Tradition statt Innovation Die deutsche Presseberichterstattung über die Wahlkampfstrategien der Parteien zur Bundestagswahl 2017

Table of contents

Bibliographic information

Cover of Volume: SCM Studies in Communication and Media Volume 9 (2020), Issue 2
Open Access Full access

SCM Studies in Communication and Media

Volume 9 (2020), Issue 2

Authors:
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyright Year
2020
ISSN-Online
2192-4007
ISSN-Print
2192-4007

Chapter information

Open Access Full access

Volume 9 (2020), Issue 2

Tradition statt Innovation Die deutsche Presseberichterstattung über die Wahlkampfstrategien der Parteien zur Bundestagswahl 2017

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

Bibliography

  1. Akkerman, S., Admiraal, W., Simons, R. J., & Niessen, T. (2006). Considering diversity: Multivoicedness in international academic collaboration. Culture & Psychology, 12(4), 461–485. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1354067X06069947 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  2. Albert, M., Laberge, S., & Hodges, B. D. (2015). Who wants to collaborate with social scientists? Biomedical and clinical scientists’ perceptions of social science. In B. Penders, N. Vermeulen, & J. N. Parker (Eds.), Collaboration across health research and medical care: Healthy collaboration (pp. 59–79). London, New York: Routledge. https:/doi.org/10.4324/9781315572611 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  3. Alnajjar, J., Pelikan, K., & Wassermann, M. (2016). Zur Rolle von Asymmetrien in interkultureller Projektkommunikation. [On the role of asymmetries in intercultural project communication]. Glottotheory, 7(2), 137–157. https:/doi.org/10.1515/glot-2016-0012 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  4. Amann, K., & Knorr-Cetina, K. (1996). Zur Methodologie qualitativer Wissenschaftsforschung [On the methodology of qualitative science research]. In W. Balsiger, R. Defila, & A. Di Giulio (Eds.), Ökologie und Interdisziplinarität – Eine Beziehung mit Zukunft? [Ecology and interdisciplinarity – A relationship for the future?] (pp. 113124). Basel: Springer. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-5036-0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  5. Anandarajan, M., & Anandarajan, A. (Eds.). (2010). e-Research collaboration: Theory, techniques and challenges. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-3642-12257-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  6. Anderson, M. S., & Steneck, N. H. (Eds.). (2011). International research collaborations: Much to be gained, many ways to get in trouble. New York, London: Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  7. Aritz, J., & Walker, R. C. (2010). Cognitive organization and identity maintenance in multicultural teams. A discourse analysis of decision-making meetings. Journal of Business Communication, 47(1), 20–41. https:/doi.org/10.1177/0021943609340669 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  8. Bader, A., Fritz, G., & Gloning, T. (2012). Digitale Wissenschaftskommunikation 2010– 2011: Eine Online-Befragung [Digital science communication 2010–2011: An online survey]. Gießen: Gießner elektronische Bibliothek. http://geb.uni-giessen.de/geb/volltexte/2012/8539/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  9. Bagshaw, D., Lepp, M., & Zorn, C. R. (2007). International research collaboration: Building teams and managing conflicts. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 24(4), 433–446. https:/doi.org/10.1002/crq.183 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  10. Bakker, R. M. (2010). Taking stock of temporary organizational forms: A systematic review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(4), 466– 486. https:/doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00281.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  11. Bammer, G. (2008). Enhancing research collaborations: Three key management challenges. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  12. Research Policy, 37(5), 875–887. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.03.004 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  13. Barjak, F. (2006) The role of the internet in informal scholarly communication. Journal of The American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(10), 1350–1367. https:/doi.org/10.1002/asi.20454 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  14. Bark, R. H., Kragt, M. E., & Robson, B. J. (2016). Evaluating an interdisciplinary research project: Lessons learned for organisations, researchers and funders. International Journal of Project Management, 34(8), 1449–1459. https:/doi.org//10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.08.004 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  15. Barley, W. C., & Weickum, N. R. (2017). The work gap: a structured review of collaborative teamwork research from 2005 to 2015. Annals of the International Communication Association, 41(2), 136–167. https:/doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2017.1322912 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  16. Barrett, A. M., Crossley, M., & Dachi, H. A. (2011). International collaboration and research capacity building: Learning from the EdQual experience. Comparative Education, 47(1), 25–43. https:/doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2011.541674 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  17. Baurmann, M., & Vowe, G. (2014). Governing the research club. Wie lassen sich Kooperationsprobleme in Forschungsverbünden lösen? [Governing the research club. How can cooperation problems in research networks be solved?]. Forschung. Politik – Strategie Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  18. – Management, 3, 73–84. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  19. Beaver, D. (2001). Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present, and future. Scientometrics, 52(3), 365–377. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  20. Becher, A., (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and cultures of the disciplines. Milton Keynes, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  21. Benda, L. E., Poff, N. L., Tague, C., Palmer, M. A., Pizzuto, J., Cooper, S., Stanley, E., & Moglen, G. (2002). How to avoid train wrecks when using science in environmental problem solving. BioScience, 52(12), 1127–1136. https:/doi.org/10.1641/00063568(2002)052[1127:HTATWW]2.0.CO;2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  22. Binder, J. (2007). Global project management: Communication, collaboration and management. Hampshire, UK/Burlington, USA: Gower Publishing. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  23. Birnholtz, J. P. (2007). When do researchers collaborate? Toward a model of collaboration propensity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(14), 2226–2239. https:/doi.org/10.1002/asi.20684 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  24. Bolten, J. (2007). Einführung in die interkulturelle Wirtschaftskommunikation [Introduction to intercultural business communication]. Stuttgart: UTB. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  25. Bolten, J. (2011). Unschärfe und Mehrwertigkeit: “Interkulturelle Kompetenz” vor dem Hintergrund eines offenen Kulturbegriffs [Fuzziness and polyvalence: “Intercultural competence” against the backdrop of an open culture concept]. In W. Dreyer & U. Hößler (Eds.), Perspektiven interkultureller Kompetenz (pp. 55–70). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  26. Bonfadelli, H., Fähnrich, B., Lüthje, C., Milde, J., Rhomberg, M., & Schäfer, M. S. (2017a). Das Forschungsfeld Wissenschaftskommunikation [The research field of science communication]. In H. Bonfadelli, B. Fähnrich, C. Lüthje, J. Milde, M. Rhomberg, & M. S. Schäfer, Forschungsfeld Wissenschaftskommunikation (pp. 3–15). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  27. Bonfadelli, H., Fähnrich, B., Lüthje, C., Milde, J., Rhomberg, M., & Schäfer, M. S. (Eds.). (2017b). Forschungsfeld Wissenschaftskommunikation [Research field science communication]. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-12898-2 Borgman, C. L. (Ed.). (1990). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Newbury Park, Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  28. CA: Sage. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  29. Bosch, X., & Titus, S. L. (2009). Cultural challenges and international research integrity. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  30. The Lancet, 373(9664), 610–612. https:/doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60379-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  31. Bournois, F., & Chevalier, F. (1998). Doing research with foreign colleagues: A project-life cycle approach. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 13(3/4), 206–213. https:/doi. org/10.1108/02683949810215011 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  32. Bozeman, B., Fay, D., & Slade, C. P. (2013). Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: The state-of-the-art. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1–67. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9281-8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  33. Bozeman, B., & Boardman, C. (2014). Research collaboration and team science: A state-of-the-art review and agenda. Heidelberg et al.: Springer. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06468-0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  34. Bracken, L. J., & Oughton, E. A. (2006). “What do you mean?” The importance of language in developing interdisciplinary research. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 31(3), 371–382. https:/doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2006.00218.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  35. Brew, A., Boud, D., Lucas, L., & Crawford, K. (2013). Reflexive deliberation in international research collaboration: Minimising risk and maximising opportunity. Higher Education, 66(1), 93–104. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9592-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  36. Brewster, C., Mayrhofer, W., & Reichel, A. (2011). Riding the tiger? Going along with Cranet for two decades – A relational perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 21(1), 5–15. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.09.007 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  37. Brocke, J. V., & Lippe, S. (2015). Managing collaborative research projects: A synthesis of project management literature and directives for future research. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), 1022–1039. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.02.001 Bukvova, H. (2010). Studying research collaboration: A literature review. Journal of Infor- Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  38. mation Science, 6(1), 33–38. http://aisel.aisnet.org/sprouts_all/326 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  39. Clark, B. R. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. Los Angeles: University of California Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  40. Cleland, D. I., & Ireland, L. R. (2006). Project management. Strategic design and implementation (5th edition). New York: McGraw-Hill. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  41. Clerke, T., & Hopwood, N. (2014). Doing ethnography in teams: A case study of asymmetries in collaborative research (Springer Briefs in Education). Heidelberg et al.: Springer. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05618-0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  42. Compton, B. (1973). Scientific communication. In I. Pool, F. Frey, W. Schramm, N. Maccoby, & E. Parker (Eds.), Handbook of Communication. Chicago: Rand McNally. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  43. Conrad, L., & Phillips, E. M. (1995). From isolation to collaboration: A positive change for postgraduate women? Higher Education, 30(3), 313–322. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  44. Cooke, N. J., & Hilton, M. L. (2015). Enhancing the effectiveness of team science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. http://nap.edu/19007 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  45. Cooper, H. M. (1988). Organizing knowledge synthesis: a taxonomy of literature review. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  46. Knowledge in Society, 1(104), 104–126. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  47. Costa, S., & Meadows, J. (2000). The impact of computer usage on scholarly communication among social scientists. Journal of Information Science, 26(4), 255–262. https:/ doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0368-z Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  48. Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges. Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  49. Cummings, J. N., & Kiesler, S. (2005). Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 703–722. https:/doi. org/10.1177/0306312705055535 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  50. Cummings, J. N., Kiesler, S., Zadeh, R., & Balakrishnan, A. (2013). Group heterogeneity increases the risks of large group size: A longitudinal study of productivity in research groups. Psychological Science, 24(6), 880–890. https:/doi.org/10.1177/0956797612463082 Cuntz, A., & Peuckert, J. (2015). Openness determinants of national research funding programmes in EU27. Science and Public Policy, 42(4), 474–486. https:/doi.org/10.1093/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  51. scipol/scu063 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  52. DeSanctis, G., & Jiang, L. (2005). Communication and the learning effectiveness in multinational teams. In D. L. Shapiro, M. A. von Glinow, & J. L. C. Cheng (Eds.), Managing multinational teams: Global perspectives (pp. 97–123). (Advancements in international management series, volume 18). Amsterdam et al.: Elsevier. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  53. Duque, R. B., Miller, B. P., Barriga, O. Jr., Shrum, W., & Henriquez, G. (2012). Is internet use associated with reporting fewer problems in collaboration? Evidence from the scientific community in Chile. Science Communication, 34(5), 642–678. https:/doi. org/10.1177/1075547011432364 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  54. Easterby-Smith, M., & Malina, D. (1999). Cross-cultural collaborative research: Toward reflexivity. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 76–86. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  55. Eigenbrode, S. D., O’Rourke, M., Wulfhorst, J. D., Althoff, D. M., Goldberg, C.S., Merrill, K., …, Bosque-Perez, N. A. (2007). Employing philosophical dialogue in collaborative science. BioScience, 57(1), 55–64. https:/doi.org/10.1641/B570109 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  56. Ely, R. J. & Thomas, D. A. (2001). Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2), 229–273. https:/doi.org/10.2307/2667087 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  57. Esser, F., & Hanitzsch, T. (Eds.). (2012a). On the why and how of comparative inquiry in communication studies. In Handbook of comparative communication research (pp. 3–22). New York/London: Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  58. Esser, F., & Hanitzsch, T. (2012b): Organizing and managing comparative research projects across nations: Models and challenges of coordinated collaboration. In I. Volkmer (Ed.), The handbook of global media research (Handbooks in communication and media, pp. 521–532). West Sussex: Wiley/Blackwell Publishing. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  59. Finley, G. E. (1979). Collaborative issues in cross-national research. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 3(1), 5–13. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  60. Fiore, S. M. (2008). Interdisciplinarity as teamwork: How the science of teams can inform team science. Small Group Research, 39(3), 251–277. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1046496408317797 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  61. Fischhoff, B., & Scheufele, D. A. (Eds.) (2013). The science of science communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(3), 14031–14032. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  62. Flory, M. (1998). International team effectiveness. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 13(3/4), 225–229. https:/doi.org/10.1108/02683949810215039 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  63. Freitag, M. (2016). Kommunikation im Projektmanagement: Aufgabenfelder und Funktionen der Projektkommunikation [Communication in project management: Tasks and functions of project communication]. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. https:/doi. org/10.1007/978-3-658-12073-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  64. Fry, J. (2004a). Scholarly research and information practices: A domain analytic approach. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  65. Information Processing and Management, 42(1), 299–316. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  66. Fry, J. (2004b). The cultural shaping of ICTs within academic fields: Corpus-based linguistic as a case study. Literacy and Linguistic Computing, 19(3), 303–319. https:/doi. org/10.1093/llc/19.3.303 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  67. Fry, J., & Talja, S. (2007) The intellectual and social organization of academic fields and the shaping of digital resources. Journal of Information Science, 33(2), 115–133. https:/ doi.org/10.1177/0165551506068153 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  68. Fussel, S. R., & Setlock, L. D. (2012). Multicultural teams. In W. S. Bainbridge (Ed.), Leadership in science and technology: A reference handbook. Volume 1. (pp. 255–263). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  69. Gaillard, J. (1992). Use of publication lists to study scientific production and strategies of scientists in developing countries. Scientometrics, 23(1), 57–73. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  70. Galtung, J. (1982). On the meaning of “nation” as a variable. In M. Nießen & J. Peschar (Eds.), International comparative research: problems of theory, methodology and organization in Eastern and Western Europe (pp. 17–34). Oxford/New York: Pergamon Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  71. Gardner, P., Katagiri, K., Parsons, J., Lee, J., & Thevannoor, R. (2012). “Not for the fainthearted”: Engaging in cross-national comparative research. Journal of Aging Studies, 26(3), 253–261. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2012.02.004 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  72. Garvey, W. D. (1979). Communication: the essence of science – Facilitating information exchange among librariens, scientists, engineers and students. New York: Pergamon Press. Garvey, W. D., & Griffith B. C. (1967). Scientific communication as a social system. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  73. Science, 157(3792), 1011–1016. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  74. Garvey, W. D., & Griffith, B. C. (1972). Communication and information processing within scientific disciplines: Empirical findings for psychology. Information Storage and Retrieval, 8(3), 123–136. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  75. Gläser, J. (2012). Scientific communities. In S. Maasen, M. Kaiser, M. Reinhart, & B. Sutter (Eds.), Handbuch Wissenschaftssoziologie (pp. 151–162). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-18918-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  76. Goddard J. T., Cranston, N., & Billot, J. (2006). Making it work: Identifying the challenges of collaborative international research. International Electronic Journal for Leadership Learning, 10(11). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  77. Gray, K., Bright, G., & Cheng, A. (2012). Human factors in four cases of E-collaboration in biomedical research: A qualitative study. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 8(2), 14–27. https:/doi.org/10.4018/jec.2012040102 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  78. Guenter, H., Gardner, W. L., McCauley, K. D., Randolph-Seng, B., & Prabhu, V. P. (2017). Shared authentic leadership in research teams: Testing a multiple mediation model. Small Group Research, 48(6), 719–765. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1046496417732403 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  79. Haak, M., Himmelsbach, I., Granbom, M., & Löfqvist, C. (2013). Cross-national and multilanguage qualitative research: Challenges and recommendations. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 76(7): 333–336. https:/doi.org/10.4276/030802213X13729279115059 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  80. Han, S. J., & Beyerlein, M. (2016). Framing the effects of multinational cultural diversity on virtual team processes. Small Group Research, 47(4), 351–383. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1046496416653480 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  81. Hanges, P. J., Lyon, J. S., & Dorfman, P. W. (2005). Managing a multinational team: Lessons from the project globe. In D. L. Shapiro, M. A. von Glinow, & J. L. C. Cheng (Eds.), Managing multinational teams: Global perspectives (pp. 337–360). (Advancements in international management series, volume 18). Amsterdam et al.: Elsevier. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  82. Hanitzsch, T. (2007). Networking journalism studies: Towards a world journalism survey. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  83. Brazilian Journalism Research, 3(2), 43–54. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  84. Hanitzsch, T., Hanusch, F., Mellado, C., Anikina, M., Berganza, R., Cangoz, I., … Yuen, Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  85. K.W. (2011). Mapping journalism cultures across nations: A comparative study of 18 countries. Journalism Studies, 12(3), 273–293. https:/doi.org/10.1080/146167 0X.2010.512502 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  86. Hantrais, L. (Ed.). (2009). Managing international comparative research. In International comparative research. Theory, methods and practice (pp. 142–169). Basingstoke /UK, New York/USA: Palgrave Macmillan. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  87. Helbing, D. (2010). The FuturIcT knowledge accelerator: Unleashing the power of information for a sustainable future (CCSS Working Paper Series). Zürich: Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich. https:/doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1597095 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  88. Hemlin, S., Allwood, C. M., Martin, B. R., & Mumford, M. D. (2013). Creativity and leadership in science, technology, and innovation. New York, NY: Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  89. Hertel, G., Geiser, S., & Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15(1), 69–95. https:/doi. org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2005.01.002 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  90. Hinds, P. J., & Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication. Organization Science, 16(3), 290–307. https:/doi.org/10.1287/ orsc.1050.0122 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  91. Hoegl, M., & Gemünden, H. G. (2001). Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects. A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. In Organization Science, 12(4), 435–449. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  92. Hoffman, D. M., Blasi B., Culum, B., Dragsic, Z., Ewen, A., Horta, H., Nokkala, T., & Rios-Aguilar, C. (2014). The methodological illumination of a blind spot: Information and communication technology and international research team dynamics in a higher education program. Higher Education, 67(4), 473–495. https:/doi.org/10.1007/ s10734-013-9692-y Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  93. Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  94. Hwang, K. (2005). The inferior science and the dominant use of English in knowledge production: A case study of Korean science and technology. Science Communication, 26(4), 390–427. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1075547005275428 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  95. Hwang, K. (2013). Effects of the language barrier on processes and performance of international scientific collaboration, collaborators’ participation, organizational integrity, and interorganizational relationships. Science Communication, 35(1), 3–31. https:/doi. org/10.1177/1075547012437442 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  96. Jablin, F. M. (2008). The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  97. Jameson, D. A. (2007). Reconceptualizing cultural identity and its role in intercultural business communication. Journal of Business Communication, 44(3), 199–235. https:/ doi.org/10.1177/0021943607301346 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  98. Jamieson, K. H., Kahan, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (Eds.) (2017). The Oxford handbook of the science of science communication (Oxford Library of Psychology). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. https:/doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190497620.001.0001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  99. Janich, N., & Zakharova, E. (2011). Wissensasymmetrien, Interaktionsrollen und die Frage der „gemeinsamen“ Sprache in der interdisziplinären Projektkommunikation [Knowledge asymmetries, interaction roles and the question of a “joint” language in interdisciplinary project communication]. Fachsprache/International Journal of Specialized Communication, 33(3–4), 187–204. https:/doi.org/10.24989/fs.v33i3-4.1371 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  100. Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791–815. https:/doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.6.791 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  101. Jeong, S., & Choi, J. Y. (2015). Collaborative research for academic knowledge creation: How team characteristics, motivation, and processes influence research impact. Science and Public Policy, 42(4), 460–473. https:/doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu067 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  102. Jeong, S., Choi, J. Y., & Kim, J.-Y. (2014). On the drivers of international collaboration: The impact of informal communication, motivation, and research resources. Science and Public Policy, 41(4), 520–531. https:/doi.org/10.1093/scipol/ sct079 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  103. Jones, B. F., Wuchty, S., & Uzzi, B. (2008). Multi-university research teams: Shifting impact, geography, and stratification in science. Science, 322(5905), 1259–1262. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  104. Jonsen, K., Butler, C. L., Drogendijk, R., Lauring, J., Lervik, J-E., Mäkelä, K., … Zander, L. (2012). Processes of international collaboration in management research: A reflexive, autoethnographic approach. Journal of Management Inquiry, 22(4), 394–413. https:/ doi.org/10.1177/1056492612464429 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  105. Kaden, B. (2009). Library 2.0 und Wissenschaftskommunikation [Library 2.0 and science communication]. Berlin: Simon. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  106. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1–18. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  107. Katz, R., & Allen, T.J. (1988). Investigating the not invented here (NIH) syndrome: A look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns of 50 R&D project groups. In M. L. Tushman & W. L. Moore (Eds.), Readings in the management of innovations Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  108. (pp. 293–309). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  109. Kekale, J., (2002). Conceptions of quality in four different disciplines. Tertiary Education and Management, 8(1), 65–80. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  110. Klein, J. T. (2003). Thinking about interdisciplinarity: A primer for practice. Colorado School of Mines Quarterly, 103(1), 101–114. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  111. Kling, R. (2004). The internet and unrefereed scholarly publishing. In C. Blaise (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (pp. 591–631). Medford, NJ: Information Today. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  112. Kling, R., & Callahan, E. (2001). Electronic journals, the internet, and scholarly communication. In C. Blaise (Ed.), Annual review of communication science and technology (pp. 122–177). Medford, NJ: Information Today. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  113. Kling, R., & McKim, G. (2000). Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 51(14), 1306–1320. https:/doi. org/10.1002/1097-4571(2000)9999:9999<::AID-ASI1047>3.0.CO;2-T Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  114. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  115. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  116. Kosmützky, A. (2017). Zustand, Herausforderungen und Perspektiven international vergleichender Sozialforschung – am Fall der Hochschulforschung [State of the art, challenges and perspectives of international comparative social research – the case of higher education research] (Kumulative Habilitationsschrift. Fachbereich 05 Gesellschaftswissenschaften der Universität Kassel). http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:hebis:34-2018021554593 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  117. Kosmützky, A. (2018). A two-sided medal: On the complexity of international comparative and collaborative team research. Higher Education Quarterly, 1, 1–18. https:/doi. org/10.1111/hequ.12156 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  118. Kosmützky, A., & Wöhlert, R. (2015). International vergleichende Forschung. Eine interdisziplinäre Metaanalyse disziplinärer Zugänge [International comparative research. An interdisciplinary meta-analysis of disciplinary approaches]. SWS-Rundschau, 55(4), 496–524. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  119. Kostoff, R. N. (2002). Overcoming specialization. BioScience, 52(10), 937–941. https:/doi. org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0937:os]2.0.co;2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  120. Kotthoff, H., & Spencer-Oatey, H. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of intercultural communication. Berlin: de Gruyter. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  121. Kuckhohn, F. R., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in value orientations. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  122. Kumar, K. (1985). Role parity in international social science collaborative research: Research roles of U.S. researchers and their collaborators. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 7(1), 7–32. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  123. Kuster, J., Huber, E., Lippmann, R., Schmid, A., Schneider, E., Witschi, U., & Wüst, R. (2011). Handbuch Projektmanagement [Handbook on project management] (3. Auflage). Heidelberg et al.: Springer. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21243-7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  124. Kwiek, M. (2015). The internationalization of research in Europe: A quantitative study of 11 national systems from a micro-level perspective. Journal of Studies in International Education, 19(4), 341–359. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1028315315572898 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  125. Laband, D. N., & R. D. Tollison (2000). Intellectual collaboration. Journal of Political Economy, 108(3), 632–662. https:/doi.org/10.1086/262132 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  126. Lakic, I., Zivkovic, B., & Vukovic, M. (Eds.). (2015). Academic discourses across cultures. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  127. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  128. Larkey, L. K. (1996). Toward a theory of communicative interactions in culturally diverse workgroups. Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 463–491. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  129. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  130. Laudel, G. (2002). What do we measure by co-authorships? Research Evaluation, 11(1), 3–15. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  131. Lawrence, K. A. (2006). Walking the tightrope: The balancing acts of a large e-research project. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 15(4), 385–411. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s10606-006-9025-0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  132. Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673–702. https:/doi.org/10.1177/0306312705052359 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  133. Lee, Y.-N., Walsh, J. P., & Wang, J. (2015). Creativity in scientific teams: Unpacking novelty and impact. Research Policy, 44(3), 684–697. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.007 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  134. Leibowitz, B., Ndebele, C., & Winberg, C. (2013). “It’s an amazing learning curve to be part of the project”: Exploring academic identity in collaborative research. Studies in Higher Education, 39(7), 1256–1269. https:/doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.801424 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  135. Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (2004). Collaboration: The social context of theory development. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(2), 164–172. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  136. Lewis, J. M., & Ross, S. (2011). Research funding systems in Australia, New Zealand and the UK: Policy settings and perceived effects. Policy and Politics, 39(3), 379–398. https:/doi.org/10.1332/030557310X520270 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  137. Lewis, J. M., Ross, S., & Holden, T. (2012). The how and why of academic collaboration: disciplinary differences and policy implications. Higher Education, 64(5), 693–708. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9521-8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  138. Leydesdorff, L., & Wagner, C. S. (2008). International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group. Journal of Infometrics, 2(4), 317–325. https:/doi. org/10.1002/asi.23102 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  139. Lievrouw, L. A. (2010). Social media and the production of knowledge. A return to little science? Social Epistemology, 24(3), 219–237. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2010 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  140. .499177 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  141. Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (1997). Virtual teams: Reaching across space, time, and organizations with technology. New York: Wiley. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  142. Livingston, S. (2003). On the challenges of cross-national comparative media research. European Journal of Communication, 18(4), 477–500. https:/doi.org/10.1177/0267323103184003 López-Yáñez, J., & Altopiedi, M. (2015). Evolution and social dynamics of acknowledged Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  143. research groups. Higher Education, 70(4), 629–647. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s10734014-9835-9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  144. Lüthje, C. (2017). Interne informelle Wissenschaftskommunikation [Internal informal scientific communication]. In H. Bonfadelli, B. Fähnrich, C. Lüthje, J. Milde, M. Rhomberg, & M. S. Schäfer (Eds.), Forschungsfeld Wissenschaftskommunikation [Research field scientific communication] (pp. 109–124). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien. https:/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-12898-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  145. Lyman, S. (2011). Balancing research collaborations with the realities of working with industry. In M. S. Anderson & N. H. Steneck (Eds.), International research collaborations: Much to be gained, many ways to get in trouble (pp. 229–242). New York, London: Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  146. Mabey, C., Kulich, C., & Lorenzi, C. (2012). Knowledge leadership in global scientific research. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(12), 2450– 2467. https:/doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.668386 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  147. Martin, J. N.; & Nakayama, T. K. (2010). Intercultural communication in contexts (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  148. Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004). Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30(6), 805–835. https:/doi. org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.05.002 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  149. Matzat, U. (2004). Academic communication and Internet discussion groups: Transfer of information or creation of social contacts? Social Networks, 26(3), 221–255. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2004.04.001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  150. Mayrhofer, W. (1998). Between market, bureaucracy and clan: Coordination and control mechanisms in the Cranfield Network on European Human Resource Management (Cranet-E). Journal of Managerial Psychology, 13(3/4), 241–258. https:/doi. org/10.1108/02683949810215057 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  151. Maznevski, M. L., DiStefano, J. J., Gomez, C. B., Noorderhaven, N. G., & Wu, P. C. (2002). Cultural dimensions at the individual level of analysis: The cultural orientations framework. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 2(3), 275–295. https:/doi.org/10.1177/147059580223001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  152. McGinn, N. F. (Ed.). (2005). The Six Nation project as an experience in collaborative research. In Learning through collaborative research: The Six Nation Education Project (pp. 178–207). New York, London: RoutledgeFalmer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  153. McKenna, B., Callan, V.J., & Gallois, C. (2012). Comparing organizational business communication. In F. Esser & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), Handbook of comparative communication research (pp. 48–63). London: Routledge. https:/doi.org/10.4324/9780203149102.ch3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  154. Melin, G. (2000). Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level. Research Policy, 29(1), 31–40. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  155. Mirowski, P. (1994). Natural images in economic thought. New York: Cambridge University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  156. Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1663 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 213–238. https:/ doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900204 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  157. Müller, C. V. (1998). About differences and blind spots. A systemic view on an international, interdisciplinary research team. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 13(3/4), 259–270. https:/doi.org/10.1108/02683949810215066 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  158. National Research Council (2008). International collaborations in behavioral and social sciences research: Report of a workshop (Board on International Scientific Organizations). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  159. Neumann, R. (2001). Disciplinary differences and university teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 26(2), 135–146. https:/doi.org/10.1080/03075070120052071 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  160. Neumann, R., Parry, S., & Becher, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: A conceptual analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 27(4), 405–418. https:/ doi.org/10.1080/0307507022000011525 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  161. Okamoto, K. (2015). Academic culture: An alternative conceptual and analytical framework for discussions on international collaboration in Social Science. Journal of Glocal Studies, 2, 69–91. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  162. Olson, J. S., Hofer, E. C., Bos, N., Zimmerman, A., Olson, G. M., Cooney, D., & Faniel, I. (2008). A theory of remote scientific collaboration. In G. M. Olson, A. Zimmerman, & Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  163. M. Bos (Eds.), Scientific collaboration on the Internet (pp. 73–98). Cambridge: MIT Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  164. Ossenblok, T. L. B., & Engels, T. C. E. (2015). Edited books in the Social Sciences and Humanities: Characteristics and collaboration analysis. Scientometrics, 104(1), 219–237. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1544-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  165. Paisley, W. (1984). Communication in the communication sciences. In B. Dervin & M. Voigt (Eds.), Progress in the communication sciences (pp. 1–43) (Volume 5). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  166. Paisley, W. (1989). Bibliometrics, scholarly communication, and communication research. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  167. Communication Research, 16(5), 701–717. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  168. Pelikan, K. (2015a). Communication needs in science? Access to communication optimization in an international research project in the area of public health. trans-kom, 8(1), 125–143. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  169. Pelikan, K. (2015b). Möglichkeiten der Optimierung internationaler Projektkommunikation [Possibilities for optimizing international project communication]. In S Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-151
  170. Allen, D. S. (2008). The trouble with transparency. The challenge of doing journalism ethics in a surveillance society. Journalism Studies, 9(3), 323–340. https://doi. org/10.1080/14616700801997224 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  171. Andén-Papadopoulos, K. (2013). Media witnessing and the ‘crowd-sourced video revolution.’ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  172. Visual Communication, 12(3), 341–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357213483055 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  173. Blöbaum, B. (2014). Trust and journalism in a digital environment. Oxford. Retrieved from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2017-11/Trust and Journalism in a Digital Environment.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  174. Brandtzaeg, P. B., Følstad, A., Ángeles, M., & Domínguez, C. (2018). How journalists and social media users perceive online fact-checking and verification services. Journalism Practice, 12(9), 1109–1129. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2017.1363657 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  175. Brandtzaeg, P. B., Lüders, M., Spangenberg, J., Rath-Wiggins, L., & Følstad, A. (2015). Emerging journalistic verification practices concerning social media. Journalism Practice, 10(3), 323–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2015.1020331 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  176. Broersma, M., & Graham, T. (2013). Twitter as a news source. Journalism Practice, 7(4), 446–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2013.802481 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  177. Brown, P. (2015). It’s genuine, as opposed to manufactured. A study of UK news audiences’ attitudes towards eyewitness media. Oxford. Retrieved from https://firstdraftnews. org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/‘It’s-Genuine-as-Opposed-to-Manufactured’-A-Study-of-UK-News-Audiences’-Attitudes-towards-Eyewitness-Media_0.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  178. Bruno, N. (2011). Tweet first, verify later: How real time information is changing the coverage of worldwide crisis events. Oxford. Retrieved from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/our-research/tweet-first-verify-later-how-real-time-information-changing-coverage-worldwide-crisis Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  179. Domingo, D. (2008). Interactivity in the daily routines of online newsrooms: dealing with an uncomfortable myth. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13(3): 680– 704. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.00415.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  180. Duffy, A., & Tan Rui Si, J. (2017). Naming the dog on the internet: Student reporters’ verification tactics for non-elite newsmakers online. Digital Journalism, 6(7), 910–927. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1377092 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  181. Engelke, K. M. (2020). Enriching the conversation: Audience perspectives on the deliberative nature and potential of user comments for news media. Digital Journalism, 8(4), 447–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2019.1680567 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  182. Engelke, K. M., Hase, V., & Wintterlin, F. (2019). On measuring trust and distrust in journalism: Reflection of the status quo and suggestions for the road ahead. Journal of Trust Research, 9(1), 66–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2019.1588741 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  183. Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  184. Grosser, K. M. (2016). Trust in online journalism. A conceptual model of risk-based trust in the online context. Digital Journalism, 4(8), 1036–1057. http://doi.org/10.1080/216 70811.2015.1127174 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  185. Grosser, K. M., Hase, V., & Wintterlin, F. (2019). Trustworthy or shady? Exploring the influence of verifying and visualizing user-generated content (UGC) on online journalism’s trustworthiness. Journalism Studies, 20(4), 500–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/146 1670X.2017.1392255 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  186. Halfmann, A., Dech, H., Riemann, J., Schlenker, L., & Wessler, H. (2018). Moving closer to the action: How viewers’ experiences of eyewitness videos in TV news influence the trustworthiness of the reports. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 96(2), 367–384. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018785890 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  187. Hänska-Ahy, M. T., & Shapour, R. (2013). Who’s reporting the protests? Converging practices of citizen journalists and two BBC world service newsrooms, from Iran’s election protests to the Arab Uprisings. Journalism Studies, 14(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.10 80/1461670X.2012.657908 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  188. Heinrich, A. (2011). Network journalism: Journalistic practice in interactive spheres. New York: Routledge Chapman & Hall. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  189. Heise, N., Loosen, W., Reimer, J., & Schmidt, J.-H. (2014). Including the audience. Comparing the attitudes and expectations of journalists and users towards participation in German TV news journalism. Journalism Studies, 15(4), 411–430. https://doi.org/10.1 080/1461670X.2013.831232 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  190. Hellmueller, L., & Li, Y. (2015). Contest over content. A longitudinal study of the CNN iReport effect on the journalistic field. Journalism Practice, 9(5), 617–633. https://doi. org/10.1080/17512786.2014.987553 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  191. Hellmueller, L., Vos, T. P., & Poepsel, M. A. (2013). Shifting journalistic capital? Journalism Studies, 14(3), 287–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2012.697686 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  192. Heravi, B. R., & Harrower, N. (2016). Twitter journalism in Ireland: sourcing and trust in the age of social media. Information, Communication & Society, 19(9), 1194–1213. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1187649 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  193. Hermida, A. (2015). Nothing but the truth. Redrafting the journalistic boundary of verification. In M. Carlson & S. C. Lewis (Eds.), Boundaries of journalism. Professionalism, practices and participation (pp. 37–50). New York: Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  194. Hermida, A., & Thurman, N. (2008). A clash of cultures. The integration of user-generated content within professional journalistic frameworks at British newspaper websites. Journalism Practice, 2(3), 343–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512780802054538 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  195. Johnston, L. (2016). Social news = journalism evolution? How the integration of UGC into newswork helps and hinders the role of the journalist. Digital Journalism, 4(7), 899– 909. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2016.1168709 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  196. Karlsson, M. (2010). Rituals of transparency. Journalism Studies, 11(4), 535–545. https:// doi.org/10.1080/14616701003638400 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  197. Karlsson, M., Clerwall, C., & Nord, L. (2014). You ain’t seen nothing yet. Transparency’s (lack of) effect on source and message credibility. Journalism Studies, 15(5), 668–678. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2014.886837 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  198. Karlsson, M., Clerwall, C., & Nord, L. (2017). Do not stand corrected. Transparency and users’ attitudes to inaccurate news and corrections in online journalism. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 94(1), 148–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016654680 Karlsson, M., Clerwall, C., & Nord, L. (2018). The public doesn’t miss the public. Views from the people: Why news by the people? Journalism, 19(5), 577–594. https://doi. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  199. org/10.1177/1464884917694399 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  200. Kleemans, M., Schaap, G., & Hermans, L. (2015). Citizen sources in the news: Above and beyond the vox pop? Journalism, 18(4), 464–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884915620206 Kohring, M. (2004). Vertrauen in Journalismus: Theorie und Empirie [Trust in journalism: Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  201. Theory and empiricism]. Konstanz: UVK. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  202. Koliska, M. (2017). Testing the effects of transparency on trust in journalism. Paper presented at the 67th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association. San Diego, USA. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  203. Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2007). The elements of journalism: What newspeople should know and the public should expect. New York: Three Rivers Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  204. Kruikemeier, S., & Lecheler, S. (2018). News Consumer Perceptions of New Journalistic Sourcing Techniques. Journalism Studies, 19(5), 632–649. https://doi.org/10.1080/146 1670X.2016.1192956 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  205. Lecheler, S., & Kruikemeier, S. (2016). Re-evaluating journalistic routines in a digital age: A review of research on the use of online sources. New Media & Society, 18(1), 156– 171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815600412 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  206. Leuven, S. Van, Heinrich, A., & Deprez, A. (2015). Foreign reporting and sourcing practices in the network sphere: A quantitative content analysis of the Arab Spring in Belgian news media. New Media & Society, 17(4), 573–591. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813506973 Lewis, S. C., & Molyneux, L. (2018). A decade of research on social media and journalism: Assumptions, blind spots, and a way forward. Media and Communication, 6(4), Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  207. 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198733522.013.17 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  208. Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2002). Qualitative communication research methods (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  209. Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. New York: Jon Wiley. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  210. Machill, M., & Beiler, M. (2009). The importance of the Internet for journalistic research. A multi-method study of the research performed by journalists working for daily newspapers, radio, television and online. Journalism Studies, 10(2), 178–203. https://doi. org/10.1080/14616700802337768 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  211. Manninen, V. J. E. (2020). If only they knew: Audience expectations and actual sourcing practices in online journalism. Journalism Practice, 14(4), 412–428. https://doi.org/10. 1080/17512786.2019.1625719 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  212. Mayring, P. (2010). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken [Qualitative content analysis: Basics and techniques]. Weinheim: Beltz. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  213. McCracken, G. (1998). The long interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  214. McNair, B. (2013). Trust, truth and objectivity. In M. D. Peters & M. Broersma (Eds.), Rethinking journalism: Trust and participation in a transformed news landscape (pp. 75–88). London; New York: Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  215. Meier, K., & Reimer, J. (2011). Transparenz im Journalismus [Transparency in journalism]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  216. Publizistik, 56(2), 133–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-011-0116-7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  217. Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Markov, A., Grossman, R., & Bulger, M. (2015). Believing the unbelievable: Understanding young people’s information literacy beliefs and practices in the United States. Journal of Children and Media, 9(3), 325–348. https://doi.or g/10.1080/17482798.2015.1056817 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  218. Mortensen, M. (2015). Conflictual media events, eyewitness images, and the Boston Marathon Bombing (2013). Journalism Practice, 9(4), 536-551. https://doi.org/10.1080/175 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  219. 12786.2015.1030140 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  220. Naab, T. K., & Sehl, A. (2017). Studies of user-generated content: A systematic review. Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism, 18(10), 1256–1273. https://doi. org/10.1177/1464884916673557 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  221. Newman, N., & Fletcher, R. (2017). Audience perspectives on low trust in the media. Oxford. Retrieved from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2017-11/ Nic Newman and Richard Fletcher-Bias%2C Bullshit and Lies-Report.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  222. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Levy, D. A. L., & Nielsen, R. K. (2016). Reuters Institute digital news report. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  223. Rauchfleisch, A., Artho, X., Metag, J., Post, S., & Schäfer, M. S. (2017). How journalists verify user-generated content during terrorist crises. Analyzing Twitter communication during the Brussels attacks. Social Media + Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117717888 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  224. Robson, C. (2002). Real world research. A resource for social scientists and practitionerresearchers (2nd edition). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  225. Ross, A. R., & Dumitrescu, D. (2019). ‘Vox Twitterati’: Investigating the effects of social media exemplars in online news articles. New Media & Society, 21(4), 962–983. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818817313 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  226. Sacco, V., & Bossio, D. (2015). Using social media in the news reportage of war & conflict: Opportunities and challenges. The Journal of Media Innovation, 1, 59–76. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  227. Schultz, T., Jackob, N., Ziegele, M., Quiring, O., & Schemer, C. (2017). Erosion des Vertrauens zwischen Medien und Publikum? [Erosion of trust between media and audience?] Media Perspektiven, 2017(5), 246–259. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  228. Shapiro, I., Brin, C., Bédard-Brûlé, I., & Mychajlowycz, K. (2013). Verification as a strategic ritual. How journalists retrospectively describe processes for ensuring accuracy. Journalism Practice, 7(6), 657–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2013.765638 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  229. Singer, J. B. (2007). Contested autonomy. Professional and popular claims on journalistic norms. Journalism Studies, 8(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700601056866 Singer, J. B. (2010). Quality control: Perceived effects of user-generated content on newsroom norms, values and routines. Journalism Practice, 4(42), 127–142. https://doi. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  230. org/10.1080/17512780903391979 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  231. Singer, J. B. (2014). User-generated visibility: Secondary gatekeeping in a shared media space. New Media & Society 16(1): 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813477833 Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research from grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory, 30(3), 167–186. https:// Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  232. doi.org/10.1177/0735275112457914 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  233. Tsfati, Y., & Ariely, G. (2014). Individual and contextual correlates of trust in media across 44 countries. Communication Research, 41(6), 760–782. https://doi. org/10.1177/0093650213485972 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  234. 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: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  235. van der Wurff, R., & Schoenbach, K. (2014a). Civic and citizen demands of news media and journalists. What does the audience expect from good journalism? Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 91(3), 433–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699014538974 van der Wurff, R., & Schönbach, K. (2014b). Audience expectations of media accountability in the Netherlands. Journalism Studies, 15(2), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/14 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  236. 61670X.2013.801679 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  237. Vis, F. (2013). Twitter as a reporting tool for breaking news. Digital Journalism, 1(1), 27– 47. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2012.741316 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  238. Volkmer, I., & Firdaus, A. (2013). Between networks and “hierarchies of credibility”. Navigating journalistic practice in a sea of user-generated-content. In M. D. Peters & M. Broersma (Eds.), Rethinking journalism: Trust and participation in a transformed news landscape (pp. 101–113). London: Routhledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  239. von Nordheim, G., Boczek, K., & Koppers, L. (2018). Sourcing the sources: An analysis of the use of Twitter and Facebook as a journalistic source over 10 years in The New Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  240. York Times, The Guardian, and Suddeutsche Zeitung. Digital Journalism, 6(7), 807– 828. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1490658 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  241. Wintterlin, F. (2019). Quelle: Internet. Journalistisches Vertrauen bei der Recherche in sozialen Medien [Source: Internet. Journalistic trust in social media]. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  242. Wright, L. L., Shemberger, M., & Price, E. (2016). Not another quiz. An approach to engage today’s students in meaningful current events discussions. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 71(2), 231–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695815598435 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-218
  243. Althoff, T., White, R. W., & Horvitz, E. (2016). Influence of Pokémon Go on physical activity: study and implications. Journal of medical Internet research, 18. https:/doi. org/10.2196/jmir.6759 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  244. Baldwin, M., Biernat, M., & Landau, M. J. (2015). Remembering the real me: Nostalgia offers a window to the intrinsic self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 128–147. https:/doi.org/10.1037/a0038033 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  245. Baldwin, M., & Landau, M. J. (2014). Exploring nostalgia’s influence on psychological growth. Self and Identity, 13, 162–177. https:/doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2013.772320 Barrett, F. S., Grimm, K. J., Robins, R. W., Wildschut, T., Sedikides, C., & Janata, P. (2010). Music-evoked nostalgia: affect, memory, and personality. Emotion, 10, 390–403. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  246. https:/doi.org/10.1037/a0019006 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  247. Bonus, J. A., Peebles, A., Mares, M. L., & Sarmiento, I. G. (2018). Look on the bright side (of media effects): Pokémon Go as a catalyst for positive life experiences. Media Psychology, 21, 263–287. https:/doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2017.1305280 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  248. Bowman, N. D., & Tamborini, R. (2012). Task demand and mood repair: The intervention potential of computer games. New Media & Society, 14, 1339–1357. https:/doi. org/10.1177/1461444812450426. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  249. Bryant, J., & Zillmann, D. (1984). Using television to alleviate boredom and stress: Selective exposure as a function of induced excitational states. Journal of Broadcasting, 28, 1–20. https:/doi.org/10.1080/08838158409386511. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  250. Cavanaugh, J. C. (1989). I have this feeling about everyday memory aging. Educational Gerontology, 15, 597–605. https:/doi.org/10.1080/0380127890150604 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  251. Cheung, W.-Y., Wildschut, T., Sedikides, C., Hepper, E. G., Arndt, J., & Vingerhoets, J. J. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  252. M. (2013). Back to the future: nostalgia increases optimism. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1484–96. https:/doi.org/10.1177/0146167213499187 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  253. Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of personality assessment, 49, 71-75. https:/doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  254. Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D. W., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97, 143-156. https:/doi.org/ 10.1007/ s11205-009-9493-y Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  255. Elson, M., Breuer, J., & Quandt, T. (2014). Know the player: An integrated model of player experience for digital games research. In M. C. Angelides (Ed.), Handbook of digital games (pp. 362–387). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  256. Eyal, K., & Cohen, J. (2006). When good friends say goodbye: A parasocial breakup study. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50, 502–523. https://doi.org/10.1207/ s15506878jobem5003_9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  257. Fairley, S., Gibson, H., & Lamont, M. (2018). Temporal manifestations of nostalgia: Le Tour de France. Annals of Tourism Research, 70, 120–130. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j. annals.2017.09.004 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  258. Griffiths, M. D., Davies, M. N. O., & Chappell, D. (2004). Demographic factors and playing variables in online computer gaming. Cyberpsychology & Behavior: The Impact of the Internet, Multimedia and Virtual Reality on Behavior and Society, 7, 479–487. https:/doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2004.7.479 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  259. Hepper, E. G., Ritchie, T. D., Sedikides, C., & Wildschut, T. (2012). Odyssey’s end: lay conceptions of nostalgia reflect its original Homeric meaning. Emotion, 12, 102–19. https:/doi.org/10.1037/a0025167 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  260. Holbrook, M. B., & Schindler, R. M. (1996). Market segmentation based on age and attitude toward the past: Concepts, methods, and findings concerning nostalgic influences on customer tastes. Journal of Business Research, 37, 27–39. https:/doi.org/10.1016/01482963(96)00023-9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  261. Homburg, C., & Giering, A. (1996). Konzeptualisierung und Operationalisierung komplexer Konstrukte: ein Leitfaden für die Marketingforschung [Conceptualizing and operationalizing complex constructs. A guide for marketing research]. Marketing: Zeitschrift Für Forschung und Praxis, 1, 5–24. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  262. Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Well-being: Foundations of hedonic psychology. New York, NY: Sage. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  263. Keogh, B. (2017). Pokemon Go, the novelty of nostalgia, and the ubiquity of the smartphone. Mobile Media & Communication, 5, 38–41. https:/doi.org/10.1177/2050157916678025 Khoo, G. S. (2016). Contemplating tragedy raises gratifications and fosters self-acceptance. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  264. Human Communication Research, 42, 269–291. https:/doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12074 Knobloch, S., & Zillmann, D. (2002). Mood management via the digital jukebox. Journal Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  265. of Communication, 52, 351–366. https:/doi.org/10.1093/joc/52.2.351 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  266. Koban, K., Breuer, J., Rieger, D., Mohseni, M. R., Noack, S., Bente, G., & Ohler, P. (2019). Playing for the thrill and skill. Quiz games as means for mood and competence repair. Media Psychology, 22, 743-768. https:/doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2018.1515637 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  267. Lasaleta, J. D., & Loveland, K. E. (2019). What’s new Is old again: Nostalgia and retrostyling in response to authenticity threats. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 4, 172-184. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  268. Menke, M. (2017). Seeking comfort in past media: Modeling media nostalgia as a way of coping with media change. International Journal of Communication, 11, 626–646. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  269. Morewedge, C. K. (2013). It was a most unusual time: How memory bias engenders nostalgic preferences. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26, 319–326. https:/doi. org/10.1002/bdm.1767 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  270. Natterer, K. (2014). How and why to measure personal and historical nostalgic responses through entertainment media. International Journal on Media Management, 16, 161– 180. https:/doi.org/10.1080/14241277.2014.989567 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  271. Newman, D. B., Sachs, M. E., Stone, A. A., & Schwarz, N. (2019). Nostalgia and well-being in daily life: An ecological validity perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Online First. https:/doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000236 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  272. Oliver, M. B., & Bartsch, A. (2010). Appreciation as audience response: Exploring entertainment gratifications beyond hedonism. Human Communication Research, 36, 53– 81. https:/doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01368.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  273. Oliver, M. B., Bowman, N. D., Woolley, J. K., Rogers, R., Sherrick, B. I., & Chung, M.-Y. (2015). Video games as meaningful entertainment experiences. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5(4). https:/doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000066 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  274. Oliver, M. B., Hartmann, T., & Woolley, J. K. (2012). Elevation in response to entertainment portrayals of moral virtue. Human Communication Research, 38, 360–378. https:/doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2012.01427.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  275. Oliver, M. B., & Raney, A. A. (2011). Entertainment as pleasurable and meaningful: Identifying hedonic and eudaimonic motivations for entertainment consumption. Journal of Communication, 61, 984–1004. https:/doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01585.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  276. Plagge, K. (2019). Harry Potter’s new game Wizards Unite mixes Pokemon Go with RPGs. Retrieved March 12, 2019, from https://www.gamespot.com/articles/harry-potters-new-game-wizards-unite-mixes-pokemon/1100-6465479/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  277. Przybylski, A. K., Rigby, C. S., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). A motivational model of video game engagement. Review of General Psychology, 14, 154–166. https:/doi.org/10.1037/ a0019440 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  278. Reid, C. A., Green, J. D., Wildschut, T., & Sedikides, C. (2014). Scent-evoked nostalgia. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  279. Memory, 1–10. https:/doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2013.876048 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  280. Reinecke, L., Klatt, J., & Krämer, N. C. (2011). Entertaining media use and the satisfaction of recovery needs: recovery outcomes associated with the use of interactive and noninteractive entertaining media. Media Psychology, 14, 192–215. https:/doi.org/10.1080/1 5213269.2011.573466 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  281. Rieger, D., Frischlich, L., Wulf, T., Bente, G., & Kneer, J. (2015). Eating ghosts: The underlying mechanisms of mood repair via interactive and noninteractive media. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 4, 138–154. https:/doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000018 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  282. Rieger, D., Reinecke, L., Frischlich, L., & Bente, G. (2014). Media entertainment and wellbeing-linking hedonic and eudaimonic entertainment experience to media-induced recovery and vitality. Journal of Communication, 64, 456–478. https:/doi.org/10.1111/ jcom.12097 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  283. Rieger, D., Wulf, T., Kneer, J., Frischlich, L., & Bente, G. (2014). The winner takes it all: The effect of in-game success and need satisfaction on mood repair and enjoyment. Computers in Human Behavior, 39. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.037 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  284. Rosseel, Y (2012). lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36. https:/doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  285. Routledge, C. (2016). Pokémon Go and the power of nostalgia. Retrieved from https:// www.psychologytoday.com/blog/more-mortal/201607/pok-mon-Go-and-the-power-nostalgia Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  286. Routledge, C., Arndt, J., Wildschut, T., Sedikides, C., Hart, C., Juhl, J., … Scholtz, W. (2011). The past makes the present meaningful: Nostalgia as an existential resource. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 638–652. https:/doi.org/10.1037/ a0024292 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  287. Routledge, C., Wildschut, T., Sedikides, C., & Juhl, J. (2013). Nostalgia as a Resource for Psychological Health and Well-Being. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 808–818. https:/doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12070 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  288. Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65, 529–565. https:/doi. org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00326.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  289. Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S., & Przybylski, A. (2006). The motivational pull of video games: A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 347–363. https:/ doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  290. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081. https:/doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  291. Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. H. (2008). Know thyself and become what you are: A eudaimonic approach to psychological well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 13-39. https:/ doi.org/10.1007/s10902-006-9019-0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  292. Schabel, M. (2016). Pokémon Go: Entwickler Niantic möchte eine Lebensspanne wie im Falle von World of Warcraft [Pokémon GO: Developer hopes for a life time comparable to World of Warcraft]. Retrieved March 10, 2019, from http://www.spieletipps. de/n_37971/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  293. Schweizer, K. (2010). Some guidelines concerning the modeling of traits and abilities in test construction. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26, 1–2. https:/doi. org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  294. Sedikides, C., & Wildschut, T. (2016). Past forward: Nostalgia as a motivational force. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  295. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 319–321. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.01.008 Sedikides, C., Wildschut, T., Routledge, C., & Arndt, J. (2015a). Nostalgia counteracts self- Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  296. discontinuity and restores self-continuity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 52-61. https:/doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2073 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  297. Sedikides, C., Wildschut, T., Routledge, C., Arndt, J., Hepper, E. G., & Zhou, X. (2015b). To nostalgize: Mixing memory with affect and desire. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 51, 189–273. https:/doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2014.10.001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  298. Stephan, E., Wildschut, T., Sedikides, C., Zhou, X., He, W., Routledge, C., … Vingerhoets, Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  299. A. J. J. M. (2014). The mnemonic mover: nostalgia regulates avoidance and approach motivation. Emotion, 14, 545–61. https:/doi.org/10.1037/a0035673 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  300. Stern, B. B. (1992). Historical and personal nostalgia in advertising text: The fin de siecle effect. Journal of Advertising, 21, 11–22. https:/doi.org/10.1080/ 00913367.1992.10673382 van Tilburg, W. A. P., Igou, E. R., & Sedikides, C. (2013). In search of meaningfulness: nostal- Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  301. gia as an antidote to boredom. Emotion, 13, 450–61. https:/doi.org/10.1037/a0030442 Vess, M., Arndt, J., Routledge, C., Sedikides, C, & Wildschut, T. (2012). Nostalgia as a re- Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  302. source for the self. Self and Identity, 11, 273–284. https:/doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2 010.521452 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  303. Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., & Ritterfeld, U. (2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media entertainment. Communication Theory, 4, 388–408. https:/doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004. tb00321.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  304. Vorderer, P., & Reinecke, L. (2015). From mood to meaning: The changing model of the user in entertainment research. Communication Theory, 25, 447–453. https:/doi. org/10.1111/comt.12082 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  305. Wildschut, T., Sedikides, C., Arndt, J., & Routledge, C. (2006). Nostalgia: content, triggers, functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 975–93. https:/doi. org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.975 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  306. Wildschut, T., Sedikides, C., Routledge, C., Arndt, J., & Cordaro, F. (2010). Nostalgia as a repository of social connectedness: the role of attachment-related avoidance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 573–86. https:/doi.org/10.1037/a0017597 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  307. Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2003). Affective forecasting. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 345–411. https:/doi.org/10.1177/0098628315620952 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  308. Wulf, T., Bowman, N. D., Velez, J. A., & Breuer, J. (2018). Once upon a game: Exploring video game nostalgia and its impact on well-being. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, Online First. https:/doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000208 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  309. Wulf, T., & Rieger, D. (2018). Wallowing in media-past: Media-induced nostalgia’s connection to parasocial relationships. Communication Research Reports, 35, 178–182. https:/doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2017.1383236 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  310. Wulf, T., Rieger, D., & Schmitt, J. B. (2018). Blissed by the past: Theorizing media-induced nostalgia as an audience response factor for entertainment and well-being. Poetics, 69, 70–80. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2018.04.001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  311. Yang, C., & Liu, D. (2017). Motives matter: Motives for playing Pokémon Go and implications for well-being. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 20, 52–57. https:/doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0562 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  312. Zhou, X., Sedikides, C., Wildschut, T., & Gao, D.-G. (2008). Counteracting loneliness. On the restorative function of nostalgia. Psychological Science, 19, 1023–1029. https:/doi. org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02194.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  313. Zillmann, D. (1988). Mood management through communication choices. American Behavioral Scientist, 31, 327–340. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-241
  314. Aalberg, T., Strömbäck, J., & de Vreese, C. H. (2011). The framing of politics as strategy and game: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2), 162–178. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1464884911427799 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  315. von Alemann, U., & Marschall, S. (Hrsg.). (2002). Parteien in der Mediendemokratie [Parties in media democracy]. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-004-0153-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  316. Adam, S., & Maier, M. (2010). Personalization of politics. A critical review and agenda for Research. Communication Yearbook, 34, 213–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  317. .2010.11679101 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  318. Andersen, U., & Woyke, W. (Hrsg.). (2013). Handwörterbuch des politischen Systems der Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Concise dictionary of the political system of the Federal Republic of Germany] (7. Auflage). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  319. Bender, J. (2017, August 28). AfD teilt aus. Gauland: Özoğuz in Anatolien entsorgen [AfD makes a swipe at Özoğuz]. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. http://www.faz.net/aktuell/ politik/bundestagswahl/afd-alexander-gauland-traeumt-von-entsorgung-aydan-oezoguz-15171141.html Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  320. Bianchi, M., & Korte, K. R. (2015). Die Wahlkommunikation zur Bundestagswahl 2013: Perspektiven der Parteien-und Mediendemokratie [Election communication for the German parliamentary elections 2013]. In K. R. Korte (Hrsg.), Die Bundestagswahl 2013 (S. 293– 315). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02915-9_13 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  321. Brettschneider, F. (2002). Spitzenkandidaten und Wahlerfolg. Personalisierung – Kompetenz – Parteien. Ein internationaler Vergleich [Top candidates and electoral succes]. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-90769-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  322. Cappella, J. N., & Jamieson, K. H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  323. Czerwick, E. (1986). Legitimation und Legitimierung im Parteiensystem der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Forschungsgruppe Parteiendemokratie. Analysen und Berichte 16 [Legitimation and legitimacy in the party system of the federal republic of Germany]. Koblenz: Universität Koblenz. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  324. De Vreese, C. H. (2004). The effects of strategic news on political cynicism, issue evaluations and policy support: A two-wave experiment. Mass Communication and & Society, 7(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327825mcs0702_4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  325. Esaiasson, P., & Holmberg, S. (1996). Representation from above. Members of Parliament and Representative Democracy in Sweden. Dartmouth: Aldershot. https://doi. org/10.2307/2585726 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  326. Galtung, J., & Ruge, M. H. (1965). The structure of foreign news: The presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus crises in four foreign newspapers. Journal of Peace Research, 2, 64–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/002234336500200104 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  327. Geise, S., Distelrath, M, Hille, J., Krieter, M., Malczewski, D., Pütz, F., & Williams, P. (2019). Plakativ, aber wirkungslos? Wirkungspotentiale der Wahlwerbung aus Sicht der Medien [Flashy but ineffective? Potential effects of election advertising from the media’s point of view]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2017. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24824-6_12 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  328. Graner, J. (2002). Personalisierung als erfolgreiche Wahlkampfstrategie? „Prinzessin mit dem Mahagonihaar oder geröteter Haarschopf?“ [Personalization as successful election campaign strategy?]. In J. Schmid & H. Griese (Hrsg.), Wahlkampf in Baden-Württemberg (S. 43–60). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-95034-5_4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  329. Hallahan, K., Holtzhausen, D., Van Ruler, B., Verčič, D., & Sriramesh, K. (2007). Defining strategic communication. International journal of strategic communication, 1(1), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/15531180701285244 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  330. Holtz-Bacha, C. (2001). Negative Campaigning: in Deutschland negativ aufgenommen [Negative campaigning: negatively evaluated in Germany]. Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen, 32(3), 669–677. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  331. Holtz-Bacha, C. (2015). Bundestagswahlkampf 2013: Der Kandidat, der sich nicht inszenieren wollte [The candidate, who didn’t want to be on stage]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die (Massen-)Medien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2013 (S. 1–12). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-06151-7_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  332. Holtz-Bacha, C. (2019). Bundestagswahl 2017: Flauer Wahlkampf? Spannende Wahl! [The Federal Election 2017: Boring Campaigning? Exciting Election!]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die (Massen-)Medien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2017 (S. 1–26). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24824-6_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  333. Holtz-Bacha, C., & Kaid, L. L. (Hrsg.). (1996). Wahlen und Wahlkampf in den Medien. Untersuchungen aus dem Wahljahr 1994 [Elections and election campaigns in the media]. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-87282-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  334. Holtz-Bacha, C., & Lessinger, E.-M. (2015). Die Königin, der Rausschmeißer und die Gemeine Filzlaus: Die Wahlspots der Parteien im Bundestagswahlkampf 2013 [Campaign commercials of the parties for the German parliamentary elections campaign 2013]. In Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  335. C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2013 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  336. (S. 71–90). Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-06151-7_4 Holtz-Bacha, C., & Lessinger, E.-M. (2019). Eine Welt schöner Bilder oder: Wo bleibt die Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  337. Kreativität? [A world of nice pictures or: Where is the creativity?]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die (Massen-)Medien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2017 (S. 165–179). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24824-6_7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  338. Holtz-Bacha, C., Lessinger, E.-M., & Hettesheimer, M. (1998). Personalisierung als Strategie der Wahlwerbung [Personalization as a strategy in canvassing]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2005 (S. 164–182). Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  339. Jamieson, K. H. (1992). Dirty politics. New York: Oxford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  340. Jandura, O., & Leidecker, M. (2013). Grundgesamtheit und Stichprobenbildung [Population and sampling]. In W. Möhring & D. Schlütz (Hrsg.). Handbuch standardisierte Erhebungsmethoden in der Kommunikationswissenschaft (S. 61–77). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-18776-1_4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  341. Kamps, K. (1999). Politik in Fernsehnachrichten: Struktur und Präsentation internationaler Ereignisse; ein Vergleich [Politics in television news]. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  342. Kamps, K. (2003). Politisches Kommunikationsmanagement in der Mediengesellschaft. Zur Professionalisierung moderner Politikvermittlung [Political communication management in media society]. In G. Hirscher & K.-R. Korte (Hrsg.), Information und Entscheidung: Kommunikationsmanagement der politischen Führung (S. 197–210). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-90492-8_12 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  343. Kamps, K. (2007). Politisches Kommunikationsmanagement. Grundlagen und Professionalisierung moderner Politikvermittlung [Political communication management]. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90251-7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  344. Kepplinger, H. M. (2001). Der Ereignisbegriff in der Publizistikwissenschaft [Definitions of Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  345. „events“ in communication science]. Publizistik, 46, 117–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11616-001-0032-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  346. Kepplinger, H. M., & Maurer, M. (2001). Saldo oder Mittelwert? Eine vorläufige Antwort auf eine ungestellte Frage [Balance or average value?]. In F. Marcinkowski (Hrsg.), Die Politik der Massenmedien (S. 166–180). Köln: von Halem. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  347. Kepplinger, H. M., & Maurer, M. (2005). Abschied vom rationalen Wähler. Warum Wahlen im Fernsehen entschieden werden [Farewell to the rational voter]. Freiburg, München: Alber. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  348. Klingemann, H. D., Hofferbert, R. I., & Budge, I. (1994). Parties, policies, and democracy. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  349. Boulder: Westview Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  350. Krüger, U. M., Zapf-Schramm, T., & Müller, C. (2013). Wahlinformationen im öffentlichrechtlichen und privaten Fernsehen 2013 [Electoral information in public and commercial television]. Media Perspektiven, 12, 589–612. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  351. Krüger, U. M., Zapf-Schramm, T., & Müller, C. (2017). Die Bundestagswahl 2017 im öffentlich-rechtlichen und privaten Fernsehen [The German Federal Election in public and commercial television]. Media Perspektiven, 1, 16–36. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  352. Leidecker, M. (2010). Angreifende Plakatwerbung im Wahlkampf – effektiv oder riskant? Ein Experiment aus Anlass der SPD-Europawahlplakate 2009 [Negative campaigning Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  353. – effective or risky?]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Das Wahljahr 2009 (S. 117–139). Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92509-7_5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  354. Leidecker, M., & Wilke, J. (2015). Langweilig? Wieso langweilig? Die Presseberichterstattung zur Bundestagswahl 2013 im Langzeitvergleich [Boring? Why boring?]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2013 (S. 145–173). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-06151-7_7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  355. Leidecker-Sandmann, M., & Wilke, J. (2019). Aus dem Rahmen fallend oder eher „middle of the road“? Die Presseberichterstattung zur Bundestagswahl 2017 im Langzeitvergleich [Exceptional or middle of the road?]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die (Massen-) Medien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2017. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24824-6_9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  356. Lessinger, E. M., & Holtz-Bacha, C. (2010). „Wir haben mehr zu bieten“. Die Plakatkampagnen zur Europa-und Bundestagswahl [Poster advertising for the European and German parliamentary elections]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Das Wahljahr 2009 (S. 67–116). Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-531-92509-7_4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  357. Lessinger, E. M., & Holtz-Bacha, C. (2019). Nicht von gestern. Die Parteienplakate im Bundestagswahlkampf 2017 [Parties’s campaign posters in the 2017 German parliamentary elections]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die (Massen-)Medien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2017. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24824-6_6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  358. Lessinger, E.-M., Holtz-Bacha, C., & Cornel, W. (2015). Wahlplakate treffen jeden: Die Plakatkampagnen der Parteien im Bundestagswahlkampf 2013 [Poster advertising for the German parliamentary elections 2013]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2013 (S. 91–120). Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-06151-7_5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  359. Magin, M. (2012). Wahlkampf in Deutschland und Österreich: Ein Langzeitvergleich der Presseberichterstattung (1949–2006) [Election campaigns in Germany and Austria]. Wien, Köln, Weimar: Böhlau. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  360. Maier, J. (2009). Was die Bürger über Politik (nicht) wissen – und was die Massenmedien damit zu tun haben – ein Forschungsüberblick [What citizens do (not) know about politics]. In F. Marcinkowski & B. Pfetsch (Hrsg.), Politik in der Mediendemokratie (S. 393–414). Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-91728-3_17 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  361. Maier, J., & Maier, M. (2007). Audience reactions to negative campaign spots in the 2005 German national elections: the case of two ads called „The Ball“. Human Communication, 10, 329–344. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  362. Marcinkowski, F. (1996). Politikvermittlung durch das Fernsehen. Politiktheoretische und konzeptionelle Grundlagen der empirischen Forschung [Impartation of politics through television]. In O. Jarren, H. Schatz & H. Weßler (Hrsg.), Medien und politischer Prozess. Politische Öffentlichkeit und massenmediale Politikvermittlung im Wandel (S. 201–212). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-91675-4_12 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  363. Marcinkowski, F., Metag, J., & Wattenberg, J. (2013). Online-Campaigning als Wahlkampfstrategie. Zum Erklärungswert der Theorie des geplanten Verhaltens für die Strategische Kommunikation von Kandidaten [Online campaignign as election campaign strategy]. In U. Röttger, V. Gehrau, & J. Preusse (Hrsg.), Strategische Kommunikation. Umrisse und Perspektiven eines Forschungsfeldes (S. 173–199). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-00409-5_8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  364. Maurer, M. (2009). Wissensvermittlung in der Mediendemokratie. Wie Medien und politische Akteure die Inhalte von Wahlprogrammen kommunizieren [Impartation of knowledge in media democracy]. In F. Marcinkowski & B. Pfetsch (Hrsg.), Politik in der Mediendemokratie (S. 151–173). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-91728-3_7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  365. Maurer, M. (2010). Agenda-Setting. Baden-Baden: Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/ 9783845260372_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  366. Maurer, M., & Reinemann, C. (2006). Medieninhalte. Eine Einführung [Media content]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  367. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90179-4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  368. Merten, K. (2013): Strategie, Management und strategisches Kommunikationsmanagement. In U. Röttger, V. Gehrau, &. J. Preusse (Hrsg.), Strategische Kommunikation. Umrisse und Perspektiven eines Forschungsfeldes (S. 103–126). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-00409-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  369. Niedermayer, O. (2007). Der Wahlkampf zur Bundestagswahl 2005: Parteistrategien und Kampagnenverlauf [Election campaign for the German parliamentary elections 2005]. In F. Brettschneider, O. Niedermayer, & B. Weßels (Hrsg.), Die Bundestagswahl 2005 (S. 21–42). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90536-5_2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  370. Page, B. I. (1976). The theory of political ambiguity. The American Political Science Review, 70(3), 742–752. https://doi.org/10.2307/1959865 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  371. Partheymüller, J., & Schäfer, A. (2013). Das Informationsverhalten der Bürger im Bundestagswahlkampf 2013 [The information behavior of the citizens in the German parliamentary election campaign 2013]. Media-Perspektiven, 2013(12), 574–588. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  372. Podschuweit, N., & Haßler, J. (2015). Wahlkampf mit Kacheln, sponsored ads und Käseglocke: Der Einsatz des Internet im Bundestagswahlkampf 2013 [The use oft he internet during the German parliamentary election campaign 2013]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2013 (S. 13–39). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-06151-7_2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  373. Radunski, P. (1980). Wahlkämpfe. Moderne Wahlkampfführung als politische Kommunikation [Election campaigns]. München: Olzog. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  374. Raschke, J., & Tils, R. (2007). Politische Strategie. Eine Grundlegung [Political strategy]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  375. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-19871-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  376. Reinemann, C. (2008). Wandel beschrieben – Wandel erklärt? Wahlkampfkommunikation im Langzeitvergleich [Change described – change explained?]. In G. Melischek, J. Seethaler, & J. Wilke (Hrsg.), Medien & Kommunikationsforschung im Vergleich (S. 179– 198). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90808-3_10 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  377. Reinisch, K. (2017). Wahl ohne Wissen? Empirische Analyse zur Entpolitisierung der Wahlkampfberichterstattung deutscher Printmedien [Election without knowledge?]. Baden-Baden: Nomos. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-018-0089-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  378. Ridder, C.-M., & Engel, B. (2010). Massenkommunikation 2010. Mediennutzung im In- termediavergleich. Ergebnisse der 10. Welle der ARD/ZDF-Langzeitstudie Mediennutzung und -bewertung [Mass communication 2010]. Media Perspektiven, 11, 523–536. Ridout, T. N., & Smith, G. R. (2008). Free advertising. How the media amplify campaign messages. Political Research Quarterly, 61(4), 598–608. https://doi.org/10.1177/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  379. 1065912908314202 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  380. Rössler, P. (2010). Inhaltsanalyse [Content analysis]. Stuttgart: UVK. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  381. Rössler, P. (2017). Inhaltsanalyse [Content analysis] (3., völlig überarbeitete Auflage). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  382. Stuttgart: UVK. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  383. Rudzio, W. (2006). Das politische System der Bundesrepublik Deutschland [The political system of the federal republic of Germany]. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-658-06231-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  384. Ruhrmann, G., Maier, M., & Diehlmann, N. (2003). Der Wert von Nachrichten im deutschen Fernsehen. Ein Modell zur Validierung von Nachrichtenfaktoren [The value of news on German television. A model for the validation of news factors]. Opladen: Leske + Budrich. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-09644-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  385. Sarcinelli, U. (2011). Politische Kommunikation in Deutschland: Medien und Politikvermittlung im demokratischen System [Political communication in Germany] (3. erweiterte und überarbeitete Auflage). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93018-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  386. Sarcinelli, U. (2013). Wahlkampf [Election campaign]. In U. Andersen & W. Woyke (Hrsg.), Handwörterbuch des politischen Systems der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (S. 748–755). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  387. Schaffrinna, A. (2018, August 16). Die Plakate zur Bundestagswahl 2017 [Campaing posters for the German parliamentary elections 2017]. Abgerufen von https://www.design-tagebuch.de/die-plakate-zur-bundestagswahl-2017/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  388. Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, Agenda-Setting, and Priming: The evolution of three media effect models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9–20. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9916.2007.00326.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  389. Schmitt-Beck, R. (1996). Medien und Mehrheiten: Massenmedien als Informationsvermittler über die Wahlchancen der Parteien [Media and majorities]. Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen, 27(1), 127–144. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  390. Schmitt-Beck, R., & Pfetsch, B. (1994). Zur Generierung von Öffentlichkeit in Wahlkämpfen [Creation of publicity in elecion campaigns]. In F. Neidhardt (Hrsg.), Öffentlichkeit, öffentliche Meinung, soziale Bewegung (S. 106–138). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Schmücking, A. (2014). Negative Campaigning. Die Wirkung und Entwicklung negativer politischer Werbung in der Bundesrepublik [Negative campaigning. Effects and evolution of negative political advertising in the federal republic of Germany]. Wiesbaden: Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  391. Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-08212-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  392. Schoen, H. (2005). Wahlkampfforschung [Election campaign research]. In J. W. Falter & Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  393. H. Schoen (Hrsg.), Handbuch Wahlforschung (S. 503–542). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  394. Schoen, H. (2007). Ein Wahlkampf ist ein Wahlkampf ist ein Wahlkampf? Anmerkungen zu Konzepten und Problemen der Wahlkampfforschung. [An election campaign is an election campaign is an election campaign? Comments on concepts and issues of election campaign research]. In N. Jackob (Hrsg.), Wahlkämpfe in Deutschland. Fallstudien zur Wahlkampfkommunikation 1912–2005 (S. 34–45). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90448-1_2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  395. Schoen, H. (2014). Wahlkampfforschung [Election campaign research]. In J. W. Falter & Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  396. H. Schoen (Hrsg.), Handbuch Wahlforschung (2. Auflage) (S. 611–728), Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  397. Schulz, W. (1990). Die Konstruktion von Realität in den Nachrichtenmedien. Analyse der aktuellen Berichterstattung [The construct of reality in news media] (2. Auflage). Freiburg, München: Karl Alber. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  398. Schulz, W. (2008). Politische Kommunikation. Theoretische Ansätze und Ergebnisse empirischer Forschung [Political communication]. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-531-91830-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  399. Schulz, W. (2011). Politische Kommunikation. Theoretische Ansätze und Ergebnisse empirischer Forschung [Political communication]. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-531-93094-7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  400. Schulz, W., & Zeh, R. (2006). Die Kampagne im Fernsehen – Agens und Indikator des Wandels. Ein Vergleich der Kandidatendarstellung [The campaign on television]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2005 (S. 277–305). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90383-5_10 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  401. Schulz, W., & Zeh, R. (2010). Die Protagonisten in der Fernseharena. Merkel und Steinmeier in der Berichterstattung über den Wahlkampf 2009 [Merkel and Steinmeier in the media coverage of the German parliamentary elections 2009]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Das Wahljahr 2009 (S. 313–338). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92509-7_12 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  402. Schweitzer, E. J. (2010). Normalisierung 2.0. Die Online-Wahlkämpfe deutscher Parteien zu den Bundestagswahlen 2002–2009 [Online election campaigns of German parties for the 2002–2009 German parliamentary elections]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Das Wahljahr 2009 (S. 189–244). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92509-7_8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  403. Shepsle, K. A. (1972). The strategy of ambiguity: uncertainty and electoral competition. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  404. The American Political Science Review, 66(2), 555–568. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  405. Strömbäck, J. (2008). Four phases of mediatization: an analysis of the mediatization of politics. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(3), 228–246. https://doi. org/10.1177/1940161208319097 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  406. Swanson, D., & Mancini, P. (1996). Politics, media, and modern democracy: An international study of innovations in electoral campaigning and their consequences. Westport: Praeger. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  407. Vogelgesang, J., & Scharkow, M. (2012). Reliabilitätstests in Inhaltsanalysen. Eine Analyse der Dokumentationspraxis in Publizistik und Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft [Reliability tests in content analyses]. Publizistik, 57(3), 333–345. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11616-012-0154-9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  408. Voigt, M., & Seidenglanz, R. (2017). Trendstudie. Digital Campaigning in der Bundestagswahl 2017 – Implikationen für Politik und Public Affairs [Digital campaignin in the German parliamentary elections 2017]. Abgerufen von https://www.quadriga-hochschule.com/sites/default/files/quadriga-digital-campaigning-studie-btw2017.pdf Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  409. Wilke, J., & Leidecker, M. (2010). Ein Wahlkampf, der keiner war? Die Presseberichterstattung zur Bundestagswahl 2009 im Langzeitvergleich [Press coverage of the German parliamentary elections 2009 in a long-term comparison]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Das Wahljahr 2009 (S. 339–372). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92509-7_13 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  410. Wilke, J., & Leidecker, M. (2018). Zwischen Gratwanderung und „Verpapstung“ eines Landesvaters. Die Presseberichterstattung über die Landtagswahlen in Rheinland-Pfalz und Baden-Württemberg 2016 – im Vergleich zu 2011 [Between balancing act and “papalization” of a sovereign. A comparison of the German press coverage of the 2011 and 2016 federal state elections in Rhineland-Palatinate and Baden-Wuerttemberg]. Studies in Communication and Media, 7(1), 89–128. https://doi. org/10.5771/2192-4007-2018-1-89 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  411. Wilke, J., & Reinemann, C. (2000). Kanzlerkandidaten in der Wahlberichterstattung. Eine vergleichende Studie zu den Bundestagswahlen 1949-1998 [Chancellor candidates in election coverage]. Wien, Köln, Weimar: Böhlau. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  412. Wilke, J., & Reinemann, C. (2006). Die Normalisierung des Sonderfalls? Die Wahlkampfberichterstattung der Presse 2005 im Langzeitvergleich [Press coverage of the German parliamentary elections 2005 in a long-term comparison]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2005 (S. 306–337). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90383-5_11 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  413. Zeh, R. (2010). Wie viele Fans hat Angela Merkel? Wahlkampf in Social Network Sites [Election campaigns on social network sites]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Hrsg.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Das Wahljahr 2009 (S. 245–257). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92509-7_9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  414. EXTENDED ABSTRACT Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  415. Aalberg, T., Strömbäck, J., & de Vreese, C. H. (2011). The framing of politics as strategy and game: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2), 162–178. https:/doi.org/10.1177/1464884911427799 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  416. Bianchi, M., & Korte, K. R. (2015). Die Wahlkommunikation zur Bundestagswahl 2013: Perspektiven der Parteien-und Mediendemokratie [Election communication for the German parliamentary elections 2013]. In K. R. Korte (Ed.), Die Bundestagswahl 2013 (S. 293–315). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02915-9_13 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  417. Graner, J. (2002). Personalisierung als erfolgreiche Wahlkampfstrategie? „Prinzessin mit dem Mahagonihaar oder geröteter Haarschopf?“ [Personalization as successful election campaign strategy?]. In J. Schmid & H. Griese (Eds.), Wahlkampf in Baden-Württemberg (S. 43–60). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-95034-5_4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  418. Holtz-Bacha, C. (2001). Negative Campaigning: in Deutschland negativ aufgenommen [Negative campaigning: negatively evaluated in Germany]. Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen, 32(3), 669–677. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  419. Holtz-Bacha, C. (2019). Bundestagswahl 2017: Flauer Wahlkampf? Spannende Wahl! [The Federal Election 2017: Boring Campaigning? Exciting Election!]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Ed.), Die (Massen-)Medien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2017 (S. 1–26). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24824-6_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  420. Kamps, K. (1999). Politik in Fernsehnachrichten: Struktur und Präsentation internationaler Ereignisse; ein Vergleich [Politics in television news]. Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos. Krüger, U. M., Zapf-Schramm, T., & Müller, C. (2013). Wahlinformationen im öffentlichrechtlichen und privaten Fernsehen 2013 [Electoral information in public and commer- Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  421. cial television]. Media Perspektiven, 12, 589–612. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  422. Krüger, U. M., Zapf-Schramm, T., & Müller, C. (2017). Die Bundestagswahl 2017 im öffentlich-rechtlichen und privaten Fernsehen [The German Federal Election in public and commercial television]. Media Perspektiven, 1, 16–36. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  423. Leidecker, M., & Wilke, J. (2015). Langweilig? Wieso langweilig? Die Presseberichterstattung zur Bundestagswahl 2013 im Langzeitvergleich [Boring? Why boring?]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Ed.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2013 (S. 145–173). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-06151-7_7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  424. Leidecker-Sandmann, M., & Wilke, J. (2019). Aus dem Rahmen fallend oder eher „middle of the road“? Die Presseberichterstattung zur Bundestagswahl 2017 im Langzeitvergleich [Exceptional or middle of the road?]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Ed.), Die (Massen-) Medien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2017. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24824-6_9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  425. Magin, M. (2012). Wahlkampf in Deutschland und Österreich: Ein Langzeitvergleich der Presseberichterstattung (1949–2006) [Election campaigns in Germany and Austria]. Wien, Austria, Köln, Germany, Weimar, Germany: Böhlau. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  426. Marcinkowski, F., Metag, J., & Wattenberg, J. (2013). Online-Campaigning als Wahlkampfstrategie. Zum Erklärungswert der Theorie des geplanten Verhaltens für die Strategische Kommunikation von Kandidaten [Online campaignign as election campaign strategy]. In U. Röttger, V. Gehrau, & J. Preusse (Eds.), Strategische Kommunikation. Umrisse und Perspektiven eines Forschungsfeldes (S. 173–199). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-00409-5_8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  427. Rössler, P. (2017). Inhaltsanalyse [Content analysis] (3., völlig überarbeitete Auflage). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  428. Stuttgart, Germany: UVK. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  429. Sarcinelli, U. (2013). Wahlkampf [Election campaign]. In U. Andersen & W. Woyke (Hrsg.), Handwörterbuch des politischen Systems der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (S. 748–755). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  430. Schmitt-Beck, R. (1996). Medien und Mehrheiten: Massenmedien als Informationsvermittler über die Wahlchancen der Parteien [Media and majorities]. Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen, 27(1), 127–144. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  431. Schoen, H. (2007). Ein Wahlkampf ist ein Wahlkampf ist ein Wahlkampf? Anmerkungen zu Konzepten und Problemen der Wahlkampfforschung. [An election campaign is an election campaign is an election campaign? Comments on concepts and issues of election campaign research]. In N. Jackob (Ed.), Wahlkämpfe in Deutschland. Fallstudien zur Wahlkampfkommunikation 1912–2005 (S. 34–45). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90448-1_2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  432. Schoen, H. (2014). Wahlkampfforschung [Election campaign research]. In J. W. Falter & Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  433. H. Schoen (Eds.), Handbuch Wahlforschung (2. Auflage) (S. 611–728), Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  434. Schulz, W., & Zeh, R. (2006). Die Kampagne im Fernsehen – Agens und Indikator des Wandels. Ein Vergleich der Kandidatendarstellung [The campaign on television]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Ed.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2005 (S. 277–305). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90383-5_10 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  435. Schulz, W., & Zeh, R. (2010). Die Protagonisten in der Fernseharena. Merkel und Steinmeier in der Berichterstattung über den Wahlkampf 2009 [Merkel and Steinmeier in the media coverage of the German parliamentary elections 2009]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Ed.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Das Wahljahr 2009 (S. 313–338). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92509-7_12 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  436. Shepsle, K. A. (1972). The strategy of ambiguity: uncertainty and electoral competition. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  437. The American Political Science Review, 66(2), 555–568. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  438. Wilke, J., & Reinemann, C. (2006). Die Normalisierung des Sonderfalls? Die Wahlkampfberichterstattung der Presse 2005 im Langzeitvergleich [Press coverage of the German parliamentary elections 2005 in a long-term comparison]. In C. Holtz-Bacha (Ed.), Die Massenmedien im Wahlkampf. Die Bundestagswahl 2005 (S. 306–337). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-90383-5_11 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-264
  439. Angelopoulos, C. (2010). Product placement in European audiovisual productions. In S. Nikoltchev (Hrsg.), Product placement (IRIS plus, 2010-3) (S. 7–21). Strasbourg: European Audiovisual Observatory. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  440. Austin, E. W. (2001). Effects of family communication on children’s interpretation of television. In J. Bryant & J. A. Bryant (Hrsg.), Television and the American family (2nd ed.) (S. 377–396). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  441. Auty, S., & Lewis, C. (2004). Exploring children’s choice: The reminder effect of brand placement. Psychology and Marketing, 21(9), 697–713. https:/doi.org/10.1002/ mar.20025 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  442. Bakir, A., & Vitell, S. J. (2010). The ethics of food advertising targeted toward children: Parental viewpoint. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(2), 299–311. https:/doi.org/10.1007/ s10551-009-0084-2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  443. Bente, K. (1990). Product Placement. Entscheidungsrelevante Aspekte in der Werbepolitik [Product placement. Relevant aspects for decision making in advertising policy]. Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitätsverlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  444. Bijmolt, T. H. A., Claassen, W., & Brus, B. (1998). Children’s understanding of TV advertising: Effects of age, gender, and parental influence. Journal of Consumer Policy, 21(2), 171–194. https:/doi.org/10.1023/A:1006831206697 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  445. Boerman, S. C., van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Neijens, P. C. (2012). Sponsorship disclosure: Effects of duration on persuasion knowledge and brand responses. Journal of Communication, 62(6), 1047–1064. https:/doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01677.x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  446. Boerman, S. C., van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Neijens, P. C. (2013). Appreciation and effects of sponsorship disclosure. In S. Rosengren, M. Dahlén, & S. Okazaki (Hrsg.), Advances in Advertising Research (Vol. IV) (S. 273–284). Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02365-2_21 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  447. Brunbauer, S. & Matthes, J. (2016). Wissensvermittlung durch Produktplatzierungen. Lerneffekte von platzierten Marken- und Produktinformationen in unterhaltenden Medieninhalten [Product placement and knowledge transfer: Learning effect of brand placement and product related information in entertaining media]. Publizistik, 61, 123–144. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s11616-016-0255-y Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  448. Buijzen, M. (2007). Reducing children’s susceptibility to commercials: Mechanisms of factual and evaluating advertising interventions. Media Psychology, 9(3), 411–430. https:/ doi.org/10.1080/15213260701291361 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  449. Buijzen, M. (2014). The family’s role in children’s interpretation of advertising. In M. Blades, C. Oates, F. Blumberg & B. Gunter (Hrsg.), Advertising to children. New directions, new media (S. 137–157). London: Palgrave Macmillan. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  450. Buijzen, M., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2005). Parental mediation of undesired advertising effects. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(2), 153–165. https:/doi. org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4902_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  451. Buijzen, M., van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Owen, L. H. (2010). Introducing the PCMC model: An investigative framework for young people’s processing of commercialized media content. Communication Theory, 20(4), 427–450. https:/doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01370.x Cornish, L. S. (2014). ‘Mum, can I play on the internet?’ Parents’ understanding, perception and responses to online advertising designed for children. International Journal of Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  452. Advertising, 33(3), 437–473. https:/doi.org/10.2501/IJA-33-3-437-473 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  453. De Jans, S., Vanwesenbeeck, I., Cauberghe, V., Hudders, L., Rozendaal, E., & van Reijmersdal, E. A. (2018). The development and testing of a child-inspired advertising disclosure to alert children to digital and embedded advertising. Journal of Advertising, 47(3), 255–269. https:/doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2018.1463580 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  454. Dens, N., De Pelsmacker, P., & Eagle, L. (2007). Parental attitudes towards advertising to children and restrictive mediation of children’s television viewing in Belgium. Young Consumers, 8(1), 7–18. https:/doi.org/10.1108/17473610710733730 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  455. De Pauw, P., Hudders, L., & Cauberghe, V. (2018). Disclosing brand placement to young children. International Journal of Advertising, 37(4), 508–525. https:/doi.org/10.1080/ 02650487.2017.1335040 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  456. De Pauw, P., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2019). Taking children’s advertising literacy to a higher level: A multilevel analysis exploring the influence of parents, peers, and teachers. Communication Research, 46(8), 1197–1221. https:/doi.org/10.1177/0093650218797876 Evans, N. J., Carlson, L., & Hoy, M. G. (2013). Coddling our kids: Can parenting style affect attitudes toward advergames? Journal of Advertising, 42(2-3), 228–240. https:/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  457. doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2013.774602 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  458. Evans, N. J. (2014). Pinpointing persuasion in children’s advergames: Exploring the relationship among parents’ internet mediation, marketplace knowledge, attitudes, and the support for regulation. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 14(2), 73–85. https:/doi.org/ 10.1080/15252019.2014.943354 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  459. Evans, N. J., & Hoy, M. G. (2016). Parents’ presumed persuasion knowledge of children’s advergames: The influence of advertising disclosure modality and cognitive load. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 37(2), 146–164. https:/doi.org/10.10 80/10641734.2016.1171181 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  460. Evans, N. J., Hoy, M. G, & Childers, C. C. (2018). Parenting “YouTube Natives”: The impact of pre-roll advertising and text disclosures on parental responses to sponsored child influencer videos. Journal of Advertising, 47(4), 326–346. https:/doi.org/10.1080 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  461. /00913367.2018.1544952 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  462. Feierabend, S., & Kahl, A. (2017). Was Kinder sehen. Eine Analyse der Fernsehnutzung Drei- bis 13-Jähriger 2016 [What children watch. An analysis of television use of children between the ages six and thirteen in 2016]. Media Perspektiven, 2017(4), 216–227. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  463. Feierabend, S., Rathgeb, T., & Reutter, T. (2018). KIM-Studie 2018. Kindheit, Internet, Medien. Basisuntersuchung zum Medienumgang 6- bis 13-Jähriger [KIM study 2018. Children, internet, media. An examination on media usage of children between the ages six and thirteen]. Abrufbar unter https://www.mpfs.de/studien/kim-studie/2018/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  464. Folkvord, F., Anschütz, D. J., Wiers, R. W., & Buijzen, M. (2015). The role of attentional bias in the effect of food advertising on actual food intake among children. Appetite, 84, 251–258. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.10.016 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  465. Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research 21(1), 1–31. https:/doi. org/10.1086/209380 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  466. Ginosar, A., & Levi-Faur, D. (2010). Regulating product placement in the European Union and Canada: Explaining regime change and diversity. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 12(5), 467–490. https:/doi.org/10.1080/13876988.20 10.516512 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  467. Hudders, L., & Cauberghe, V. (2018). The mediating role of advertising literacy and the moderating influence of parental mediation on how children of different ages react to brand placements. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 17(2), 197–210. https:/doi. org/10.1002/cb.1704 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  468. Hudders, L., Cauberghe, V., & Panic, K. (2016). How advertising literacy training affect children’s responses to television commercials versus advergames. International Journal of Advertising, 35(6), 909–931. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2015.1090045 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  469. Hudders, L., De Pauw, P., Cauberghe, V., Panic, K., Zarouali, B., & Rozendaal, E. (2017). Shedding new light on how advertising literacy can affect children’s processing of embedded advertising formats: A future research agenda. Journal of Advertising, 46(2), 333–349. https:/doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2016.1269303 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  470. Hudson, S., Hudson, D., & Peloza, J. (2008). Meet the parents: A parents’ perspective on product placement in children’s films. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(2), 289–304. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9421-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  471. Jäger, M. (2017). Trennungs-und Kennzeichnungsgebot im Lauterkeits- und Medienrecht [Separation and labeling requirements in the law of unfair competition and media law]. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  472. John, D. R. (1999). Consumer socialization of children: A retrospective look at twenty-five years of research. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), 183–213. https:/doi. org/10.1086/209559 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  473. Koch, T. (2016). Wirkung von Product Placements. Theoretische Ansätze und empirische Befunde [Effect of product placements. Theoretical approaches and empirical results]. In G. Siegert, W. Wirth, P. Weber, & J. A. Lischka (Hrsg.), Handbuch Werbeforschung (S. 373–394). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-18916-1_17 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  474. Koch, T., & Ruland, A. (2011). Versteckte Effekte. Wirkungen subtiler und exponierter Product Placements [Hidden impacts. Effects of subtle and distinct product placements]. Publizistik, 56(3), 263–280. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s11616-011-0121-x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  475. Lapierre, M. A., & Rozendaal, E. (2018). Cross-national differences in consumer socialization, development, and behavior: a comparison of children in the United States and the Netherlands. Journal of Children and Media, 12(4), 388–405. https:/doi.org/10.1080/1 7482798.2018.1474481 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  476. Matthes, J., & Naderer, B. (2016). Product placement disclosures: Exploring the moderating effect of placement frequency on brand responses via persuasion knowledge. International Journal of Advertising, 35(2), 185–199. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2015.1071947 Matthes, J., Schemer, C., & Wirth, W. (2007). More than meets the eye: Investigating the hidden impact of brand placements in television magazines. International Journal of Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  477. Advertising, 26(4), 477–503. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2007.11073029 Moore, E. (2004). Children and the changing world of advertising. Journal of Business Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  478. Ethics, 52(2), 161–167. https:/doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000035907.66617.f5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  479. Naderer, B., & Matthes, J. (2016). Kinder und Werbung: Inhalte, Wirkprozesse und Forschungsperspektiven [Children and advertising: Content, effect mechanisms, and research prospects]. In G. Siegert, W. Wirth, P. Weber, & J. A. Lischka (Hrsg.), Handbuch Werbeforschung (S. 689–712). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-18916-1_30 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  480. Naderer, B., Matthes, J., Marquart, F., & Mayrhofer, M. (2018). Children’s attitudinal and behavioral reactions to product placements: Investigating the role of placement frequency, placement integration, and parental mediation. International Journal of Advertising, 37(2), 236–255. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2016.1218672 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  481. Naderer, B., Matthes, J., & Spielvogel, I. (2019). How brands appear in children’s movies. A systematic content analysis of the past 25 Years. International Journal of Advertising, 38(2), 237–257. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2017.1410000 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  482. Nelson, M. R. (2016). Developing persuasion knowledge by teaching advertising literacy in primary school. Journal of Advertising, 45(2), 169–182. https:/doi.org/10.1080/009 13367.2015.1107871 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  483. Nelson, M. R., Atkinson, L., Rademacher, M. A., & Ahn, R. (2017). How media and family build children’s persuasion knowledge. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 38(2), 165–183. https:/doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2017.1291383 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  484. Newman, N., & Oates, C. J. (2014). Parental mediation of food marketing communications aimed at children. International Journal of Advertising, 33(3), 579–598. https:/ doi.org/10.2501/IJA-33-3-579-598 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  485. Oates, C., Newman, N., & Tziortzi, A. (2014). Parents’ beliefs about, and attitudes towards, marketing children. In M. Blades, C. Oates, F. Blumberg & B. Gunter (Hrsg.), Advertising to children. New directions, new media (S. 115–135). London: Palgrave Macmillan. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  486. Reid, R. M. C. (2014). Embedded advertising to children: A tactic that requires a new regulatory approach. American Business Law Journal, 51(4), 721–777. https:/doi. org/10.1111/ablj.12038 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  487. Rose, G. M., Bush, V. D., & Kahle, L. (1998). The influence of family communication patterns on parental reactions toward advertising: A cross-national examination. Journal of Advertising 27(4), 71–85. https:/doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1998.10673570 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  488. Rozendaal, E., Lapierre, M. A., van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Buijzen, M. (2011). Reconsidering advertising literacy as a defense against advertising effects. Media Psychology, 14(3), 333–354. https:/doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2011.620540 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  489. Richtlinie (EU) 2018/1808 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 14. November 2018 zur Änderung der Richtlinie 2010/13/EU zur Koordinierung bestimmter Rechtsund Verwaltungsvorschriften der Mitgliedstaaten über die Bereitstellung audiovisueller Mediendienste (Richtlinie über audiovisuelle Mediendienste) im Hinblick auf sich verändernde Marktgegebenheiten. Abrufbar unter https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ de/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32018L1808 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  490. Shin, W. (2017). Active mediation of television, internet and mobile advertising. Young Consumers, 18(4), 378–392. https:/doi.org/10.1108/YC-06-2017-00700 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  491. Shin, W., & Lwin, M. O. (2017). How does “talking about the Internet with others” affect teenagers’ experience of online risks? The role of active mediation by parents, peers, and school teachers. New Media & Society, 19(7), 1109–1126. https:/doi.org/10.1177/ 1461444815626612 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  492. Spielvogel, I., Naderer, B., & Matthes, J. (2020a). Again and again: Exploring the influence of disclosure repetition on children's cognitive processing of product placement. International Journal of Advertising, 39(5), 611–630. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02650487.20 19.1648984 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  493. Spielvogel, I., Naderer, B., & Matthes, J. (2020b). Disclosing product placement in audio-visual media services: A practical and scientific perspective on the implementation of disclosures across the European Union. International Journal of Advertising. Advance online publication. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2020.1781478 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  494. Terlutter, R., & Spielvogel, J. (2010). Einflussfaktoren auf die Entwicklung der Werbekompetenz bei Kindern [Influencing factors on the development of advertising literacy in children]. der markt, 49(1), 17–41. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s12642-010-0022-y Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  495. Tessitore, T., & Geuens, M. (2013). PP for ‘product placement’ or ‘puzzled public’? The effectiveness of symbols as warnings of product placements and the moderating role of brand recall. International Journal of Advertising, 32(3), 419–442. https://doi. org/10.2501/IJA-32-3-419-442 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  496. van Reijmersdal, E. A., Boerman, S. C., Buijzen, M., & Rozendaal, E. (2017). This is advertising! Effects of disclosing television brand placement on adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(2), 328–342. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0493-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  497. van Reijmersdal, E. A., Tutaj, K., & Boerman, S.C. (2013). The effects of brand placement disclosures on scepticism and brand memory. Communications 38(2), 127–146. https:/ doi.org/10.1515/commun-2013-0008 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  498. Vanwesenbeeck, I., Walrave, M., & Ponnet, K. (2016). Young adolescents and advertising on social network games: A structural equation model of perceived parental media mediation, advertising literacy, and behavioral intention. Journal of Advertising, 45(2), 183–197. https:/doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2015.1123125 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  499. Ward, S. (1974). Consumer socialization. Journal of Consumer Research, 1(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1086/208584 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  500. Wiman, A. R. (1983). Parental influence and children’s responses to television advertising. Journal of Advertising, 12, 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1983.10672825 Wright, P., Friestad, M., & Boush, D. (2005). The development of marketplace persuasion knowledge in children, adolescents, and young adults. Journal of Public Policy & Mar- Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  501. keting, 24, 222–233. https:/doi.org/10.1509/jppm.2005.24.2.222 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  502. EXTENDED ABSTRACT Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  503. AVMSD Audiovisual Media Services Directive. 2018. Directive 2018/1808 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November 2018 amending Directive 2010/13/EU. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32018L1808 Buijzen, M., & Valkenburg, P.M (2005). Parental mediation of undesired advertising effects. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  504. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(2), 153–165. https:/doi.org/10.1207/ s15506878jobem4902_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  505. Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research 21(1), 1–31. https:/doi. org/10.1086/209380 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  506. Hudders, L., & Cauberghe, V. (2018). The mediating role of advertising literacy and the moderating influence of parental mediation on how children of different ages react to brand placements. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 17(2), 197–210. https:/doi. org/10.1002/cb.1704 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  507. Hudders, L., De Pauw, P., Cauberghe, V., Panic, K., Zarouali, B., & Rozendaal, E. (2017). Shedding new light on how advertising literacy can affect children’s processing of embedded advertising formats: A future research agenda. Journal of Advertising, 46(2), 333–349. https:/doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2016.1269303 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  508. Hudson, S., Hudson, D., & Peloza, J. (2008). Meet the parents: A parents’ perspective on product placement in children’s films. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(2), 289–304. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9421-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  509. Nelson, M. R., Atkinson, L., Rademacher, M. A., & Ahn, R. (2017). How media and family build children’s persuasion knowledge. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 38(2), 165–183. https:/doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2017.1291383 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  510. van Reijmersdal, E. A., Tutaj, K., & Boerman, S.C. (2013). The effects of brand placement disclosures on scepticism and brand memory. Communications 38(2), 127–146. https:/doi.org/10.1515/commun-2013-0008 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308
  511. Ward, S. (1974). Consumer socialization. Journal of Consumer Research, 1(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1086/208584 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2020-2-308

Citation

Download RIS Download BibTex

Downloads

Download chapter (PDF)

Notice

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

Share via email

Media