Zum Verhältnis von Journalismus und Aktivismus: Boundary work als Navigieren zwischen Komplementarität und Hybridisierung.

Table of contents

Bibliographic information


Cover of Volume: SCM Studies in Communication and Media Volume 14 (2025), Issue 1
Open Access Full access

SCM Studies in Communication and Media

Volume 14 (2025), Issue 1


Authors:
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyright Year
2025
ISSN-Online
2192-4007
ISSN-Print
2192-4007

Chapter information


Open Access Full access

Volume 14 (2025), Issue 1

Zum Verhältnis von Journalismus und Aktivismus: Boundary work als Navigieren zwischen Komplementarität und Hybridisierung.


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


Preview:

Discursive self-empowerment, the visibility of political attitudes and acting towards societal transformation are vernacular practices in social media. This also applies to parts of journalistic actors who advocate for equality and social justice alongside or within their professional activities. Results from qualitative ethnographic case studies on border crossers who are active in journalism and/or activism based on a feminist perspective are reported. The boundary work approach, implemented here in a comparative design that examines the perspectives of journalists and activists in an interrelationship, guides the analysis. In addition to discursive boundary work (normative imagery/role orientation), the actual positioning of the actors in their professional fields was also analyzed (practical actuality/role performance). A comparison of the groups shows a tendency towards opposing boundary work: While the activists discursively argue and justify complementary cooperation of independent, clearly separated fields of activity, the (feminist) journalists justify the hybridization of both fields. This hybridization is legitimized with the (new) norm of transparent, evidence-based partisanship, linked to the idea of community-oriented journalism with a high degree of personal approachability. On the level of practical performance, the activists show formal and stylistic overlaps with journalistic practices, contrary to the verbal demarcation, while the journalists (can) realize the hybridity that verbally has been made strong to varying degrees. The concept of boundary work is made fruitful for the praxeologically based analysis of ongoing negotiating of boundaries between professional journalism and other forms of public communication, which pose a particular challenge in digital media environments. The relational perspective of investigation here allows for a nuanced and dynamic consideration of boundary changes beyond dichotomous distinctions (journalism, non-journalism).

Bibliography


  1. Albury, K. (2014). Porn and sex education, porn as sex education. Porn Studies, 1(1–2), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2013.863654 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  2. Allen, M., Emmers, T., Gebhardt, L., & Giery, M. A. (1995). Exposure to pornography and acceptance of rape myths. Journal of Communication, 45(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1995.tb00711.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  3. Austin, E. W., Pinkleton, B. E., & Funabiki, R. P. (2007). The desirability paradox in the effects of media literacy training. Communication Research, 34(5), 483–506. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650207305233 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  4. Aznar-Martínez, B., Lorente-De-Sanz, J., López-i-Martín, X., & Castillo-Garayoa, J. A. (2024). Pornography and gender-based violence: Two neglected topics in sexuality education. A systematic review. Sex Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2024.2316154 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  5. Bandura, A. (2009). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. In J. Bryant, & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects (pp. 110–140). Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  6. Bergsma, L. J., & Carney, M. E. (2008). Effectiveness of health-promoting media literacy education: A systematic review. Health Education Research, 23(3), 522–542. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cym084 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  7. Botta, R. A. (1999). Television images and adolescent girls’ body image disturbance. Journal of Communication, 49(2), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02791.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  8. Brown, Halpern, C. T., & L’Engle, K. L. (2005). Mass media as a sexual super peer for early maturing girls. Journal of Adolescent Health, 36(5), 420–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.06.003 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  9. Brown, J. D., & L’Engle, K. L. (2009). X-rated: Sexual attitudes and behaviors associated with U.S. early adolescents’ exposure to sexually explicit media. Communication Research, 36(1), 129–151. https://doi.org/doi:10.1177/0093650208326465 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  10. Busby, D. M., Willoughby, B. J., Chiu, H.-Y., & Olsen, J. A. (2020). Measuring the multidimensional construct of pornography: A long and short version of the pornography usage measure. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 49(8), 3027–3039. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01688-w Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  11. Byrd-Bredbenner, C., Murray, J., & Schlussel, Y. R. (2005). Temporal changes in anthropometric measurements of idealized females and young women in general. Women & health, 41(2), 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1300/J013v41n02_02 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  12. Byron, P., McKee, A., Watson, A., Litsou, K., & Ingham, R. (2021). Reading for realness: Porn literacies, digital media, and young people. Sexuality & Culture, 25(3), 786–805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-020-09794-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  13. Carrotte, E. R., Davis, A. C., & Lim, M. S. C. (2020). Sexual behaviors and violence in pornography: Systematic review and narrative synthesis of video content analyses. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(5), e16702. https://doi.org/10.2196/16702 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  14. Carter, T. J., Ferguson, M. J., & Hassin, R. R. (2011). A single exposure to the American flag shifts support toward republicanism up to 8 months later. Psychological Science, 22(8), 1011–1018. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611414726 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  15. Cavazos-Rehg, P. A., Krauss, M. J., Spitznagel, E. L., Schootman, M., Bucholz, K. K., Peipert, J. F., Sanders-Thompson, V., Cottler, L. B., & Bierut, L. J. (2009). Age of sexual debut among US adolescents. Contraception, 80(2), 158–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2009.02.014 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  16. Collins, R., N Elliott, M., Berry, S., Kanouse, D., Kunkel, D., Hunter, S., & Miu, A. (2004). Watching sex on television predicts adolescent initiation of sexual behavior. Pediatrics, 114(3), 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2003-1065-L Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  17. Coughlin, J. W., & Kalodner, C. (2006). Media literacy as a prevention intervention for college women at low-or high-risk for eating disorders. Body Image, 3(1), 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2006.01.001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  18. Czopp, A. M., Monteith, M. J., Zimmerman, R. S., & Lynam, D. R. (2004). Implicit attitudes as potential protection from risky sex: Predicting condom use with the IAT. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 26(2–3), 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2004.9646407 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  19. Dawson, K., Nic Gabhainn, S., & MacNeela, P. (2019). Toward a model of porn literacy: Core concepts, rationales, and approaches. The Journal of Sex Research, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2018.1556238 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  20. Durantini, M. R., Albarracin, D., Mitchell, A. L., Earl, A. N., & Gillette, J. C. (2006). Conceptualizing the influence of social agents of behavior change: A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of HIV-prevention interventionists for different groups. Psychological Bulletin, 132(2), 212–248. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.2.212 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  21. Dworkin, A. (1989). Pornography: Men possessing women. Plume. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  22. 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: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  23. Flood, M. (2007). Exposure to pornography among youth in Australia. Journal of Sociology, 43(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783307073934 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  24. Fritz, N., & Paul, B. (2017). From orgasms to spanking: A content analysis of the agentic and objectifying sexual scripts in feminist, for women, and mainstream pornography. Sex Roles, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0759-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  25. Gleason, N., & Sprankle, E. (2019). The effects of pornography on sexual minority men’s body image: An experimental study. Psychology & Sexuality, 10(4), 301–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2019.1637924 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  26. Goldfarb, E. S., & Lieberman, L. D. (2021). Three decades of research: The case for comprehensive sex education. Journal of Adolescent Health, 68(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.07.036 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  27. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  28. Hald, G. M., Malamuth, N. M., & Yuen, C. (2010). Pornography and attitudes supporting violence against women: Revisiting the relationship in nonexperimental studies. Aggressive Behavior, 36(1), 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20328 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  29. Hald, G. M., & Malamuth, N. N. (2015). Experimental effects of exposure to pornography: The moderating effect of personality and mediating effect of sexual arousal. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(1), 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0291-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  30. Hald, G. M., Malamuth, N. N., & Lange, T. (2013). Pornography and sexist attitudes among heterosexuals. Journal of Communication, 63(4), 638–660. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12037 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  31. Halliwell, E., Easun, A., & Harcourt, D. (2011). Body dissatisfaction: Can a short media literacy message reduce negative media exposure effects amongst adolescent girls? British Journal of Health Psychology, 16(2), 396–403. https://doi.org/doi:10.1348/135910710X515714 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  32. Hansen, C. H., & Krygowski, W. (1994). Arousal-augmented priming effects: Rock music videos and sex object schemas. Communication Research, 21(1), 24–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365094021001003 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  33. Harkness, E. L., Mullan, B., & Blaszczynski, A. (2015). Association between pornography use and sexual risk behaviors in adult consumers: A systematic review. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(2), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2014.0343 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  34. Hunter, J. A., Figueredo, A. J., & Malamuth, N. M. (2010). Developmental pathways into social and sexual deviance. Journal of Family Violence, 25(2), 141–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-009-9277-9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  35. Irving, L. M., & Berel, S. R. (2001). Comparison of media-literacy programs to strengthen college women’s resistance to media images. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 25(2), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.00012 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  36. Jeong, S. H., Cho, H., & Hwang, Y. (2012). Media literacy interventions: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Communication, 62(3), 454–472. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01643.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  37. Jonas, K. J., Hawk, S. T., Vastenburg, D., & de Groot, P. (2014). “Bareback” pornography consumption and safe-sex intentions of men having sex with men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(4), 745–753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0294-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  38. Kann, L., McManus, T., Harris, W. A., Shanklin, S. L., Flint, K. H., Queen, B., Lowry, R., Chyen, D., Whittle, L., & Thornton, J. (2018). Youth risk behavior surveillance—United States, 2017. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 67(8), 1–114. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/ss/ss6708a1.htm. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  39. Kanuga, M., & Rosenfeld, W. D. (2004). Adolescent sexuality and the internet: The good, the bad, and the URL. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology, 17(2), 117–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2004.01.015 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  40. Khan, S. I., Hudson-Rodd, N., Saggers, S., Bhuiyan, M. I., & Bhuiya, A. (2005). Safer sex or pleasurable sex? Rethinking condom use in the AIDS era. Sexual Health, 1(4), 217–225. https://doi.org/10.1071/SH04009 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  41. Klaassen, M. J. E., & Peter, J. (2015). Gender (in)equality in internet pornography: A content analysis of popular pornographic internet videos. The Journal of Sex Research, 52(7), 721–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2014.976781 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  42. Kraus, S. W., & Rosenberg, H. (2016). Lights, camera, condoms! Assessing college men’s attitudes toward condom use in pornography. Journal of American College Health, 64(2), 139–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2015.1085054 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  43. Li, M., Liu, Y., & Zheng, L. (2023). Sexually explicit internet media consumption and sexual risk behaviors among Chinese male sexual minorities: The moderating role of perceived realism. Health Communication, 38(10), 2080–2086. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2022.2053272 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  44. Litsou, K., Byron, P., McKee, A., & Ingham, R. (2021). Learning from pornography: Results of a mixed methods systematic review. Sex Education, 21(2), 236–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2020.1786362 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  45. Livingstone, S., Van Couvering, E., & Thumim, N. (2005). Adult media literacy: A review of the research literature. https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/5283/1/aml.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  46. Löfgren-Mårtenson, L., & Månsson, S.-A. (2010). Lust, love, and life: A qualitative study of swedish adolescents’ perceptions and experiences with pornography. The Journal of Sex Research, 47(6), 568–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490903151374 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  47. Maheux, A. J., Roberts, S. R., Evans, R., Widman, L., & Choukas-Bradley, S. (2021). Associations between adolescents’ pornography consumption and self-objectification, body comparison, and body shame. Body Image, 37, 89–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2021.01.014 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  48. Marsh, K. L., Johnson, B. T., & Scott-Sheldon, L. A. (2001). Heart versus reason in condom use: Implicit versus explicit attitudinal predictors of sexual behavior. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie. https://doi.org/10.1026//0949-3946.48.2.161 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  49. McLean, S., Paxton, S. J., & Wertheim, E. H. (2016a). Does media literacy mitigate risk for reduced body satisfaction following exposure to thin-ideal media? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45(8), 1678–1695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0440-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  50. McLean, S., Paxton, S. J., & Wertheim, E. H. (2016b). The role of media literacy in body dissatisfaction and disordered eating: A systematic review. Body Image, 19, 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.08.002 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  51. Meldrum, M. L. (2000). A brief history of the randomized controlled trial: From oranges and lemons to the gold standard. Hematology/oncology clinics of North America, 14(4), 745–760. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-8588(05)70309-9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  52. Mestre-Bach, G., Villena-Moya, A., & Chiclana-Actis, C. (2024). Pornography use and violence: A systematic review of the last 20 years. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 25(2), 1088–1112. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380231173619 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  53. Miller, D. J., & McBain, K. A. (2022). The content of contemporary, mainstream pornography: A literature review of content analytic studies. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 17(2), 219–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/15546128.2021.2019648 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  54. Miller, D. J., McBain, K. A., & Raggatt, P. T. (2019). An experimental investigation into pornography’s effect on men’s perceptions of the likelihood of women engaging in porn-like sex. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 8(4), 365–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000202 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  55. O’Brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity, 41(5), 673–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  56. Oncale, R. M., & King, B. M. (2001). Comparison of men’s and women’s attempts to dissuade sexual partners from the couple using condoms. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 30(4), 379–391. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1010209331697 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  57. Paslakis, G., Chiclana Actis, C., & Mestre-Bach, G. (2022). Associations between pornography exposure, body image and sexual body image: A systematic review. Journal of Health Psychology, 27(3), 743–760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105320967085 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  58. Perry, N. S., Nelson, K. M., Carey, M. P., & Simoni, J. M. (2019). Sexually explicit media exposure as a sexual milestone among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men. Health Psychology, 38(1), 29–32. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000678 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  59. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2006). Adolescents’ exposure to sexually explicit material on the internet. Communication Research, 33(2), 178–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650205285369 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  60. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2007). Adolescents’ exposure to a sexualized media environment and their notions of women as sex objects. Sex Roles, 56(5), 381–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9176-y Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  61. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2010). Processes underlying the effects of adolescents’ use of sexually explicit internet material: The role of perceived realism. Communication Research, 37(3), 375–399. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210362464 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  62. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2011). The influence of sexually explicit internet material on sexual risk behavior: A comparison of adolescents and adults. Journal of Health Communication, 16(7), 750–765. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2011.551996 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  63. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2014). Does exposure to sexually explicit Internet material increase body dissatisfaction? A longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 297–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.071 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  64. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2016). Adolescents and pornography: A review of 20 years of research. The Journal of Sex Research, 53(4-5), 509–531. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1143441 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  65. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In R. E. Petty, & J. T. Cacioppo, (Eds.), Communication and Persuasion (pp. 1–24). Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  66. Pinkleton, B. E., Austin, E. W., Chen, Y.-C. Y., & Cohen, M. (2012). The role of media literacy in shaping adolescents’ understanding of and responses to sexual portrayals in mass media. Journal of Health Communication, 17(4), 460–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2011.635770 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  67. Pinkleton, B. E., Austin, E. W., Chen, Y.-C. Y., & Cohen, M. (2013). Assessing effects of a media literacy-based intervention on US adolescents’ responses to and interpretations of sexual media messages. Journal of Children and Media, 7(4), 463–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2013.781512 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  68. Pornhub Insights. (2020). The 2019 year in review. https://www.pornhub.com/insights/2019-year-in-review Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  69. Potter, W. J. (2013). Media literacy. Sage Publications. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  70. Primack, B., Douglas, E., Land, S., Miller, E., & Fine, M. J. (2014). Comparison of media literacy and usual education to prevent tobacco use: A cluster-randomized trial. Journal of School Health, 84(2), 106–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12130 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  71. Primack, B., Gold, M., Switzer, G. E., Hobbs, R., Land, S. R., & Fine, M. J. (2006). Development and validation of a smoking media literacy scale for adolescents. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 160(4), 369–374. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.160.4.369 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  72. R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  73. Ramos, M. R., Barreto, M., Ellemers, N., Moya, M., Ferreira, L., & Calanchini, J. (2016). Exposure to sexism can decrease implicit gender stereotype bias. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46(4), 455–466. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2165 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  74. Rasi, P., Vuojärvi, H., & Ruokamo, H. (2019). Media literacy education for all ages. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 11(2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.23860/JMLE-2019-11-2-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  75. Rodenhizer, K. A. E., & Edwards, K. M. (2017). The impacts of sexual media exposure on adolescent and emerging adults’ dating and sexual violence attitudes and behaviors: A critical review of the literature. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 20(4), 439–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838017717745 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  76. Rothman, E. F., Adhia, A., Christensen, T. T., Paruk, J., Alder, J., & Daley, N. (2018). A pornography literacy class for youth: Results of a feasibility and efficacy pilot study. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 13(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15546128.2018.1437100 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  77. Rousseau, A., Beyens, I., Eggermont, S., & Vandenbosch, L. (2017). The dual role of media internalization in adolescent sexual behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(6), 1685–1697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0902-4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  78. Rozendaal, E., Lapierre, M. A., Van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Buijzen, M. (2011). Reconsidering advertising literacy as a defense against advertising effects. Media Psychology, 14(4), 333–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2011.620540 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  79. Sakaluk, J. K., & Gillath, O. (2016). The causal effects of relational security and insecurity on condom use attitudes and acquisition behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(2), 339–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0618-x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  80. Samson, L., & Buijzen, M. (2019). Craving healthy foods?! How sensory appeals increase appetitive motivational processing of healthy foods in adolescents. Media Psychology, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2019.1584569 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  81. Signorell, A. (2016). DescTools: Tools for descriptive statistics. R package version 0.99, 18. https://andrisignorell.github.io/DescTools/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  82. Smith, C. (2021). Putting porn studies (back) into porn literacy. Synoptique, 9(2), 160–182. https://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/id/eprint/45872/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  83. Snagowski, J., Wegmann, E., Pekal, J., Laier, C., & Brand, M. (2015). Implicit associations in cybersex addiction: Adaption of an Implicit Association Test with pornographic pictures. Addictive Behaviors, 49, 7–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2015.05.009 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  84. Stice, E., & Shaw, H. (2004). Eating disorder prevention programs: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 130(2), 206–227. https://psycnet.apa.org/buy/2004-11156-002 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  85. Sun, C., Bridges, A., Johnson, J. A., & Ezzell, M. B. (2016). Pornography and the male sexual script: An analysis of consumption and sexual relations. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(4), 983–994. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0391-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  86. Telles Dias, P. R., Souto, K., & Page-Shafer, K. (2006). Long-term female condom use among vulnerable populations in Brazil. AIDS and Behavior, 10(1), 67–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-006-9139-x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  87. Testa, G., Mestre-Bach, G., Chiclana Actis, C., & Potenza, M. N. (2023). Problematic pornography use in adolescents: From prevention to intervention. Current Addiction Reports, 10(2), 210–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-023-00469-4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  88. Tokunaga, R. S., Wright, P. J., & Vangeel, L. (2020). Is pornography consumption a risk factor for condomless sex? Human Communication Research, 46(2–3), 273–299. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqaa005 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  89. Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80(5), 352–373. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0020071 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  90. Vandenbosch, L., & Eggermont, S. (2015). The role of mass media in adolescents’ sexual behaviors: Exploring the explanatory value of the three-step self-objectification process. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(3), 729–742. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0292-4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  91. Vandenbosch, L., & van Oosten, J. M. F. (2017). The Relationship between online pornography and the sexual objectification of women: The attenuating role of porn literacy education. Journal of Communication, 67(6), 1015–1036. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12341 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  92. Vannier, S. A., Currie, A. B., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2014). Schoolgirls and soccer moms: A content analysis of free “teen” and “MILF” online pornography. The Journal of Sex Research, 51(3), 253–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2013.829795 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  93. Venter, A., Maxwell, S. E., & Bolig, E. (2002). Power in randomized group comparisons: The value of adding a single intermediate time point to a traditional pretest-posttest design. Psychological Methods, 7(2), 194–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.2.194 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  94. Wang, F., Chen, X., Bo, B., Zhang, T., Liu, K., Jiang, J., Wang, Y., Xie, H., Liang, Z., & Guan, J.-S. (2023). State-dependent memory retrieval: Insights from neural dynamics and behavioral perspectives. Learning & Memory, 30(12), 325–337. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.053893.123 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  95. Ward, L. M. (2002). Does television exposure affect emerging adults’ attitudes and assumptions about sexual relationships? Correlational and experimental confirmation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1014068031532 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  96. Wright, P. J. (2011). Mass media effects on youth sexual behavior assessing the claim for causality. Annals of the International Communication Association, 35(1), 343–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2011.11679121 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  97. Wright, P. J., Herbenick, D., & Paul, B. (2022). Casual condomless sex, range of pornography exposure, and perceived pornography realism. Communication Research, 49(4), 547–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502211003765 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  98. Xiao, X., Su, Y., & Lee, D. K. L. (2021). Who consumes new media content more wisely? Examining personality factors, SNS use, and new media literacy in the era of misinformation. Social Media + Society, 7(1), 2056305121990635. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305121990635 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  99. Xie, X., Gai, X., & Zhou, Y. (2019). A meta-analysis of media literacy interventions for deviant behaviors. Computers & Education, 139, 146–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.008 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  100. Zajonc, R. B. (2001). Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(6), 224–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00154 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-8
  101. Aigner, I., & Lenz, I. (2019). Antifeminismus und Antigenderismus in medialen und digitalen Öffentlichkeiten [Antifeminism and antigenderism in mediated and digital public spheres]. In J. Dorer, B. Geiger, B. Hipfl & V. Ratković (Hrsg.), Handbuch Medien und Geschlecht (S. 1–10). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-20712-0_45-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  102. Altmeppen, K.-D. (2016). Anwaltschaftlicher Journalismus [Advocacy journalism]. In J. Heesen (Hrsg.), Handbuch Medien- und Informationsethik (S. 132–137). J.B. Metzler. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-05394-7_18 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  103. Ammann, I. (2010). Gedenktagsjournalismus. Bedeutung und Funktion in der Erinnerungskultur [Memorial day journalism. Meaning and function in the culture of memory]. In K. Arnold, W. Hömberg & S. Kinnebrock (Hrsg.), Geschichtsjournalismus: Zwischen Information und Inszenierung (S. 153–167). LIT Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  104. Baer, H. (2016). Redoing feminism: Digital activism, body politics, and neoliberalism. Feminist Media Studies, 16(1), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2015.1093070 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  105. Banjac, S., & Hanusch, F. (2022). A question of perspective: Exploring audiences’ views of journalistic boundaries. New Media & Society, 24(3), 705–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1461444820963795 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  106. Barker-Plummer, B., & Barker-Plummer, D. (2017). Twitter as a feminist resource: #YesAllWomen, digital platforms, and discursive social change. In J. Earl & D. A. Rohlinger (Hrsg.), Social Movements and Media (S. 91–118). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2050-206020170000014010 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  107. Barnard, S. R. (2018). Tweeting #Ferguson: Mediatized fields and the new activist journalist. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2252–2271. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817712723 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  108. Belair-Gagnon, V., & Holton, A. E. (2018). Boundary work, interloper media, and analytics in newsrooms: An analysis of the roles of web analytics companies in news production. Digital Journalism, 6(4), 492–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1445001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  109. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739–768. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  110. Bettendorf, S. (2019). Instagram-Journalismus: Ein Leitfaden für Redaktionen und freie Journalisten [Instagram journalism: A guideline for newsrooms and free journalists]. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-25853-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  111. Boltanski, L., & Thévenot, L. (2007). Über die Rechtfertigung. Eine Soziologie der kritischen Urteilskraft [On justification. Economies of Worth]. Hamburger Edition. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  112. boyd, d. (2011). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Hrsg.), A Networked self: Identity, community and culture on social network sites (S. 39–58). Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  113. Brinkmann, J. (2023). Journalistische Grenzgänger. Wie die Reportage-Formate von funk Wirklichkeit konstruieren. [Journalistic border crossers. How funk’s reportage formats construct reality]. Otto-Brenner-Stiftung. https://www.otto-brenner-stiftung.de/journalistische-grenzgaenger/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  114. Brüggemann, M., Frech, J., & Schäfer, T. (2021). Transformative journalisms: How the ecological crisis is transforming journalism [Preprint]. Open Science Framework. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/mqv5w Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  115. Bruns, A. (2017). Gatewatching and news curation: Journalism, social media, and the public sphere. Peter Lang. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  116. Burri, R. V. (2008). Doing distinctions: Boundary work and symbolic capital in radiology. Social Studies of Science, 38(1), 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312707082021 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  117. Cabas-Mijares, A. (2023). In feminism we trust! On how feminist standpoint epistemologies shape journalism practices in two Argentine digital newsrooms. Journalism, 24(8), 1615–1633. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849221090741 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  118. Carlson, M. (2015). Introduction. The many boundaries of journalism. In M. Carlson & S. C. Lewis (Hrsg.), Boundaries of journalism: Professionalism, practices and participation (S. 1–18). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315727684 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  119. Carlson, M. (2016). Metajournalistic discourse and the meanings of journalism: Definitional control, boundary work, and legitimation. Communication Theory, 26(4), 349–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12088 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  120. Carlson, M., & Lewis, S. C. (Hrsg.) (2015). Boundaries of journalism: Professionalism, practices and participation. Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  121. Carlson, M., & Lewis, S. C. (2019). Boundary work. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen & T. Hanitzsch (Hrsg.), The handbook of journalism studies (S. 123–135). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315167497-8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  122. Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  123. Chan, J. M., & Lee, C.-C. (1984). The journalistic paradigm on civil protests: A case study of Hong Kong. In A. Arno & W. Dissanayake (Hrsg.), The news media in national and international conflict (S. 182–202). Westview. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  124. Cohen, B. C. (1963). The press and foreign policy. Princeton University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  125. Costera Meijer, I. (2020). Understanding the audience turn in journalism: From quality discourse to innovation discourse as anchoring practices 1995–2020. Journalism Studies, 21(16), 2326–2342. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1847681 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  126. Crossley, A. D. (2015). Facebook feminism: Social media, blogs, and new technologies of contemporary U.S. feminism. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 20(2), 253–268. https://doi.org/10.17813/1086-671X-20-2-253 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  127. Di Salvo, P. (2020). The boundary space between journalism and activism. In P. Di Salvo, Digital whistleblowing platforms in journalism (S. 155–174). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38505-7_7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  128. Domingo, D., & Le Cam, F. (2015). Journalism beyond the boundaries. The collective construction of news narratives. In M. Carlson & S. C. Lewis (Hrsg.), Boundaries of journalism: professionalism, practices and participation (S. 137–151). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315727684 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  129. Drüeke, R. (2019). Digitale Öffentlichkeiten und feministische Protestkulturen [Digital public spheres and feminist protest cultures]. In J. Dorer, B. Geiger, B. Hipfl & V. Ratković (Hrsg.), Handbuch Medien und Geschlecht. Perspektiven und Befunde der feministischen Kommunikations- und Medienforschung [Handbook media and gender. Perspectives and findings of feminist communication and media research] (S. 1–11). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-20712-0_42-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  130. Edgerly, S., & Vraga, E. K. (2020). Deciding what’s news: News-ness as an audience concept for the hybrid media environment. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 97(2), 416–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020916808 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  131. Eldridge II, S. A. (2019). Where do we draw the line? Interlopers, (ant)agonists, and an unbounded journalistic field. Media and Communication, 7(4), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i4.2295 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  132. Ferrucci, P., & Canella, G. (2023). Resisting the resistance (journalism): Ben Smith, Ronan Farrow, and delineating boundaries of practice. Journalism, 24(3), 513–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849211064379 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  133. Fotopoulou, A. (2017). Feminist activism and digital networks: Between empowerment and vulnerability. Palgrave Macmillan. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  134. Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48(6), 781–795. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  135. Ginosar, A., & Reich, Z. (2022). Obsessive-activist journalists: A new model of journalism? Journalism Practice, 16(4), 660–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1816488 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  136. Hanitzsch, T., Hanusch, F., Mellado, C., Anikina, M., Berganza, R., Cangoz, I., Coman, M., Hamada, B., Hernández, M. E., Karadjov, C. D., Moreira, S. V., Mwesige, P. G., Plaisance, P. L., Reich, Z., Seethaler, J., Skewes, E. A., Vardiansyah Noor, D., & Kee Wang Yuen, E. (2011). Mapping journalism cultures across nations: A comparative study of 18 countries. Journalism Studies, 12(3), 273–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2010.512502 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  137. Hanitzsch, T., & Vos, T. P. (2017). Journalistic roles and the struggle over institutional identity: The discursive Constitution of Journalism. Communication Theory, 27(2), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12112 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  138. Hanusch, F. (2018). Political journalists’ corporate and personal identities on twitter profile pages: A comparative analysis in four Westminster democracies. New Media & Society, 20(4), 1488–1505. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817698479 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  139. Hanusch, F., & Löhmann, K. (2022). Dimensions of peripherality in journalism: A typology for studying new actors in the journalistic field. Digital Journalism, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2022.2148549 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  140. Hepp, A., & Loosen, W. (2021). Pioneer journalism: Conceptualizing the role of pioneer journalists and pioneer communities in the organizational re-figuration of journalism. Journalism, 22(3), 577–595. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919829277 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  141. Hoffjann, O. (2021). Public Relations und Journalismus [Public relations and journalism]. In P. Szyszka, R. Fröhlich & U. Röttger (Hrsg.), Handbuch der Public Relations (S. 1–22). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28149-6_17-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  142. Holt, K., Figenschou, T. U., & Frischlich, L. (2019). Key dimensions of alternative news media. Digital Journalism, 7(7), 860–869. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2019.1625715 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  143. Holton, A. E., & Belair-Gagnon, V. (2018). Strangers to the game? Interlopers, intralopers, and shifting news production. Media and Communication, 6(4), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v6i4.1490 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  144. Horak, G. (2008). Feministische Zeitschriften in Österreich. Feministischer Journalismus arbeitet nach anderen Qualitätskriterien [Feminist magazines in Austria. Feminist journalism works according to different quality criteria]. In L. Susemichel, S. Rudigier & G. Horak (Hrsg.), Feministische Medien: Öffentlichkeiten jenseits des Malestream (S. 19–31). U. Helmer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  145. Ismail, A., Torosyan, G., & Tully, M. (2019). Social media, legacy media and gatekeeping: The protest paradigm in news of Ferguson and Charlottesville. The Communication Review, 22(3), 169–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714421.2019.1651153 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  146. Jackson, S. J., Bailey, M., & Welles, B. F. (2020). #HashtagActivism: Networks of race and gender justice. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10858.001.0001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  147. Kananovich, V., & Perreault, G. (2021). Audience as journalistic boundary worker: The rhetorical use of comments to critique media practice, assert legitimacy and claim authority. Journalism Studies, 22(3), 322–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1869912 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  148. Keinert, A., Heft, A., & Dogruel, L. (2019). Wie sehen News-Entrepreneurs die Zukunft ihrer Profession? Vier Thesen zum Journalismus von morgen [How do news entrepreneurs see the future of their profession? Four theses on the journalism of tomorrow]. Journalistik. Zeitschrift für Journalismusforschung, 2(3), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1453/2569-152X-32019-10134-de Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  149. Kinnebrock, S. (2005). Anita Augspurg (1857–1943). Feministin und Pazifistin zwischen Journalismus und Politik. Eine kommunikationshistorische Biographie [Anita Augspurg (1857–1943). Feminist and pacifist between journalism and politics. A biography from the perspective of communication history]. Centaurus. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  150. Kinnebrock, S., Klaus, E., & Wischermann, U. (2014). GrenzgängerInnentum als terra incognita der KommunikatorInnenforschung? Zum Potenzial von Autobiographien für die historische Berufsfeldforschung [Border crossers as terra incognita in communicator research? On the potential of autobiographies for historical vocational field research]. Medien & Zeit, 29(4), 5–15. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  151. Klaus, E. (2004). Öffentlichkeit und Privatheit: Frauenöffentlichkeiten und feministische Öffentlichkeiten [Public and private spheres: Female public spheres and feminist public spheres]. In R. Becker & B. Kortendiek (Hrsg.), Handbuch Frauen- und Geschlechterforschung. Theorie, Methoden, Empirie (S. 209–216). Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  152. Klaus, E., & Wischermann, U. (2013). Journalistinnen. Eine Geschichte in Biographien und Texten 1848–1990 [Female journalists. A history in biographies and texts 1848–1990]. LIT. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  153. Laws, N., & Chojnicka, J. (2020). “A Future to believe in”: Introducing varieties of advocacy journalism. The examples sustainability and the Sanders campaign. Journalism Studies, 21(9), 1261–1283. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1742773 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  154. Lenz, I. (2019). Feminismus: Denkweisen, Differenzen, Debatten [Feminism: mindsets, differences, debates]. In B. Kortendiek, B. Riegraf & K. Sabisch (Hrsg.), Handbuch Interdisziplinäre Geschlechterforschung (S. 231–241). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-12496-0_18 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  155. Lilienthal, V. (2017). Recherchejournalismus für das Gemeinwohl. Correctiv – eine Journalismusorganisation neuen Typs in der Entwicklung [Investigative journalism for the common good. Correctiv – a new type of journalism organization in development]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 65(4), 659–681. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2017-4-659 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  156. Lilienthal, V., & Neverla, I. (Hrsg.). (2017). Lügenpresse. Anatomie eines Kampfbegriffs [Lying press. Anatomy of a tendentious term]. Kiepenheuer & Witsch. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  157. Loosen, W. (2015). The notion of the „blurring boundaries“: Journalism as a (de-)differentiated phenomenon. Digital Journalism, 3(1), 68–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.928000 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  158. Loosen, W., Ahva, L., Reimer, J., Solbach, P., Deuze, M., & Matzat, L. (2022). ‘X Journalism’. Exploring journalism’s diverse meanings through the names we give it. Journalism, 23(1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884920950090 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  159. Lünenborg, M. (1997). Journalistinnen in Europa: Eine international vergleichende Analyse zum Gendering im sozialen System Journalismus [Female journalists in Europe: An international comparative analysis of gendering in the social system of journalism]. Westdeutscher Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  160. Lünenborg, M. (2005). Journalismus als kultureller Prozess: Zur Bedeutung von Journalismus in der Mediengesellschaft. Ein Entwurf [Journalism as a cultural process: On the significance of journalism in the media society. An outline]. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  161. Lünenborg, M., Raetzsch, C., Reißmann, W., & Siemon, M. (2020). Media Practice in performativen Öffentlichkeiten: Für eine praxistheoretische Positionierung der Journalismusforschung [Media practice in performative publics: Toward a practice-theoretical positioning of journalism research]. In J. Schützeneder, K. Meier & N. Springer (Hrsg.), Neujustierung der Journalistik/Journalismusforschung in der digitalen Gesellschaft: Proceedings zur Jahrestagung der Fachgruppe Journalistik/Journalismusforschung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Publizistik- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 2019 (S. 34–51). Deutsche Gesellschaft für Publizistik- und Kommunikationswissenschaft e.V. https://doi.org/10.21241/ssoar.70817 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  162. Martini, F. (2020). Wer ist #MeToo? Eine netzwerkanalytische Untersuchung (anti-)feministischen Protests auf Twitter [Who is #MeToo? A network analysis of (anti-)feminist protests on twitter]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 68(3), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2020-3-255 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  163. Meier, K. (2019). Berichterstattungsmuster als Strategie der Komplexitätsreduktion [Reporting patterns as a strategy for complexity reduction]. In B. Dernbach, A. Godulla & A. Sehl (Hrsg.), Komplexität im Journalismus (S. 101–116). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-22860-6_10 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  164. Mellado, C. (2019). Journalists’ professional roles and role performance. In M. Powers (Hrsg.), Oxford research encyclopedia of communication. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.832 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  165. Mellado, C., & Alfaro, A. (2020). Platforms, journalists and their digital selves. Digital Journalism, 8(10), 1258–1279. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1817763 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  166. Møller Hartley, J., & Askanius, T. (2021). Activist-journalism and the norm of objectivity: Role performance in the reporting of the #MeToo movement in Denmark and Sweden. Journalism Practice, 15(6), 860–877. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1805792 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  167. Neuberger, C. (2014). Konflikt, Konkurrenz und Kooperation. Interaktionsmodi in einer Theorie der dynamischen Netzwerköffentlichkeit [Conflict, competition and cooperation. Modes of interaction in a theory of dynamic networked public sphere]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 62(4), 567–587. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2014-4-567 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  168. Neuberger, C., Nuernbergk, C., & Langenohl, S. (2019). Journalism as multichannel communication. Journalism Studies, 20(9), 1260–1280. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1507685 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  169. Örnebring, H. (2013). Anything you can do, I can do better? Professional journalists on citizen journalism in six European countries. International Communication Gazette, 75(1), 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048512461761 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  170. Pfetsch, B., Löblich, M., & Eilders, C. (2018). Dissonante Öffentlichkeiten als Perspektive kommunikationswissenschaftlicher Theoriebildung [Dissonant public spheres. A new perspective in communication theory]. Publizistik, 63(4), 477–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-018-0441-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  171. Raetzsch, C., & Lünenborg, M. (2020). Anchoring practices for public connection: Media practice and its challenges for journalism studies. International Journal of Communication, 14, 2868–2886. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/11213/3100 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  172. Reschke, A. (2018). Haltung zeigen! [Show attitude!] Rowohlt. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  173. Robinson, S. (2010). Traditionalists vs. convergers: Textual privilege, boundary work, and the journalist – audience relationship in the commenting policies of online news sites. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 16(1), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856509347719 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  174. Rosen, J. (2010). The view from nowhere: Questions and answers. PressThink. https://pressthink.org/2010/11/the-view-from-nowhere-questions-and-answers/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  175. Rucht, D. (2004). The quadruple ‘A’: media strategies of protest movements since the 1960s. In W. Van de Donk, B. D. Loader, P. G. Nixon & D. Rucht (Hrsg.), Cyberprotest (S. 29–56). Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  176. Schapals, A. K. (2022). Peripheral actors in journalism: Deviating from the norm? Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003144663 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  177. Schmidt, J.-H. (2014). Twitter and the rise of personal publics. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt & C. Puschmann (Hrsg.), Twitter and Society (S. 3–14). Peter Lang. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  178. Schudson, M. (1978). Discovering the news. A social history of American newspapers. Basic Books. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  179. Schultz, T. (2021). Der Reporter-Blick von nirgendwo?: Journalismus in der Spannung zwischen Objektivität und Subjektivität [A reporter’s view from nowhere? Journalism’s tension between objectivity and subjectivity]. Publizistik, 66(1), 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-020-00624-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  180. Schulz, W. (1990). Die Konstruktion von Realität in den Nachrichtenmedien. Analyse der aktuellen Berichterstattung [The construction of reality in the news media. Analysis of current reporting] (2. Aufl.). Karl Alber. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  181. Seiler, M. (2021). Ergebnisse meiner Masterarbeit: Feministische Journalist*innen erleben einen beruflichen Rollenkonflikt [Results of my master’s thesis: Feminist journalists experience a professional role conflict]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  182. Singer, J. B. (2015). Out of bounds: Professional norms as boundary markers. In M. Carlson & S. C. Lewis (Hrsg.), Boundaries of journalism: Professionalism, practices and participation (S. 21–36). Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  183. Sobieraj, S. (2010). Reporting conventions: Journalists, activists, and the thorny struggle for political visibility. Social Problems, 57(4), 505–528. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2010.57.4.505 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  184. Susemichel, L., Rudigier, S., & Horak, G. (Hrsg.) (2008). Feministische Medien: Öffentlichkeiten jenseits des Malestream [Feminist media: Public spheres beyond the malestream]. U. Helmer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  185. Swart, J., Peters, C., & Broersma, M. (2017). Repositioning news and public connection in every­day life: A user-oriented perspective on inclusiveness, engagement, relevance, and constructiveness. Media, Culture & Society, 39(6), 902–918. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443716679034 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  186. Tuchman, G. (1972). Objectivity as strategic ritual. An examination of newsmen’s notions of objectivity. American Journal of Sociology, 77(4), 660–679. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  187. Usher, N. (2016). Interactive journalism: Hackers, data and code. University of Illinois Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  188. Vos, T. P., & Moore, J. (2020). Building the journalistic paradigm: Beyond paradigm repair. Journalism, 21(1), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884918767586 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  189. Wallace, L. R. (2017). Objectivity is dead, and I’m okay with it. Medium. https://medium.com/@lewispants/objectivity-is-dead-and-im-okay-with-it-7fd2b4b5c58f Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  190. Wallace, L. R. (2019). The view from somewhere: Undoing the myth of journalistic objectivity. University of Chicago Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  191. Weinberger, D. (2009). Transparency is the new objectivity. https://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2009/07/19/transparency-is-the-new-objectivity/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  192. Wimmer, J. (2007). (Gegen-)Öffentlichkeit in der Mediengesellschaft: Analyse eines medialen Spannungsverhältnisses [(Counter)Public sphere in the media society: Analysis of a media tension.]. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90549-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  193. Zelizer, B. (1990). Achieving journalistic authority through narrative. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 7(4), 366–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295039009360185 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  194. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-37
  195. Brüggemann, M., Frech, J., & Schäfer, T. (2021). Transformative journalisms: How the ecological crisis is transforming journalism [Preprint]. Open Science Framework. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/mqv5w Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  196. Carlson, M. (2015). Introduction. The many boundaries of journalism. In M. Carlson & S. C. Lewis (Hrsg.), Boundaries of journalism: Professionalism, practices and participation (pp. 1–18). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315727684 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  197. Clark-Parsons, R. (2022). Networked feminism: How digital media makers transformed gender justice movements. University of California Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  198. Ginosar, A., & Reich, Z. (2022). Obsessive-activist journalists: A new model of journalism? Journalism Practice, 16(4), 660–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1816488 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  199. Hepp, A., & Loosen, W. (2021). Pioneer journalism: Conceptualizing the role of pioneer journalists and pioneer communities in the organizational re-figuration of journalism. Journalism, 22(3), 577–595. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919829277 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  200. Hanitzsch, T., & Vos, T. P. (2017). Journalistic roles and the struggle over institutional identity: The discursive constitution of journalism. Communication Theory, 27(2), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12112 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  201. Hanusch, F., & Löhmann, K. (2022). Dimensions of peripherality in journalism: A typology for studying new actors in the journalistic field. Digital Journalism, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2022.2148549 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  202. Jackson, S. J., Bailey, M., & Foucault Welles, B. (2020). #HashtagActivism: Networks of race and gender justice. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10858.001.0001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  203. Laws, N., & Chojnicka, J. (2020). “A future to believe in”: Introducing varieties of advocacy journalism. The examples sustainability and the Sanders campaign. Journalism Studies, 21(9), 1261–1283. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1742773 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  204. Lünenborg, M., & Raetzsch, C. (2018). From Public Sphere to Performative Publics: Developing Media Practice as an Analytic Model. In S. Foellmer, M. Lünenborg, C. Raetzsch (Eds.), Media practices, social movements, and performativity: transdisciplinary approaches (pp. 13–35). Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  205. Møller Hartley, J., & Askanius, T. (2021). Activist-journalism and the norm of objectivity: Role performance in the reporting of the #MeToo movement in Denmark and Sweden. Journalism Practice, 15(6), 860–877. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1805792 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  206. Reißmann, W., Siemon, M., Lünenborg, M., & Raetzsch, C. (2022). Praxisprofile als mixed-methods Ansatz zur Analyse performativer Öffentlichkeiten: Vorschlag für eine relationale Journalismusforschung [Practice profiles as a mixed-methods approach to retrace performative publics: A proposal for relational journalism studies]. Studies in Communication Sciences, 22(1), 69–88. https://doi.org/10.24434/j.scoms.2022.01.3057 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  207. Sorce, G., & Thomas, T. (2025). New Digital Feminist Interventions. Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  208. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-99
  209. Abou, Y.B. & Ennam, A. (2024). Binge-watching and academic achievement among university students: A case study. Journal of Positive Psychology and Wellbeing, 8(1), 101–118. https://journalppw.com/index.php/jppw/article/view/18073/11309 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  210. Ahmed, A. A.-A. M. (2017). A new era of TV-watching behavior: Binge watching and its psychological effects. Media Watch, 8(2). 192–207. https://doi.org/10.15655/mw/2017/v8i2/49006 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  211. Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 421–458. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393203 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  212. Bastos M., Naranjo-Zolotov M., & Aparício, M. (2024). Binge-watching uncovered: Examining the interplay of perceived usefulness, habit, and regret in continuous viewing. Heliyon, 10(6), e27848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27848 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  213. Chang, Y.-J., & Peng, C.-Y. (2022). Exploring experiences of binge-watching and perceived addictiveness among binge-watchers: A qualitative study. BMC Public Health, 22(1), 2285. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14789-z Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  214. Charness, N., & Boot, W. R. (2009). Aging and information technology use: Potential and barriers. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(5), 253–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01647.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  215. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed). L. Erlbaum Associates. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  216. Czichon, M. (2019). Kumulierte Serienrezeption: Ein Modell zur Erklärung des Rezeptionsphänomens Binge Watching. [Cumulative series reception: A model to explain the phenomenon of binge watching] Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  217. Devisetty, H., & Phadtare, P. (2023). A study of the genre of shows that viewers are consuming and the platform they choose to consume the content. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2523(1), 020100. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0110642 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  218. Dhiman, D. B. (2021). Psychosocial impact of web series and streaming content: A study on indian youth. Dhiman, B., & Malik, PS (2021). Global Media Journal, 19(46), 1–7. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  219. Diego, P., & Etayo, C. (2013). Explanatory factors of preferences for domestically-produced versus American-made fiction series. Communication & Society, 26(1), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.26.36152 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  220. Döring, N. (2023). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial- und Humanwissenschaften [Research methods and evaluation in the social and human sciences] (6th ed.). Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  221. Erickson, S., Dal Cin, S., & Byl, H. (2019). An experimental examination of binge watching and narrative engagement. Social Sciences, 8(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8010019 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  222. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  223. Ferchaud, A. (2018). Binge and bingeability: The antecedants and consequences of binge-watching behaviour [Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  224. Flayelle, M., Canale, N., Vögele, C., Karila, L., Maurage, P., & Billieux, J. (2019). Assessing binge-watching behaviors: Development and validation of the “Watching TV Series Motives” and “Binge-watching Engagement and Symptoms” questionnaires. Computers in Human Behavior, 90, 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.022 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  225. Flayelle, M., Maurage, P., Di Lorenzo, K. R., Vögele, C., Gainsbury, S. M., & Billieux, J. (2020). Binge-watching: What do we know so far? A first systematic review of the evidence. Current Addiction Reports, 7(1), 44–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-020-00299-8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  226. Gantz, W., Wang, Z., Paul, B., & Potter, R. F. (2006). Sports versus all comers: Comparing TV sports fans with fans of other programming genres. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(1), 95–118. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem5001_6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  227. Granow, V. C., Reinecke, L., & Ziegele, M. (2018). Binge-watching and psychological well-being: Media use between lack of control and perceived autonomy. Communication Research Reports, 35(5), 392–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2018.1525347 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  228. Greenberg, B. S., Sherry, J., Lachlan, K., Lucas, K., & Holmstrom, A. (2010). Orientations to video games among gender and age groups. Simulation & Gaming, 41(2), 238–259. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1177/1046878108319930 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  229. Halfmann, A., & Reinecke, L. (2021). Binge-watching as case of escapist entertainment use. In P. Vorderer & C. Klimmt (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of entertainment theory, (pp. 181–203). Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.24690.25288 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  230. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  231. Hills, M. (2007). From the box in the corner to the box set on the shelf: ‘TVIII’ and the cultural/textual valorisations of DVD. New Review of Film and Television Studies, 5(1), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/17400300601140167 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  232. Horvath, J. C., Horton, A. J., Lodge, J. M., & Hattie, J. A. C. (2017). The impact of binge watching on memory and perceived comprehension. First Monday, 22(9). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v22i9.7729 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  233. Jasmine, V. M., Sruthiya, V. N., & Jose, N. (2023). Factors affecting the binge-watching behavior of young consumers. IUP Journal of Marketing Management, 22(3), 41–58. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/factors-affecting-binge-watching-behavior-young/docview/2875139569/se-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  234. Jenner, M. (2016). Is this TVIV? On Netflix, TVIII and binge-watching. New Media & Society, 18(2), 257–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814541523 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  235. Jenner, M. (2020). Researching binge-watching. Critical Studies in Television, 15(3), 267–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/1749602020935012 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  236. Jenner, M. (2021). Binge-watching and contemporary television studies. Edinburgh University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  237. Kim, D. D. E. (2020). The search for pleasure and meaning on TV, captured in-app: Eudaimonia and hedonism effects on TV consumption as self-reported via mobile app. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 64(5), 693–713. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2020.1849702 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  238. Kozak, L., & Zeller-Jacques, M. (2021). Digressions and recaps: The bingeable narrative. In L. Kozak & M. Zeller-Jacques (Eds.), Binge-watching and contemporary television studies, (pp. 207–223). Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474461986.003.0014 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  239. Kunz, R. E., Roth, A., Telkmann, V., & Zabel, C. (2022). Service value—theoretische Konzeptualisierung und empirische Exploration am Beispiel von Virtual-Reality-Games. [Service value—theoretical conceptualization and empirical exploration using the example of virtual reality games.] Internet-Intermediäre und virtuelle Plattformen medienökonomisch betrachtet: Proceedings zur Jahrestagung der Fachgruppe Medienökonomie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Publizistik- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 2021, Hamburg, Germany. https://doi.org/10.21241/SSOAR.78769 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  240. Merikivi, J, Mäntymäki, M, Salovaara, A, and Zhang, L. (2016) Binge watching television shows: conceptualization and measurement. Research Papers, 16. https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2016_rp/16 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  241. Merrill Jr., K., & Rubenking, B. (2019). Go long or go often: Influences on binge watching frequency and duration among college students. Social Sciences, 8(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8010010 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  242. Mikos, L. (2016). Digital media platforms and the use of TV content: Binge watching and video-on-demand in Germany. Media and Communication, 4(3), 154–161. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v4i3.542 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  243. Mikos, L. & Castro, D. (2021). Binge-watching and the organisation of everyday life. In M. Jenner (Ed.), Binge-watching and contemporary television studies (pp. 112–130). Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474462006-010 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  244. Moore, A. E. (2015). Binge watching: Exploring the relationship of binge watched television genres and colleges at Clemson University. Graduate Research and Discovery Symposium (GRADS), 138. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/grads_symposium/138 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  245. Nanda, A. P., & Banerjee, R. (2020). Binge watching: An exploration of the role of technology. Psychology & Marketing, 37(9), 1212–1230. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21353 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  246. Naudé, W., & Nagler, P. (2017). Technological innovation and inclusive growth in Germany. SSRN Electronic Journal, IZA DP No. 11194. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3088958 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  247. Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. SAGE Publications. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  248. Netflix. Inc (2013, December 13). Netflix declares binge watching is the new normal. PR Newswire. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/netflix-declares-binge-watching-is-the-new-normal-235713431.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  249. Nielsen. (2023, January). Streaming unwrapped: 2022 was the year of original content. https://www.nielsen.com/insights/2023/streaming-unwrapped-2022-was-the-year-of-original-content/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  250. Nikolic, D., Kostic-Stankovic, M., & Jeremic, V. (2023). How does genre preference influence the importance of film marketing mix elements: Evidence during the COVID-19 pandemics. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 36(1), 2080734. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2022.2080734 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  251. Noh, S. (2021). Dual portfolio management strategies of online subscription video on demand (SVOD) companies: A genre perspective. Journal of Media Business Studies, 18(2), 132–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/16522354.2020.1797270 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  252. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). An overview of psychological measurement. In B. B. Wolman (Eds.), Clinical Diagnosis of Mental Disorders, (pp. 97–146). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-2490-4_4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  253. O’Brien, D., Wellbrock, C.-M., & Kleer, N. (2020). Content for free? Drivers of past payment, paying intent and willingness to pay for digital journalism: A systematic literature review. Digital Journalism, 8(5), 643–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1770112 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  254. Panda, S., & Pandey, S. C. (2017). Binge watching and college students: Motivations and outcomes. Young Consumers, 18(4), 425–438. https://doi.org/10.1108/YC-07-2017-00707 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  255. Papacharissi, Z., & Mendelson, A. L. (2007). An exploratory study of reality appeal: Uses and gratifications of reality TV shows. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 51(2), 355–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838150701307152 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  256. Parrot Analytics. (2024). Most popular TV series genres based on audience demand in the United States in 2023 [Data set]. As cited in Statista. Available at https://www.statista.com/statistics/715161/most-in-demand-tv-genre-in-north-america/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  257. Perks, L. G. (2021) Binge-watching conditions and multitasking: The enjoyable ephemeral. In M. Jenner (Ed.), Binge-watching and contemporary television studies (pp. 82–97). Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474462006-008 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  258. Pierce-Grove, R. (2021). What Defines a Binge? Elapsed Time versus Episodes. In M. Jenner (Ed.), Binge-watching and contemporary television studies (pp. 82–97). Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474462006-008 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  259. Pittman, M., & Sheehan, K. (2015). Sprinting a media marathon: Uses and gratifications of binge-watching television through Netflix. First Monday, 20(10). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v20i10.6138 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  260. Pittman, M., & Steiner, E. (2019). Transportation or narrative completion? Attentiveness during binge-watching moderates regret. Social Sciences, 8(3), 99. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8030099 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  261. Rentfrow, P. J., Goldberg, L. R., & Zilca, R. (2011). Listening, watching, and reading: The structure and correlates of entertainment preferences. Journal of Personality, 79(2), 223–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00662.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  262. Rubenking, B., & Bracken, C. C. (2021). Binge watching and serial viewing: Comparing new media viewing habits in 2015 and 2020. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 14, 100356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abrep.2021.100356 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  263. Rubenking, B., Bracken, C. C., Sandoval, J., & Rister, A. (2018). Defining new viewing behaviours: What makes and motivates TV binge-watching? International Journal of Digital Television, 9(1), 69–85. https://doi.org/10.1386/jdtv.9.1.69_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  264. Rubin, A. M. (1981). An examination of television viewing motivations. Communication Research, 8(2), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365028100800201 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  265. Schaber, R.W. (2022, August 03). Roku und Fire TV: Darum sind die Fernbedienungen mit Netflix-Buttons zugepflastert [Roku and Fire TV: Why remotes have been plastered with Netfix-buttons]. Netzwelt. https://www.netzwelt.de/news/206542-roku-fire-tv-fernbedienungen-netflix-buttons-zugepflastert.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  266. Schweidel, D. A., & Moe, W. W. (2016). Binge watching and advertising. Journal of Marketing, 80(5), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.15.0258 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  267. Shim, H., & Kim, K. J. (2018). An exploration of the motivations for binge-watching and the role of individual differences. Computers in Human Behavior, 82, 94–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.032 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  268. Shim, H., Lim, S., Jung, E. E., & Shin, E. (2018). I hate binge-watching but I can’t help doing it: The moderating effect of immediate gratification and need for cognition on binge-watching attitude-behavior relation. Telematics and Informatics, 35(7), 1971–1979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.07.001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  269. Song, L., Hu, B., & Mou, J. (2021). Investigating consumer binge-watching behavior: A valence framework perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 62, 102604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102604 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  270. Starosta, J. A., & Izydorczyk, B. (2020). Understanding the phenomenon of binge-watching: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(12), 4469. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17124469 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  271. Starosta, J., Izydorczyk, B., & Lizińczyk, S. (2019). Characteristics of people’s binge-watching behavior in the “entering into early adulthood” period of life. Health Psychology Report, 7(2), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.5114/hpr.2019.83025 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  272. Steiner, E. (2018). Binge-watching killed the idiot box: The changing identities of viewers and television in the experiential, streaming video age [Doctoral dissertation, Temple University]. http://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/2442 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  273. Steiner, E. (2021). Commercial constructions of binge-viewers: A typology of the new and improved couch potato as seen on TV. In E. Steiner (Ed.), Binge-Watching and Contemporary Television Studies, (pp. 65–81). Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474461986.003.0005 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  274. Steiner, E., & Xu, K. (2020). Binge-watching motivates change: Uses and gratifications of streaming video viewers challenge traditional TV research. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 26(1), 82–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856517750365 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  275. Sung, Y. H., Kang, E. Y., & Lee, W.-N. (2018). Why do we indulge? Exploring motivations for binge watching. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 62(3), 408–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2018.1451851 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  276. Taqiyah, L. N. (2024). The relationship between binge-watching behavior and psychological well-being in early adulthood during the pandemic COVID-19. European Journal of Psychological Research, 11(2). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  277. Tefertiller, A. (2018) Media substitution in cable cord-cutting: The adoption of web-streaming television. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 62(3), 390–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2018.1451868 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  278. Tukachinsky, R., & Eyal, K. (2018). The psychology of marathon television viewing: Antecedents and viewer involvement. Mass Communication and Society, 21(3), 275–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2017.1422765 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  279. Turner, G. (2021). Television studies, we need to talk about “binge-viewing”. Television & New Media, 22(3), 228–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476419877041 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  280. von Abrams, K. (2022). Western Europe digital Video 2022: Inflation won’t dent steady growth in viewers. EMARKETER https://www.insiderintelligence.com/content/western-europe-digital-video-2022# Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  281. Walton-Pattison, E., Dombrowski, S. U., & Presseau, J. (2018). ‘Just one more episode’: Frequency and theoretical correlates of television binge watching. Journal of Health Psychology, 23(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105316643379 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  282. Yoon, S.-H., Kim, H.-W., & Kankanhalli, A. (2021). What makes people watch online TV clips? An empirical investigation of survey data and viewing logs. International Journal of Information Management, 59, 102329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102329 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  283. Zabel, C., Kunz, R. E., Telkmann, V., & O’Brien, D. (2024). The show must go on(line): The impact of content and system quality on the usage of television streaming content libraries. Journal of Media Economics, 35(3–4), 63–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/08997764.2024.2322825 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-105
  284. Allington, D., Duffy, B., Wessely, S., Dhavan, N., & Rubin, J. (2020). Health-protective behaviour, social media usage and conspiracy belief during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Psychological Medicine, 51(10), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329172000224X Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  285. Aslett, K., Sanderson, Z., Godel, W., Persily, N., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. A. (2023). Online searches to evaluate misinformation can increase its perceived veracity. Nature, 625(7995), 548–556. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06883-y Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  286. Avaaz. (2020). Facebook’s algorithm: A major threat to public health. Retrieved from www.avaaz.org/campaign/en/facebook_threat_health/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  287. Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2), 122–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  288. Bertin, P., Nera, K., & Delouvée, S. (2020). Conspiracy beliefs, rejection of vaccination, and support for hydroxychloroquine: A conceptual replication-extension in the COVID-19 pandemic context. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 565128. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.565128 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  289. Bovet, A., & Makse, H. A. (2019). Influence of fake news in Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election. Nature Communications, 10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07761-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  290. Bradshaw, S., & Howard, P. N. (2018). The global organization of social media disinformation campaigns. Journal of International Affairs, 71(1.5), 23–32. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:67cd8a98-8b3c-45c0-b07f-5e25b25ea67a/files/madb637c676fc7e1c0d8bd552a32751bc Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  291. Brisola, A., & Doyle, A. (2019). Critical information literacy as a path to resist “Fake News”: Understanding disinformation as the root problem. Open Information Science, 3(1), 274–286. https://doi.org/10.1515/opis-2019-0019 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  292. Brørs, G., Norman, C. D., & Norekvål, T. M. (2020). Accelerated importance of eHealth literacy in the COVID-19 outbreak and beyond. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 19(6), 458–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474515120941307 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  293. Buchanan, T. (2020). Why do people spread false information online? The effects of message and viewer characteristics on self-reported likelihood of sharing social media disinformation. PLOS ONE, 15(10), e0239666. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239666 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  294. Chou, W-Y S., Gaysynski, A., & Cappella, J.N. (2020). Where we go from here: Health misinformation on social media. American Journal of Public Health, 110(S3), 273–275. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2020.305905 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  295. Christianson, S.-Å., Loftus, E. F., Hoffman, H., & Loftus, G. R. (1991). Eye fixations and memory for emotional events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 17(4), 693–701. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.17.4.693 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  296. Correctiv. (2022). Diese Falschinformationen und Gerüchte kursieren zum Russland-Ukraine-Krieg [This misinformation and rumours are circulating about the Russia-Ukraine war]. Retrieved from www.correctiv.org/faktencheck/hintergrund/2022/02/22/diese-falschinformationen-und-geruechte-kursieren-zum-ukraine-russland-konflikt/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  297. De Coninck, D., Frissen, T., Matthijs, K., d’Haenens, L., Lits, G., Champagne-Poirier, O., Carignan, M.-E., David, M. D., Pignard-Cheynel, N., Salerno, S., & Généreux, M. (2021). Beliefs in conspiracy theories and misinformation about COVID-19: Comparative perspectives on the role of anxiety, depression, and exposure to and trust in information sources. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 646394. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.646394 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  298. De Gani, S. M., Jaks, R., Bieri, U., & Kocher, J. P. (2021). Health Literacy Survey Schweiz 2019-2021: Schlussbericht (V2) im Auftrag des Bundesamtes für Gesundheit BAG [Final report (V2) commissioned by the Federal Office of Public Health FOPH]. Careum Stiftung. Retrieved from https://www.bag.admin.ch/dam/bag/de/dokumente/nat-gesundheitspolitik/gesundheitskompetenz/schlussbericht-health-literacy-survey-careum.pdf.download.pdf/HLS19-21-CH_Schlussbericht_Careum%20Gesundheitskompetenz_Health%20Literacy%20Survey_20210914.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  299. Echtermann, A. (2020). Datenanalyse: Nutzer finden fragwürdige Corona-Informationen vor allem auf Youtube und verbreiten sie über Whatsapp [Data analysis: Users find questionable Corona information mainly on Youtube and spread it via Whatsapp]. Correctiv. Retrieved from www.correctiv.org/faktencheck/hintergrund/2020/05/12/datenanalyse-nutzer-finden-fragwuerdige-corona-informationen-vor-allem-auf-youtube-und-verbreiten-sie-ueber-whatsapp/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  300. Edelson, L., Nguyen, M.-K., Goldstein, I., Goga, O., McCoy, D., & Lauinger, T. (2021). Understanding engagement with US (mis)information news sources on Facebook. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM Internet Measurement Conference (pp. 444–463), November 2nd-4th, 2021, Virtual Event. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3487552.3487859 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  301. Eisenegger, M., & Vogler, D. (2022). Hauptbefunde – Zunahme der News-Deprivation mit negativen Folgen für den demokratischen Prozess [Main findings - Increase in news deprivation with negative consequences for the democratic process]. In fög - Forschungsinstitut Öffentlichkeit und Gesellschaft (Ed.), Jahrbuch Qualität der Medien 2022 (pp. 9–26). Schwabe Verlag. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-224549 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  302. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  303. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  304. Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2007). The role of site features, user attributes, and information verification behaviors on the perceived credibility of web-based information. New Media & Society, 9(2), 319–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807075015 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  305. Freeman, D., Waite, F., Rosebrock, L., Petit, A., Causier, C., East, A., Jenner, L., Teale, A.-L., Carr, L., Mulhall, S., Bold, E., & Lambe, S. (2022). Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, mistrust, and compliance with government guidelines in England. Psychological Medicine, 52(2), 251–263. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291720001890 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  306. Geissler, D., Bär, D., Pröllochs, N., & Feurriegel, S. (2023). Russian propaganda on social media during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. EPJ Data Scirnce, 12. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-023-00414-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  307. George J. F. (2024). Discovering why people believe disinformation about healthcare. PLoS ONE, 19(3), e0300497. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0300497 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  308. Hastall, M. R., & Wagner, A. J. M. (2017). Enhancing selective exposure to health messages and health intentions: Effects of susceptibility cues and gain–loss framing. Journal of Media Psychology, 30(4), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000197 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  309. Juanchich, M., Sirota, M., Jolles, D., & Whiley, L. A. (2021). Are COVID-19 conspiracies a threat to public health? Psychological characteristics and health protective behaviours of believers. European Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 969–989. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2796 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  310. Jurkowitz, M., & Mitchell, A. (2020). Americans who primarily get news through social media are least likely to follow COVID-19 coverage, most likely to report seeing made-up news. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2020/03/25/americans-who-primarily-get-news-through-social-media-are-least-likely-to-follow-covid-19-coverage-most-likely-to-report-seeing-made-up-news/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  311. Kessler, S. H. (2023). Vorsicht #Desinformation: Die Wirkung von desinformierenden Social Media-Posts auf die Meinungsbildung und Interventionen [Beware of #Disinformation: The effect of disinforming social media posts on opinion formation and interventions]. Landesanstalt für Medien NRW. Retrieved from www.medienanstalt-nrw.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Bericht__Studie_Vorsicht_Desinformation Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  312. Kessler, S. H., & Humprecht, E. (2023). COVID-19 Misinformation on YouTube: An Analysis of Its Impact and Subsequent Online Information Searches for Verification. Digital Health, 9, 20552076231177131. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-233864 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  313. Kessler, S. H., & Zillich, A. F. (2019). Searching online for information about vaccination: Assessing the influence of user-specific cognitive factors using eye-tracking. Health Communication, 34(10), 1150–1158. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2018.1465793 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  314. Kessler, S. H., Cano Pardo, M. S., Jobin, A., & Georgi, F. (2022). How informed are the Swiss about Covid-19 and prevention measures? Results of a survey on information awareness, behaviour, and deficits. European Journal of Health Communication, 3(3), 118–142. https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2022.306 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  315. Klapper, J. T. (1960). The effects of mass communication. Free Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  316. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2011). Reinforcement of the political self through selective exposure to political messages. Journal of Communication, 61(2), 349–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01543.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  317. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Johnson, B. K., & Westerwick, A. (2013). To your health: Self-regulation of health behavior through selective exposure to online health messages. Journal of Communication, 63(5), 807–829. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12055 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  318. Knuutila, A., Herasimenka, A., Au, H., Bright, J., & Howard, P. N. (2020). COVID-related misinformation on Youtube: The spread of misinformation videos on social media and the effectiveness of platform policies. University of Oxford. Retrieved from https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2020/09/Knuutila-YouTube-misinfo-memo-v1.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  319. Lazer, D.M.J. et al. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094–2096. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao2998 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  320. Loomba, S., de Figueiredo, A., Piatek, S.J., De Graaf, K., & Larson, H.J. (2021). Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 337–348. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01056-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  321. Lutz, B., Adam, M.T.P., Feuerriegel, S., Prollochs, N., & Neumann, D. (2020). Affective information processing of fake news: Evidence from NeuroIS. European Journal of Information Systems, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2023.2224973 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  322. Lutz, B., Adam, M., Feuerriegel, S., Pröllochs, N., & Neumann, D. (2024). Which linguistic cues make people fall for fake news? A comparison of cognitive and affective processing. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 8(CSCW1). https://doi.org/10.1145/3641030 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  323. Marwick, A., & Lewis, R. (2017). Media manipulation and disinformation online. Data & Society. Retrieved from https://datasociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/DataAndSociety_MediaManipulationAndDisinformationOnline-1.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  324. Möller, J., Hameleers, M., & Ferreau, F. (2020). Typen von Desinformation und Misinformation. [Types of disinformation and misinformation]. die medienanstalten – ALM GbR. Retrieved from https://www.lfk.de/fileadmin/PDFs/Publikationen/Studien/Typen-von-Desinformation-und-Misinformation/typen-von-desinformation-und-misinformation.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  325. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Schulz, A., Andı, S., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. Retreieved from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-06/DNR_2020_FINAL.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  326. Nielsen, R. K., Schulz, A., & Fletcher, L. (2021). An ongoing infodemic: How people in eight countries access news and information about coronavirus a year into the pandemic. Reuters Institute report. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. Retrieved from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/ongoing-infodemic-how-people-eight-countries-access-news-and-information-about-coronavirus-year Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  327. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. (2022). Disinformation and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine: Threats and governance responses. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/disinformation-and-russia-s-war-of-aggression-against-ukraine_37186bde-en.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  328. Porter, E., Scott, R. B., Wood, T. J., & Zhandayeva, R. (2023). Correcting misinformation about the Russia-Ukraine War reduces false beliefs but does not change views about the War. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/efvsd Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  329. Pierri, F., Luceri, L., Jindal, N., & Ferrara, E. (2023). Propaganda and misinformation on Facebook and Twitter during the Russian invasion of Ukraine. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM Web Science Conference 2023 (pp. 65–74), April 30th–May 1st, Austin, TX, USA. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3578503.3583597 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  330. Roberts, C. (2010). Correlations among variables in message and messenger credibility scales. American Behavioral Scientist, 54(1), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764210376310 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  331. Roozenbeek, J., Schneider, C. R., Dryhurst, S., Kerr, J., Freeman, A. L. J., Recchia, G., van der Bles, A. M., & van der Linden, S. (2020). Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19 around the world. Royal Society Open Science, 7(10), 201199. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201199 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  332. Schaewitz, L., Kluck, J.P., Klosters, L., & Kramer, N.C. (2020). When is disinformation (in)credible? Experimental findings on message characteristics and individual differences. Mass Communication and Society, 23(4), 484–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2020.1716983 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  333. Schmid, P., Altay, S., & Scherer, L. D. (2023). The psychological impacts and message features of health misinformation. European Psychologist, 28(3), 162–172. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000494 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  334. Schuetz, S.W., Sykes, T.A., & Venkatesh, V. (2021). Combating COVID-19 fake news on social media through fact checking: Antecedents and consequences. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(4), 376–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2021.1895682 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  335. Singh, K., Lima, G., Cha, M., Cha, C., Kulshrestha, J., Ahn, Y.Y., & Varol, O. (2022). Misinformation, believability, and vaccine acceptance over 40 countries: Takeaways from the initial phase of the COVID-19 infodemic. PLoS ONE, 17(2), e0263381. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263381 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  336. Simko, J., Hanakova, M., Racsko, P., Tomlein, M. Moro, R., & Bielikova, M. (2019). Fake news reading on social media: An eye-tracking study. HT ’19: Proceedings of the 30th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media, September, Hof, Germany. https://doi.org/10.1145/3342220.3343642 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  337. SRF Data [Schweizer Radio und Fernsehen] (2022). Impfmonitor: So impft die Schweiz gegen Corona. [Vaccination Monitor: How Switzerland is vaccinating against COVID-19] SRF. Retrieved from https://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/impfmonitor-so-impft-die-schweiz-gegen-corona Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  338. Sülflow, M., Schäfer, S., & Winter, S. (2018). Selective attention in the news feed: An eye-tracking study on the perception and selection of political news posts on Facebook. New Media & Society, 21(1), 168–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818791520 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  339. Sun, Y. (2022). Verification upon exposure to COVID-19 misinformation: Predictors, outcomes, and the mediating role of verification. Science Communication, 44(3), 261–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/10755470221088927 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  340. Taddicken, M., & Wolff, L. (2023). Climate change-related counter-attitudinal Fake News exposure and its effects on search and selection behavior. Environmental Communication, 17(7), 720–739. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2023.2239516 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  341. Tandoc, E.C. (2021). Tools of disinformation: How fake news gets to deceive. In Jayakumar S., Ang, B., Anwar, N.D. (Eds.), Disinformation and Fake News (pp. 35–46), Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5876-4_3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  342. Tandoc, E. C., Lim, D., & Ling, R. (2020). Diffusion of disinformation: How social media users respond to fake news and why. Journalism, 21(3), 381–398. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919868325 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  343. Tandoc, E. C., Lim, Z. W., & Ling, R. (2018). Defining “Fake News”: A typology of scholarly definitions. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 137–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  344. Tucker, J. A., Guess, A., Barberá, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., Stukal, D., & Nyhan, B. (2018). Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature. SSRN, 1–95. Retrieved from https://www.hewlett.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Social-Media-Political-Polarization-and-Political-Disinformation-Literature-Review.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  345. van der Linden, S. (2022). Misinformation: Susceptibility, spread, and interventions to immunize the public. Nature Medicine, 28, 460–467. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01713-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  346. van der Meer G.L.A. & Jin Y. (2020). Seeking formula for misinformation treatment in public health crises: The effects of corrective information type and source. Health Communication, 35(5), 560–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2019.1573295 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  347. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  348. Wardle, C. (2018). The need for smarter definitions and practical, timely empirical research on information disorder. Digital Journalism, 6(8), 951–963. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1502047 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  349. Wenzel, M., Stasiuk-Krajewska, K., Macková, V., & Turková, K. (2024). The penetration of Russian disinformation related to the war in Ukraine: Evidence from Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. International Political Science Review, 45(2), 192–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/01925121231205259 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  350. World Health Organization [WHO]. (2020). Working together to tackle the “infodemic”. WHO/Europe. Retrieved from www.who.int/europe/news/item/29-06-2020-working-together-to-tackle-the-infodemic- Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  351. Zeng, J., & Chan, C. H. (2021). A cross-national diagnosis of infodemics: Comparing the topical and temporal features of misinformation around COVID-19 in China, India, the US, Germany, and France. Online Information Review, 45(4), 709–728. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-199058 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140
  352. Zillich, A. F., & Kessler, S. H. (2019). Measuring selective exposure to online information: Combining eye-tracking and content analysis of users’ actual search behavior. In C. Peter, T. Naab, & R. Kühne (Eds.), Measuring media use and exposure: Recent developments and challenges (pp. 196–220). Halem. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2025-1-140

Citation


Download RIS Download BibTex