritt“. Die Mediatisierung des Häuslichen und die Entgrenzung von Berufsarbeit [“A beautifully terrible progress”: The mediatization of the domestic sphere and the blurring of limits of occupational work]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 66(2), 217–233. https://doi.org/10.5771/ 1615-634X-2018-2-217 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  104. Müller, K. F. (2020). Beyond classic mass media and stand-alone technologies: Using media online in the domestic sphere. European Journal of Communication, 36(1), 69–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323120966837 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  105. Müller, K. F., & Röser, J. (2017). Wie Paare Second Screen beim Fernsehen nutzen: Eine ethnografische Studie zur Mediatisierung des Zuhauses [How couples use second screens while watching TV: Findings of an ethnographic study]. In U. Göttlich, L. Heinz, & M. R. Herbers (Hrsg.), Ko-Orientierung in der Medienrezeption: Praktiken der Second-Screen-Nutzung (S. 137–155). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-14929-1_8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  106. Müller, P. (2016). Die Wahrnehmung des Medienwandels. Eine Exploration ihrer Dimensionen, Entstehungsbedingungen und Folgen [The perception of media change: An exploration of its dimensions, conditions of emergence and consequences]. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-12812-8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  107. Nguyen, D. (2021). Mediatisation and datafication in the global COVID-19 pandemic: On the urgency of data literacy. Media International Australia, 178(1), 210–214. https:// doi.org/10.1177/1329878X20947563 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  108. Niemand, S. (2020). Alltagsumbrüche und Medienhandeln. Eine qualitative Panelstudie zum Wandel der Mediennutzung in Übergangsphasen [Everyday life transitions and media practice: A qualitative panel study on changes in media use in transitional phases]. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-30738-7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  109. Peil, C. (2021). Polymedia in der Krise. (Außer-)Alltägliches Medienhandeln während des ersten Lockdowns in Österreich [Polymedia in crisis: (Non-)everyday media practice during the first lockdown in Austria]. MedienJournal, 45(2), 53–72. https://doi.org/10.24989/medienjournal.v45i2.1989 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  110. Peil, C., Müller, K. F., Drüeke, R., Niemand, S., & Roth, R. (2020). Technik – Medien – Geschlecht revisited. Gender im Kontext von Datafizierung, Algorithmen und digitalen Medientechnologien – eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme [Technology – Media – Gender revisited: Gender in the context of datafication, algorithms and digital media technologies – a critical overview]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 68(3), 211–238. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-211 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  111. Peter, C., & Brosius, H.-B. (2020). Umgang mit der Corona-Krise: Mediennutzung, 1–11 [Dealing with the corona crisis: Media use, 1–11]. https://www.ls1.ifkw.uni-muenchen.de/forschung/forschungsbereiche/corona/teil-1-mediennutzung.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  112. Pfadenhauer, M., & Grenz, T. (2017). De-Mediatisierung: Diskontinuitäten, Non-Linearitäten und Ambivalenzen im Mediatisierungsprozess [De-Mediatization: Discontinuities, non-linearities and ambivalences in the mediatization process]. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-14666-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  113. Poell, T., Nieborg, D., & van Dijck, J. (2019). Platformisation. Internet Policy Review, 8(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.4.1425 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  114. Roitsch, C. (2020). Kommunikative Grenzziehung: Herausforderungen und Praktiken junger Menschen in einer vielgestaltigen Medienumgebung [Setting communicative boundaries: Challenges and practices of young people in a multifaceted media environment]. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28430-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  115. Roll, J. (2017). Kommunikation im öffentlichen Raum: Aufmerksamkeit und Mediennutzung [Communication in public space: Attention and media use]. Springer VS. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16521-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  116. Röser, J., & Müller, K. F. (2017). Der Domestizierungsansatz [The domestication approach]. In L. Mikos & C. Wegener (Hrsg.), Qualitative Medienforschung: Ein Handbuch (2. Aufl., S. 156–163). UVK Verlagsgesellschaft mbH. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  117. Röser, J., Müller, K. F., Niemand, S., & Roth, U. (2017). Häusliches Medienhandeln zwischen Dynamik und Beharrung: Die Domestizierung des Internets und die Mediatisierung des Zuhauses 2008–2016 [The domestication of the internet between dynamics and persistence: Domestic media practices 2008–2016]. In F. Krotz, C. Despotović, & M.-M. Kruse (Hrsg.), Mediatisierung als Metaprozess: Transformationen, Formen der Entwicklung und die Generierung von Neuem (S. 139–162). Springer VS. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16084-5_7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  118. Röser, J., Müller, K. F., Niemand, S., & Roth, U. (2019). Das mediatisierte Zuhause im Wandel: Eine qualitative Panelstudie zur Verhäuslichung des Internets [The mediatized home in transition: A qualitative panel study on the domestication of the internet]. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-26073-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  119. Roth-Ebner, C. (2015). Der effiziente Mensch. Zur Dynamik von Raum und Zeit in mediatisierten Arbeitswelten [The efficient human: On the dynamics of space and time in mediatized working environments]. Bielefeld: transcript. https://doi.org/10.14361/transcript.9783839429143.163 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  120. Siani, A., & Marley, S. A. (2021). Impact of the recreational use of virtual reality on physical and mental wellbeing during the Covid-19 lockdown. Health and technology, 11(2), 425–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12553-021-00528-8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  121. Stürz, R. A., Stumpf, C., Mendel, U., & Harhoff, D. (2020). Digitalisierung durch Corona? [Digitalization because of Corona?]. bidt – Bayerisches Forschungsinstitut für Digitale Transformationen. https://doi.org/10.35067/XYPQ-KN62 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  122. Steinmaurer, T. (2016). Permanent vernetzt. Zur Theorie und Geschichte der Mediatisierung [Permanently connected: Theory and history of mediatization]. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04511-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  123. Vogl, G., & Carstensen, T. (2021). Mobiles Arbeiten vor und seit Corona. Arbeitssoziologische Perspektiven [Mobile work before and since corona: Work sociological perspectives]. WSI-Mitteilungen, 74(3), 192–198. https://doi.org/10.5771/0342-300X-2021-3-192 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  124. Watson, A., Lupton, D., & Michael, M. (2021). Enacting intimacy and sociality at a distance in the COVID-19 crisis: The sociomaterialities of home-based communication technologies. Media International Australia, 178(1), 136–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1329878X20961568 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  125. Wolling, J., Kuhlmann, C., Schumann, C., Berger, P., & Arlt, D. (2021). Corona 2020 – Zerreißprobe für die Gesellschaft? Persönliches Erleben und mediale Vermittlung einer multiplen Krise [Corona 2020 – A tear test for society? Personal experience and mediation of a multiple crisis]. Kommunikationswissenschaft interdisziplinär: Band 8. Universitätsverlag Ilmenau. https://www.db-thueringen.de/receive/dbt_mods_00048770 https://doi.org/10.22032/dbt.48770 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  126. Ziemann, A. (2012). Soziologie der Medien [Sociology of the media] (2. Aufl.). transcript. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-394
  127. Arnold, E., & Boggs, K. U. (2020). Interpersonal relationships: Professional communication skills for nurses (8th ed.). Elsevier Inc. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  128. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  129. Brennan, R. L., & Prediger, D. J. (1981). Coefficient Kappa: Some Uses, Misuses, and Alternatives. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41(3), 687–699. https://doi. org/10.1177/001316448104100307 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  130. Bruin, W. B. de, & Bostrom, A. (2013). Assessing what to address in science communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(Supplement 3), 14062–14068. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212729110 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  131. Chan-Olmsted, S., & Wang, R. (2020). Understanding podcast users: Consumption motives and behaviors. New Media & Society, 24(3), 684–704. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1461444820963776 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  132. Cole, T., & Leets, L. (1999). Attachment styles and intimate television viewing: Insecurely forming relationships in a parasocial way. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16(4), 495–511. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407599164005 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  133. Derrick, J. L., Gabriel, S., & Hugenberg, K. (2009). Social surrogacy: How favored television programs provide the experience of belonging. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(2), 352–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.12.003 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  134. Dibble, J. L., Hartmann, T., & Rosaen, S. F. (2016). Parasocial Interaction and parasocial relationship: Conceptual clarification and a critical assessment of measures. Human Communication Research, 42(1), 21–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12063 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  135. Domenichini, B. (2018). Podcastnutzung in Deutschland [Podcast use in Germany]. Media Perspektiven, 46-49. ARD Media. https://www.ard-media.de/fileadmin/user_upload/ media-perspektiven/pdf/2018/0218_Domenichini.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  136. Dowling, D. O., & Miller, K. J. (2019). Immersive audio storytelling: Podcasting and serial documentary in the digital publishing industry. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 26(1), 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/19376529.2018.1509218 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  137. Eden, A. L., Johnson, B. K., Reinecke, L., & Grady, S. M. (2020). Media for coping during COVID-19 social distancing: Stress, anxiety, and psychological well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.577639 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  138. Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. (2004). Coping: Pitfalls and promise. Annual review of psychology, 55, 745–774. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141456 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  139. Goldsmith, D. J., & MacGeorge, E. L. (2000). The impact of politeness and relationship on perceived quality of advice about a problem. Human Communication Research, 26(2), 234–263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2000.tb00757.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  140. Greenwood, D. N., & Long, C. R. (2009). Psychological predictors of media involvement: Solitude experiences and the need to belong. Communication Research, 36(5), 637–654. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209338906 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  141. Halfmann, A., & Reinecke, L. (2021). Binge-Watching as case of escapist entertainment use. In P. Vorderer & K. Christoph (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Entertainment Theory. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190072216.013.11 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  142. Hilmes, M., & Lindgren, M. (2016). Podcast review and criticism: A forum. Radio Journal: International Studies in Broadcast & Audio Media, 14, 83–89. https://doi.org/ 10.1386/rjao.14.1.83_7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  143. Horton, D., & Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction. Psychiatry, 19(3), 215–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  144. Jarzyna, C. (2020). Parasocial interaction, the COVID-19 quarantine, and digital media (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3668053). Social Science Research Network. https://papers. ssrn.com/abstract=3668053 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  145. Katz, E., & Foulkes, D. (1962). On the use of the mass media as “escape”: Clarification of a concept. Public Opinion Quarterly, 26(3), 377–388. https://doi.org/10.1086/267111 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  146. Kenya, K., Kogel, D., & Terschüren, H. (2020, March 27). Christian Drosten – Wie ein Virologe zum erfolgreichen Podcaster wurde [Christian Drosten – How a virologist became a successful podcaster]. Deutschlandfunk Kultur. https://www.deutschland-funkkultur.de/christian-drosten-wie-ein-virologe-zum-erfolgreichen.4038.de.html?dram:article_id=473441 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  147. Kimmerle, J., & Cress, U. (2013). The effects of tv and film exposure on knowledge about and attitudes toward mental disorders. Journal of Community Psychology, 41(8), 931– 943. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.21581 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  148. Klotz, A. M. (2011). Social media and weather warnings: Exploring the new parasocial relationships in weather forecasting. http://cardinalscholar.bsu.edu/handle/123456789/194749 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  149. Krauss, L. M. (2015). Scientists as celebrities: Bad for science or good for society? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 71(1), 26–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0096340214563676 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  150. Lau, M. (2020, March 18). Virologen: Ist das unser neuer Kanzler? [Virologists: Is this our new chancellor?]. Die Zeit. https://www.zeit.de/2020/13/coronavirus-wissenschaft-aus- wirkung-auf-politik-virologen-christian-drosten-alexander-kekule Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  151. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  152. Liebers, N., & Schramm, H. (2019). Parasocial interactions and relationships with media characters–An inventory of 60 years of research. Communication Research Trends, 38(2), 4–31. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  153. Lindgren, M. (2016). Personal narrative journalism and podcasting. Radio Journal: International Studies in Broadcast & Audio Media, 14, 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1386/ rjao.14.1.23_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  154. Maddux, J. E., & Rogers, R. W. (1980). Effects of source expertness, physical attractiveness, and supporting arguments on persuasion: A case of brains over beauty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(2), 235–244. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 3514.39.2.235 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  155. Maier, M., Rothmund, T., Retzbach, A., Otto, L., & Besley, J. C. (2014). Informal learning through science media usage. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 86–103. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00461520.2014.916215 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  156. Martinez-Conde, S., Macknik, S. L., & Powell, D. (2016). The plight of the celebrity scientist. Scientific American, 315(4), 64–67. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1016-64 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  157. Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. https://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-395173 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  158. MacDougall, R. C. (2012). Digination: Identity, organization, and public life in the age of small digital devices and big digital domains. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press; Rowman & Littlefield. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  159. Mercer-Mapstone, L., & Kuchel, L. (2017). Core skills for effective science communication: A teaching resource for undergraduate science education. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 7(2), 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2015.111 3573 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  160. NDR. (2020). Das Coronavirus-Update von NDR Info [The coronavirus-update from NDR info]. NDR. https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/info/podcast4684.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  161. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., & Nielsen, R. (2019). Reuters Institute digital news report 2019. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://ora.ox. ac.uk/objects/uuid:18c8f2eb-f616-481a-9dff-2a479b2801d0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  162. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Schulz, A., Andı, S., Robertson, C. T., & Kleis Nielsen, R. (2021). Reuters Institute digital news report 2021. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2021-06/Digital_News_Report_2021_FINAL.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  163. Newman, N., & Gallo, N. (2020). Daily news podcasts: Building new habits in the shadow of coronavirus. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  164. O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1609406919899220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  165. Pavelko, R. L., & Myrick, J. G. (2020). Muderinos and media effects: How the my favorite murder podcast and its social media community may promote well-being in audiences with mental illness. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 27(1), 151–169. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/19376529.2019.1638925 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  166. Perks, L. G., & Turner, J. S. (2019). Podcasts and productivity: A qualitative uses and gratifications study. Mass Communication and Society, 22(1), 96–116. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/15205436.2018.1490434 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  167. Phua, J. (2016). The effects of similarity, parasocial identification, and source credibility in obesity public service announcements on diet and exercise self-efficacy. Journal of Health Psychology, 21(5), 699–708. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  168. Rubin, A. M., & Step, M. M. (2000). Impact of motivation, attraction, and parasocial interaction on talk Radio listening. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(4), 635–654. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4404_7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  169. Sanderson, J., & Emmons, B. (2014). Extending and withholding forgiveness to Josh Hamilton: Exploring forgiveness within parasocial interaction. Communication & Sport, 2(1), 24–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167479513482306 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  170. Sanderson, J., & Truax, C. (2014). I hate you man!’: Exploring maladaptive parasocial interaction expressions to college athletes via Twitter. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics, 2014, 333–351. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  171. Schlütz, D., & Hedder, I. (2021). Aural parasocial relations: Host–listener relationships in podcasts. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/19376529.2 020.1870467 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  172. Sherman-Morris, K. (2005). Tornadoes, television and trust—A closer look at the influence of the local weathercaster during severe weather. Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards, 6(4), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hazards.2006.10.002 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  173. Sood, G. (2020). tuber: Access YouTube from R. R package version 0.9.9. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  174. Steenbuck, T. (2020, April 9). Podcasts: Medien-Gewinner der Coronakrise [Podcasts: Corona crisis media winners]. NDR. https://www.ndr.de/fernsehen/sendungen/zapp/ index.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  175. Stevis-Gridneff, M. (2020, April 5). The rising heroes of the coronavirus era? Nations’ top scientists. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/05/world/europe/scientists-coronavirus-heroes.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  176. Tukachinsky, R., & Stever, G. (2019). Theorizing development of parasocial engagement. Communication Theory, 29(3), 297–318. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qty032 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  177. Turner, J. R. (1993). Interpersonal and psychological predictors of parasocial interaction with different television performers. Communication Quarterly, 41(4), 443–453. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379309369904 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  178. Utz, S., Gaiser, F., & Wolfers, L. N. (2022). Guidance in the chaos: Effects of science communication by virologists during the COVID-19 crisis in Germany and the role of parasocial phenomena: Public Understanding of Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 09636625221093194 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  179. Utz, S., Otto, F., & Pawlowski, T. (2021). “Germany crashes out of world cup”: A mixedmethod study on the effects of crisis communication on facebook. Journal of Sport Management, 35(1), 44–54. https://doi.org/10.1123/JSM.2019-0430 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  180. Über 15 Mio. Abrufe: Der gewaltige Erfolg des “Coronavirus Update” mit Professor Christian Drosten [Over 15 million hits: The tremendous success of the “coronavirus update” with professor Christian Drosten]. (2020, March 26). MEEDIA. https://meedia. de/2020/03/26/ueber-15-mio-abrufe-der-gewaltige-erfolg-des-coronavirus-update-mit- professor-christian-drosten/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  181. VERBI Software. (2019). MAXQDA 2020 [computer software]. Berlin, Germany: VERBI Software. Available at maxqda.com Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  182. Westlund, O., & Ghersetti, M. (2015). Modelling news media use: Positing and applying the GC/MC model to the analysis of media use in everyday life and crisis situations. Journalism Studies, 16(2), 133–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2013.868139 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  183. Wichert, F. (2020, April 27). Der Held, der keiner sein wollte [The hero who didn’t want to be one]. T-Online. https://www.t-online.de/-/87771476 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  184. Wolfers, L. N., & Schneider, F. M. (2020). Using media for coping: A scoping review. Communication Research, 0093650220939778. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650220939778 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  185. Wormer, H. (2020). German media and coronavirus: Exceptional communication—or just a catalyst for existing tendencies? Media and Communication, 8(2), 467–470. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v8i2.3242 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  186. Wrather, K. (2016). Making ‘maximum fun’ for fans: Examining podcast listener participation online. Radio Journal: International Studies in Broadcast & Audio Media, 14(1), 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1386/rjao.14.1.43_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  187. Yuan, S., Ma, W., & Besley, J. C. (2019). Should scientists talk about GMOs nicely? Exploring the effects of communication styles, source expertise, and preexisting attitude. Science Communication, 41(3), 267–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019837623 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  188. Zhao, X. (2009). Media use and global warming perceptions: A snapshot of the reinforcing spirals. Communication Research, 36(5), 698–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209338911 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  189. Zuraikat, L. (2020). The parasocial nature of the podcast. In J. Hendricks (Ed.), Radio’s second country: Past, present, and future perspectives (pp. 39-52). Rutgers University Press. https://doi.org/10.36019/9780813598505-005 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-427
  190. Argote Tironi, P., Barham, E., Zuckerman Daly, S., Gerez, J. E., Marshall, J., & Pocasangre, O. (2021). Messages that increase COVID-19 vaccine acceptance: Evidence from online experiments in six Latin American countries. PloS One, 16(10), e0259059. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259059 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  191. Aschwanden, C. (2021). Five reasons why COVID herd immunity is probably impossible. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  192. Nature, 591(7851), 520–522. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00728-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  193. Bish, A., Yardley, L., Nicoll, A., & Michie, S. (2011). Factors associated with uptake of vaccination against pandemic influenza: A systematic review. Vaccine, 29(38), 6472–6484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.06.107 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  194. Bresge, A. (2021, April 5). Vaccine selfies are the new social media trend, but also a reminder of unequal access. The Canadian Press. https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/vaccine-selfies-are-the-new-social-media-trend-but-also-a-reminder-of-unequal- access-1.5374668 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  195. Chou, W.-Y. S., Burgdorf, C. E., Gaysynsky, A., & Hunter, C. M. (2020). COVID-19 vaccination communication: Applying behavioral and social science to address vaccine hesitancy and foster vaccine confidence. US National Institutes of Health. https://obssr. od.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/COVIDReport_Final.pdf?emci=712687ce- 1e60-eb11-a607-00155d43c992&emdi=e4597073-8d64-eb11-9889-00155d43c992 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  196. &ceid=4112502 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  197. Christensen, P. N., Rothgerber, H., Wood, W., & Matz, D. C. (2004). Social norms and identity relevance: A motivational approach to normative behavior. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(10), 1295–1309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204264480 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  198. Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015–1026. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 3514.58.6.1015 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  199. Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 151–192). McGraw-Hill. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  200. COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring. (2021). Impfbereitschaft [Vaccination willingness]. https://projekte.uni-erfurt.de/cosmo2020/web/explorer/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  201. Covid-Norms. (2021). Monitoring and analyzing preventive behavior. https://covid-norms.ch/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  202. Diekmann, A. (2020). Emergence of and compliance with new social norms: The example of the Corona crisis. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 49(4), 236–248. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-2020-0021 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  203. East, K., McNeill, A., Thrasher, J. F., & Hitchman, S. C. (2021). Social norms as a predictor of smoking uptake among youth: A systematic review, meta-analysis and metaregression of prospective cohort studies. Addiction, 116(11), 2953–2967. https://doi. org/10.1111/add.15427 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  204. Epton, T., Lawes-Wickwar, S., Ghio, D., Shorter, G. W., Whittaker, E., Arden, M. A., Armitage, C., Byrne-Davis, L., Chadwick, P., Drury, J., Hart, J., Lewis, L., McBride, E., O’Connor, D., Swanson, V., Kamal, A., & Chater, A. (2011). Optimising vaccination uptake for Covid-19. https://www.bps.org.uk/coronavirus-resources/professional/optimising-vaccine-uptake Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  205. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  206. Federal Office of Public Health. (2021, May 17). “Ein Herz für uns alle”: BAG lanciert neue Informationskampagne zur Covid-19-Impfung [“A heart for us all”: FOPH launches new information campaign on Covid-19 vaccination; Press release]. Bern. https://www.bag.admin.ch/bag/de/home/das-bag/aktuell/medienmitteilungen.msg-id-83547.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  207. Geber, S., & Friemel, T. N. (2022). Tracing-technology adoption during the Covid-19 pandemic: The multifaceted role of social norms. International Journal of Communication, 16, 247–266. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/18089 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  208. Geber, S., & Hefner, D. (2019). Social norms as communicative phenomena: A communication perspective on the theory of normative social behavior. Studies in Communication and Media, 8(1), 6–28. https://doi.org/10.5771/2192-4007-2019-1-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  209. Geber, S., Ho, S. S., & Ou, M. (2022, May 26–30). Communicative and normative influences on the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19: A cross-cultural study in Singapore and Switzerland. 72nd Annual Conference of the International Communication Association (ICA), Paris, France. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  210. Geber, S., & Sedlander, E. (2022). Communication as the crucial link: Toward a multilevel approach to normative social influence. Studies in Communication Sciences. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.24434/j.scoms.2022.02.005 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  211. Green, S. B., & Yang, Y. (2009). Reliability of summed item scores using structural equation modeling: An alternative to coefficient alpha. Psychometrika, 74(1), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9099-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  212. Hitchman, S. C., Tribelhorn, L., Geber, S., & Friemel, T. N. (2021). Reasons for not getting vaccinated against COVID-19 in German-speaking Switzerland: An online survey among vaccine hesitant 16-60 year olds. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/hnzke Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  213. Hubbard, T. L. (2015). The varieties of momentum-like experience. Psychological Bulletin, 141(6), 1081–1119. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000016 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  214. Kelley, K. (2020). MBESS (Version 4.8.0) [Computer software]. https://cran.r-project.org/ web/packages/MBESS Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  215. Lee, S. J., & Liu, J. (2021). Leveraging dynamic norm messages to promote counter-normative health behaviors: The moderating role of current and future injunctive norms, attitude and self-efficacy. Health Communication, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/104102 36.2021.1991638 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  216. Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Holford, D. L., Finn, A., Leask, J., Thomson, A., Lombardi, D., Al-Rawi, A. K., Amazeen, M. A., Anderson, E. C., Armaos, K. D., Betsch, C., Bruns, H. H. B., Ecker, U. K. H., Gavaruzzi, T., Hahn, U., Herzog, S., Juanchich, M., . . . Vraga, E. K. (2021). The COVID-19 vaccine communication handbook. A practical guide for improving vaccine communication and fighting misinformation. SciBeh. http://repository.essex.ac.uk/29625/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  217. Loomba, S., Figueiredo, A. de, Piatek, S. J., Graaf, K. de, & Larson, H. J. (2021). Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(3), 337–348. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562- 021-01056-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  218. Loschelder, D. D., Siepelmeyer, H., Fischer, D., & Rubel, J. A. (2019). Dynamic norms drive sustainable consumption: Norm-based nudging helps café customers to avoid disposable to-go-cups. Journal of Economic Psychology, 75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. joep.2019.02.002 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  219. Lüthy, B. (2021, January 3). 50 Prozent der Schweizer sind bereit, sich impfen zu lassen [50 percent of the Swiss are willing to be vaccinated]. 20min. https://www.20min.ch/ story/50-prozent-der-schweizer-sind-bereit-sich-impfen-zu-lassen-584758043422 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  220. Maglio, S. J., & Polman, E. (2016). Revising probability estimates: Why increasing likelihood means increasing impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(2), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000058 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  221. Manning, M. (2009). The effects of subjective norms on behaviour in the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analysis. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 48(Pt 4), 649–705. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466608X393136 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  222. McNeish, D. (2018). Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 412–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000144 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  223. Moehring, A., Collis, A., Garimella, K., Rahimian, M. A., Aral, S., & Eckles, D. (2021). Surfacing norms to increase vaccine acceptance. SSRN Electronic Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3782082 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  224. Mortensen, C. R., Neel, R., Cialdini, R. B., Jaeger, C. M., Jacobson, R. P., & Ringel, M. M. (2019). Trending norms: A lever for encouraging behaviors performed by the minority. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(2), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617734615 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  225. Palm, R., Bolsen, T., & Kingsland, J. T. (2021). The effect of frames on COVID-19 vaccine resistance. Frontiers in Political Science, 3, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2021.661257 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  226. Patrick, M. E., Neighbors, C., & Lee, C. M. (2012). A hierarchy of 21st birthday drinking norms. Journal of College Student Development, 53(4), 581–585. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2012.0060 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  227. Ratcliff, C. L., Jensen, J. D., Scherr, C. L., Krakow, M., & Crossley, K. (2019). Loss/gain framing, dose, and reactance: A message experiment. Risk Analysis, 39(12), 2640– 2652. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13379 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  228. Revelle, W., & Zinbarg, R. E. (2009). Coefficients Alpha, Beta, Omega, and the glb: Comments on Sijtsma. Psychometrika, 74(1), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9102-z Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  229. Rhodes, N., Shulman, H. C., & McClaran, N. (2020). Changing norms: A meta-analytic integration of research on social norms appeals. Human Communication Research, 46(2-3), 161–191. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqz023 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  230. Rimal, R. N., Lapinski, M. K., Turner, M. M., & Smith, K. C. (2011). The attribute-centered approach for understanding health behaviors: Initial ideas and future research directions. Studies in Communication Sciences, 11(1), 15–34. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  231. Rimal, R. N., & Storey, J. D. (2020). Construction of meaning during a pandemic: The forgotten role of social norms. Health Communication, 35(14), 1732–1734. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1838091 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  232. Ritchie, H., Mathieu, E., Rodés-Guirao, L., Appel, C., Giattino, C., Ortiz-Ospina, E., Hasell, J., Macdonald, B., Beltekian, D., & Roser, M. (2020). Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19): OurWorldInData.org. https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  233. Schmid, P., Rauber, D., Betsch, C., Lidolt, G., & Denker, M.-L. (2017). Barriers of influenza vaccination intention and behavior: A systematic review of influenza vaccine hesitancy, 2005 – 2016. PLOS ONE, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0170550 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  234. Schneider, P. (2021, January 15). Impfbereitschaft in der Schweiz nimmt markant zu [Vaccination willingness in Switzerland increases markedly]. Srf.Ch. https://www.srf.ch/ news/schweiz/6-corona-umfrage-der-srg-impfbereitschaft-in-der-schweiz-nimmt-markant-zu Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  235. Shulman, H. C., Rhodes, N., Davidson, E., Ralston, R., Borghetti, L., & Morr, L. (2017). The state of the field of social norms research. International Journal of Communication, 11, 1192–1213. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  236. Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika, 74(1), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-008-9101-0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  237. Sinclair, S., & Agerström, J. (2021). Do social norms influence young people’s willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine? Health Communication, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1937832 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  238. Sparkman, G., Howe, L., & WALTON, G. (2021). How social norms are often a barrier to addressing climate change but can be part of the solution. Behavioural Public Policy, 5(4), 528–555. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.42 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  239. Sparkman, G., & Walton, G. M. (2017). Dynamic norms promote sustainable behavior, even if it is counternormative. Psychological Science, 28(11), 1663–1674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617719950 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  240. Sparkman, G., & Walton, G. M. (2019). Witnessing change: Dynamic norms help resolve diverse barriers to personal change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 82, 238–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.01.007 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  241. Swissmedic. (2020, December 19). Swissmedic erteilt Zulassung für den ersten Covid-19-Impfstoff in der Schweiz [Swissmedic authorizes first Covid 19 vaccine in Switzerland]. [Press release]. Bern. https://www.swissmedic.ch/swissmedic/de/home/news/coronavirus-covid-19/covid-19-impfstoff_erstzulassung.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  242. Zuzak, T. J., Zuzak-Siegrist, I., Rist, L., Staubli, G., & Simões-Wüst, A. P. (2008). Attitudes towards vaccination: Users of complementary and alternative medicine versus non-users. Swiss Medical Weekly, 138(47-48), 713–718. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-13603 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-453
  243. Adegbola, O., & Gearhart, S. (2019). Examining the relationship between media use and political engagement: A comparative study among the United States, Kenya, and Nigeria. International Journal of Communication, 13, 1231–1251. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  244. Ardèvol-Abreu, A., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2017). Effects of editorial media bias perception and media trust on the use of traditional, citizen, and social media news. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 94(3), 703–724. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016654684 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  245. Arlt, D., Schumann, C., & Wolling, J. (2020). Upset with the refugee policy: Exploring the relations between policy malaise, media use, trust in news media, and issue fatigue. Communications, 45(s1), 624–647. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2019-0110 Armando, A. (2019). Public political communication: Ideologies, partisanship and media Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  246. freedom in Indonesia. In A. Grüne, K. Hafez, S. Priyadharma, & S. Schmidt (Eds.), Media and transformation in Germany and Indonesia: Asymmetrical comparisons and perspectives, (pp. 49–71), Frank & Timme. D. Zillmann & J. Bryant (Eds.), Selective exposure to communication (pp. 63-91). Lawrence Erlbaum. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  247. Badan Nasional Penanganan Bencana. (2020). Sebanyak 2.925 bencana alam terjadi pada 2020 di tanah air, bencana hidrometeorologi mendominasi [2.925 cases of natural disaster reported in 2020 in Indonesia, dominated by hydrometeorology disaster]. National Agency on Disaster Management. https://bnpb.go.id/berita/sebanyak-2-925-ben- cana-alam-terjadi-pada-2020-di-tanah-air-bencana-hidrometeorologi-mendominasi Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  248. Ball-Rokeach, S. J., & DeFleur, M. L. (1976). A dependency model of mass-media effects. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  249. Communication Research, 3(1), 3–21. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  250. Beyer, A., & Figenschou, T. U. (2018). Media hypes and public opinion: Human interest frames and hype fatigue. In P. Vasterman (Ed.), From media hype to Twitter storm: News explosions and their impact on issues, crises and public opinion (pp. 249–266). Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt21215m0.16 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  251. Boukes, M., & Vliegenthart, R. (2017). News consumption and its unpleasant side effect. Journal of Media Psychology, 29(3), 137–147. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/ a000224 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  252. Brosius, H.-B., & Kepplinger, H. M. (1995). Killer and victim issues: Issue competition in the agenda-setting process of German television. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 7(3), 211–231. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/7.3.211 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  253. Bruin, K. de, Haan, Y. de, Vliegenthart, R., Kruikemeier, S. & Boukes, M. (2021). News avoidance during the Covid-19 crisis: Understanding information overload. Digital Journalism, 9(9), 1286–1302. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2021.1957967 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  254. Ceron, A., & Memoli, V. (2015). Trust in government and media slant. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 20(3), 339–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161215572634 Chakravartty, P., Kuo, R., Grubbs, V., & McIlwain, C. (2018). #CommunicationSoWhite. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  255. Journal of Communication, 68(2), 254–266. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy003 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  256. Chao Su, C., Jund Liu, & Baohua Zhou (2020). Two levels of digitalization and internet use across Europe, China, and the U.S. International Journal of Communication, 14, 5838–5859. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  257. CIA – Central Intelligence Agency (2020). The world fact book. https://www.cia.gov/the- world-factbook/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  258. Claussen, D. S. (2020). Beware of international comparative research. Newspaper Research Journal, 41(1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739532919898774 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  259. Dahlgren, P. (1995). Television and the public sphere: Citizenship, democracy and the media. SAGE Publications Ltd. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  260. De Vreese, C. H., & Boomgaarden, H. (2006). News, political knowledge and participation: The differential effects of news media exposure on political knowledge and participation. Acta Politica, 41(4), 317–341. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500164 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  261. Demeter, M. (2019). The winner takes it all: International inequality in communication and media studies today. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 96(1), 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018792270 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  262. DetikHot (2020). Reisa Broto Asmoro: Model luar negeri, host Dr Oz hingga jubir COVID-19 [Reisa Broto Asmoro: International model, host Dr Oz until spokesperson COVID-19]. https://hot.detik.com/celeb/d-5047078/reisa-broto-asmoro-model-luar-negeri-host-dr-oz-hingga-jubir-covid-19/2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  263. Din, N. U. (2020). Media landscape in Pakistan. https://medialandscapes.org/country/pakistan Downs, A. (1972). Up and down with ecology: The issue-attention cycle. Public Interest, 28, 38–50. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  264. Dunwoody, S. & Griffin, R. J. (2015). Risk information seeking and processing model. In H. Cho, T. Reimer, & K. McComas (Eds.), The Sage handbook of risk communication, 102-116. SAGE. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  265. Edelman (2021). 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer. https://www.edelman.com/trust/2021-trust-barometer Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  266. Edgerly, S. (2020, October 15). Both sides of news avoidance. The Hill. https://thehill.com/opinion/education/520056-both-sides-of-news-avoidance Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  267. Ejaz, W., Bräuer, M., & Wolling, J. (2017). Subjective evaluation of media content as a moderator of media effects on European identity: Mere exposure and the hostile media phenomenon. Media and Communication, 5(2), 41. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v5i2.885 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  268. Emmer, M., & Kunst, M. (2018). Digital citizenship revisited: The impact of ICTs on citizens’ political communication beyond the Western state. International Journal of Communication, 12, 2191-2211. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  269. Finance Division Government of Pakistan (2019). Pakistan Economic Survey 2018-19. https://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapters_19/Economic_Survey_2018_19.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  270. Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). News avoidance in the UK remains high as lockdown restrictions are eased. Reuters Institute, University of Oxford. UK Covid-19 News and Information Project: Factsheet 8. https://reutersinstitute.poli- tics.ox.ac.uk/news-avoidance-uk-remains-high-lockdown-restrictions-are-eased Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  271. Freedom House (2020). Freedom in the world. https://freedomhouse.org/countries/free- dom-world/scores Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  272. Gallotti, R., Valle, F., Castaldo, N., Sacco, P., & Domenico, M. de (2020). Assessing the risks of ‘infodemics’ in response to COVID-19 epidemics. Nature human behaviour, 4(12), 1285–1293. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-00994-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  273. Geers, S. (2020). News consumption across media platforms and content. Public Opinion Quarterly, 84(S1), 332–354. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfaa010 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  274. Geiß, S. (2011). Patterns of relationships between issues: An analysis of German prestige newspapers. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 23(3), 265–286. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq050 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  275. Geiß, S. (2015). Die Aufmerksamkeitsspanne der Öffentlichkeit. [The attention span of the public] Nomos. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  276. Golman, R., Hagmann, D., & Loewenstein, G. (2017). Information avoidance. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(1), 96–135. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20151245 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  277. Gurr, G., & Metag, J. (2021). Examining avoidance of ongoing political issues in the news: A longitudinal study of the impact of audience issue fatigue. International Journal of Communication, 15, 1789–1809. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  278. Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Communication, Society and Politics. Cambridge University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  279. Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (Eds.). (2012). Comparing media systems beyond the Western world. Communication, Society and Politics. Cambridge University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  280. Hanitzsch, T., van Dalen, A., & Steindl, N. (2018). Caught in the nexus: A comparative and longitudinal analysis of public trust in the press. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 23(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161217740695 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  281. Hasebrink, U., Jensen, K. B., van den Bulck, H., Hölig, S., & Maeseele, P. (2015). Changing patterns of media use across cultures: A challenge for longitudinal research. International Journal of Communication, 9(1), 435–457. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  282. Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. (2021). COVID-19 Map. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  283. Jones, J. P. (2005). Entertaining politics: New political television and civic culture. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  284. Kang, D. S., & Mastin, T. (2008). How cultural difference affects international tourism public relations websites: A comparative analysis using Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. Public Relations Review, 34(1), 54–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2007.11.002 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  285. Kassambara, A. (2018). Machine learning essentials: Practical guide in r. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  286. Khalid, A., Nawaz, M. B., & Nazeer, J. (2021). The effect of news TV channels coverage during pandemic Covid-19 on youth in Pakistan. Global Mass Communication Review, VI(I), 302–320. https://doi.org/10.31703/gmcr.2021(vi-i).23 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  287. Khokhar, R. (2022, October 9). Pakistan Covid-19 update: Current trends and future projections. Stimson. https://www.stimson.org/2020/pakistan-covid-19-update-current- trends-and-future-projections/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  288. Kim, H. K., Ahn, J., Atkinson, L., & Kahlor, L. A. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 misinformation on information seeking, avoidance, and processing: A multicountry comparative study. Science Communication, 42(5), 586–615. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547020959670 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  289. Kinnick, K. N., Krugman, D. M., & Cameron, G. T. (1996). Compassion fatigue: Communication and burnout toward social problems. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 73(7), 687–707. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909607300314 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  290. Kirchgässner, G. (2008). Homo oeconomicus: Das ökonomische Modell individuellen Verhaltens und seine Anwendung in den Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften [Homo oeconomicus: The economic modell of individual behavior and its application in economics and social sciences]. Mohr Siebeck. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  291. Kohring, M., & Matthes, J. (2007). Trust in news media. Communication Research, 34(2), 231–252. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0093650206298071 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  292. Kuhlmann, C., Schumann, C., & Wolling, J. (2014). “Ich will davon nichts mehr sehen und hören!” Exploration des Phänomens Themenverdrossenheit [I do not want to hear or see anything about this anymore!” Exploration of the phenomenon issue fatigue.] Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 62(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615- 634x-2014-1-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  293. Kühne, R., & Schemer, C. (2015). The emotional effects of news frames on information processing and opinion formation. Communication Research, 42(3), 387–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650213514599 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  294. Ladd, J. M. (2010). Why Americans hate the media and how it matters. Princeton Univ. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  295. Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  296. Link, E. (2021). Information avoidance during health crises: Predictors of avoiding information about the COVID-19 pandemic among German news consumers. Information processing & management, 58(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102714 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  297. Liu, X., & Lu, J. (2020). Comparatives media studies in the digital age: Does the internet erode trust in media? A comparative study of 46 countries. International Journal of Communication, 14, 5822–5837. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  298. Livingstone, S. (2016). On the challenges of cross-national comparative media research. European Journal of Communication, 18(4), 477–500. https://doi.org/10.1177/026732 3103184003 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  299. Luhmann, N. (2000). The reality of the mass media. Cultural memory in the present. Stanford Univ. Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  300. McCombs, M. (2005). A Look at Agenda-setting: past, present and future. Journalism Studies, 6(4), 543–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700500250438 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  301. Metag, J., & Arlt, D. (2016). Das Konstrukt Themenverdrossenheit und seine Messung. Theoretische Konzeptualisierung und Skalenentwicklung. [Issue fatigue and its meas-urement: Theoretical conceptualization and scale development]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 64(4), 542–563. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2016-4-542 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  302. Mukaromah, V. F. (2020). Mengenal Dokter Reisa, Anggota Tim Komunikasi Gugus Tugas Percepatan Penanganan Covid-19 [Getting to know medical doctor Reisa, member of communication team of Covid-19 taskforce]. https://www.kompas.com/tren/read/2020/06/09/141500665/mengenal-dokter-reisa-anggota-tim-komunikasi-gugus-tugas-percepatan?page=2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  303. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Robertson, C., Eddy, K., & Nielsen, R. (2022). Reuters Institute digital news report 2022. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://reutersinstitute.poli- tics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2022-06/Digital_News-Report_2022.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  304. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Schulz, A., Andi, S., Robertson, C.T. Nielsen, R.K. (2021). Reuters institute digital news report 2021. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2021-06/Digital_News_Report_2021_FINAL.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  305. Ng, E., White, K. C., & Saha, A. (2020). #CommunicationSoWhite: Race and power in the academy and beyond. Communication, Culture and Critique, 13(2), 143–151. https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/tcaa011 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  306. Noprian, E. (2020, December 27). Data positivity rate Covid-19 sampai 27 Desember 2020 [Data positivity rate Covid-19 until 27 December 2022]. Berita Satu. https://www.beritasatu.com/berita-grafik/713881/data-positivity-rate-covid19-sampai-27-desember-2020 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  307. Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (2019). Compendium on gender statistics of Pakistan 2019. https://www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files/social_statistics/publications/Compendium_of_Gender_Statistics_2019.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  308. Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (2021). Population and housing census – 2017 report. https://www.pbs.gov.pk/sites/default/files/population/census_reports/ncr_pakistan.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  309. Pathak-Shelat, M., Kotilainen, S., & Hirsjärvi, I. (2015). A polycentric approach to comparative research: Reflections on an international youth media participation study. Journal of Children and Media, 9(3), 386–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.201 5.1053645 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  310. Rieger, D., Reinecke, L., Frischlich, L., & Bente, G. (2014). Media entertainment and well-being-linking hedonic and eudaimonic entertainment experience to media-induced recovery and vitality. Journal of Communication, 64(3), 456–478. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12097 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  311. RKI (2021). Aktuelle Daten und Informationen zu Infektionskrankheiten und public health [Current data and information on infectious diseases and public health]. https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/Infekt/EpidBull/Archiv/2021/Ausgaben/06_21.pdf? blob=publicationFile Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  312. Robinson, M. J. (1976). Public affairs television and the growth of political malaise: The case of “The selling of the pentagon”. American Political Science Review, 70(2), 409– Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  313. 432. https://doi.org/10.2307/1959647 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  314. Rochyadi-Reetz, M., & Löffelholz, M. (2019). A pressing tale of two countries: Comparing the media system of Indonesia and Germany. In A. Grüne, K. Hafez, S. Priyadharma, & S. Schmidt (Eds). Media and transformation in Germany and Indonesia: Asymmetrical comparisons and perspectives (pp. 31-48). Frank et Timme. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  315. Rochyadi-Reetz, M., Maryani, E., & Agustina, A. (2020). Public’s media use and gratification sought during Corona virus outbreak in Indonesia: A national survey. Jurnal Komunikasi Ikatan Sarjana Komunikasi Indonesia, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.25008/jkiski. v5i1.381 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  316. Schemer, C. (2014). Emotional effects in political communication. In C. Reinemann (Ed.), Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  317. Political Communication (pp. 569–589). De Gruyter Mouton. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  318. Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and riming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9–20. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.0021-9916.2007.00326.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  319. Schuck, A. R. T. (2017). Media malaise and political cynicism. In P. Rössler, C. A. Hoffner, & L. Zoonen (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects (pp. 1–19). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0066 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  320. Schumann, C. (2018). Is topic fatigue an international problem? Four theses. Global Media Journal (German Edition), 8(2) 1-12. https://doi.org/10.22032/dbt.37780 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  321. Shehata, A. (2016). News habits among adolescents: The influence of family communication on adolescents’ news media use—Evidence from a three-wave panel study. Mass Communication and Society, 19(6), 758–781. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2016.1199705 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  322. Siebenhaar, K., Köther, A., & Alpers, G. (2020). Dealing with the COVID-19 infodemic: Distress by information, information avoidance, and compliance with preventive measures. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.567905 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  323. Skovsgaard, M., & Andersen, K. (2020). Conceptualizing news avoidance: Towards a shared understanding of different causes and potential solutions. Journalism Studies, 21(4), 459–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2019.1686410 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  324. Smelser, N. J. (1976). Comparative methods in the social sciences. Prentice-Hall methods of social science series. Prentice-Hall. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  325. So, J., & Alam, N. (2019). Predictors and effects of anti-obesity message fatigue: A thought-listing analysis. Health Communication, 34(7), 755–763. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2018.1434736 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  326. Soroya, S. H., Farooq, A., Mahmood, K., Isoaho, J., & Zara, S. (2021). From information seeking to information avoidance: Understanding the health information behavior during a global health crisis. Information Processing & Management, 58(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102440 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  327. Toff, B., & Kalogeropoulos, A. (2020). All the news that’s fit to ignore. Public Opinion Quarterly, 84(S1), 366–390. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfaa016 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  328. Toff, B., & Palmer, R. A. (2019). Explaining the gender gap in news avoidance: “News-is-for-men” perceptions and the burdens of caretaking. Journalism Studies, 20(11), 1563–1579. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1528882 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  329. Tsfati, Y. (2003). Does audience skepticism of the media matter in agenda setting? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47(2), 157–176. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4702_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  330. UNDP (2020,). Human development reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-devel- opment-index-hdi Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  331. van den Bulck, J. (2006). Television news avoidance: Exploratory results from a one-year follow-up study. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(2), 231–252. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem5002_4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  332. Vasterman, P. (Ed.). (2018). From media hype to Twitter storm: News explosions and their impact on issues, crises and public opinion. Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt21215m0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  333. Vermeer, S., Kruikemeier, S., Trilling, D., & Vreese, C. de (2022). Using panel data to study political interest, news media trust, and news media use in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Journalism Studies, 23(5-6), 740–760. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616 70X.2021.2017790 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  334. Vina Fadhrotul Mukaromah (2020, June 9). Mengenal Dokter Reisa, Anggota Tim Komunikasi Gugus Tugas Percepatan Penanganan Covid-19. Kopmas.Com, https://www.kompas.com/tren/read/2020/06/09/141500665/mengenal-dokter-reisa-anggota-tim-komunikasi-gugus-tugas-percepatan?page=2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  335. Vowe, G., & Wolling, J. (2001). Die Organisationsfunktion der Netzkommunikation. Wie lassen sich Unterschiede in der Nutzung von Online-Angeboten erklären? [The organizing function of internet-communication. How can differences in the use of online-services be explained?]. In U. Maier-Rabler & M. Latzer (Eds.), Kommunikationskulturen zwischen Kontinuität und Wandel: Universelle Netzwerke für die Zivilgesellschaft (pp. 269–285). UVK. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  336. We Are Social (2020). Digital 2020: Global digital overview. https://wearesocial.com/digital-2020 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  337. Wolipop (2020). Gaya dr Reisa yang bikin adem saat jumpa pers Corona, ini ciri khasnya [Here are some calming style pf Reisa (dr. med) during press release on Corona]. https://wolipop.detik.com/celeb-style/d-5104002/foto-gaya-dr-reisa-yang-bikin-adem-saat-jumpa-pers-corona-ini-ciri-khasnya?_ga=2.250396806.1682711801.1649242954-1760642998.1621429181 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  338. Wolling, J. (1999). Politikverdrossenheit durch Massenmedien? Der Einfluß der Medien auf die Einstellungen der Bürger zur Politik [Political alienation through mass media? The influence of the mass media on citizen’s attitudes towards politics]. Westdeutscher Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  339. Wolling, J., Kuhlmann, C., Schumann, C., Berger, P., & Arlt, D. (2021). Corona 2020 – Zerreißprobe für die Gesellschaft? Persönliches Erleben und mediale Vermittlung einer multiplen Krise [Corona 2020 – crucial test for societies? Personal experience and medial mediation of a multiple crisis]. Universitätsverlag Ilmenau. https://doi.org/10.22032/dbt.48770 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  340. Wonneberger, A., Schoenbach, K., & van Meurs, L. (2013). Dimensionality of TV-news exposure: Mapping news viewing behavior with people-meter data. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 25(1), 87–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/eds004 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  341. World Health Organization (2020). Advice for the public. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  342. Yamamoto, M., Kushin, M. J., & Dalisay, F. (2017). Social media and political disengagement among young adults: A moderated mediation model of cynicism, efficacy, and social media use on apathy. Mass Communication & Society, 20(2), 149–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2016.1224352 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477
  343. Ytre-Arne, B., & Moe, H. (2021). Doomscrolling, monitoring and avoiding: News use in COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. Journalism Studies, 22(13), 1739–1755. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2021.1952475 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2022-3-477

Citation

Download RIS Download BibTex

Downloads

Download chapter (PDF)

Notice

This work is protected by copyright and may only be used in accordance with the provisions of the Terms of Use and License Agreement. Any use of the work beyond this is expressly prohibited and will be prosecuted.

Share via email

Media