News Quality from the Recipients' Perspective

REFERENCES

• 100world.media. 2000. 100world Werbewirkungsstudie 2000: Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen aus der Online-Forschung der Bannerwerbung. Nurnberg: Olympia.
   Google Scholar
• Abdulla, Rasha, Bruce Garrison, Michael Salwen, Paul Driscoll, and Denise Casey. 2002. “The Credibility of Newspapers, Television News, and Online News.” Paper presented at the aannual convention of Mass Communication and Society Division, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Miami Beach, Florida, August 9.
   Google Scholar
• Aiken, Leona, and Stephen West. 1991. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, Klaus. 2008. “Qualitaet im Journalismus – ein integratives Konzept [Quality in Journalism – An Integrated Conception].” Publizistik 53 (4): 488–508.
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, Klaus. 2009. Qualitaetsjournalismus: Die Zeitung und ihr Publikum [Quality Journalism: Newspaper and Its Audience]. Konstanz: UVK.
   Google Scholar
• Bagozzi, Richard, and Robert Burnkrant. 1985. “Attitude Organization and the Attitude-Behavior Relation: A Reply to Dillon and Kumar.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49 (1): 47–57. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.1.47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BDZV (Bundesverband Deutscher Zeitungsverleger). 2010. “Zeitungswebsites besser denn je: BDZV veroeffentlicht Analyse deutscher Zeitungsportale [Newspaper Websites Better than Ever: BDZV Publishes Analysis of Newspaper Portals].” Accessed July 3. http://www.bdzv.de/aktuell/bdzv-branchendienste/bdzv-intern/artikel/detail/zeitungswebsites_besser_denn_je-1.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, Klaus, Dennis Reineck, and Christiane Schubert. 2010. Journalistische Qualitaet in der Wirtschaftskrise [Journalistic Quality in the Time of Economic Crisis]. Konstanz: UVK.
   Google Scholar
• Bekel, Rik van, Iver Moller, and Colin Williams. 2002. “The Concept of Inclusion/Exclusion and the Concept of Work.” In Active Social Policies in the EU, edited by Rik van Bekel, and Iyer Moller, 15–44. Bristol: Polica Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benoit, William, and Alan Strathman. 2004. “Source Credibility and the Elaboration Likelihood Model.” In Persuasion, Social Influence, and Compliance Gaining, edited by Robert Gass, and John Seiter, 95–111. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Bogart, Leo. 2000. Commercial Culture: The Media System and the Public Interest. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
   Google Scholar
• Burgoon, Judee, Michael Burgoon, and David Buller. 1986. “Newspaper Image: Dimensions and Relation to Demographics, Satisfaction.” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 63 (4): 771–781. doi:10.1177/107769908606300415.
   Google Scholar
• Chaiken, Shelley, and Charles Stangor. 1987. “Attitudes and Attitude Change.” Annual Review of Psychology 38 (1): 575–630. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.38.020187.003043.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Serena, and Shelley Chaiken. 1999. “The Heuristic-Systematic Model in Its Broader Context.” In Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology, edited by Shelley Chaiken, and Yaacov Trope, 73–96. New York: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Chung, Sungeun, Edward Fink, and Stan Kaplowitz. 2008. “The Comparative Statics and Dynamics of Beliefs: The Effect of Message Discrepancy and Source Credibility.” Communication Monographs 75 (2): 158–189. doi:10.1080/03637750802082060.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig, Daniel. 2011. Excellence in Online Journalism: Exploring Current Practices in an Evolving Environment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Dahinden, Urs, Piotr Kaminski, and Raoul Niederreuther. 2004. “‘Content is King’: Qualitaetsbeurteilung aus Angebots- vs. Rezipientenperspektive [Content Is King: Quality Evaluations from the News Organizations' Perspective and the Recipients' Perspective].” In Gute Seiten, schlechte Seiten: Qualitaet in der Onlinekommunikation [Good Websites, Bad Websites: Quality in Online Communication], edited by Klaus Beck, Wolfgang Schweiger, and Werner Wirth, 103–126. Muenchen: Reinhard Fischer.
   Google Scholar
• Eberhard, Fritz. 1962. Der Rundfunkhoerer und sein Programm: Ein Beitrag zur empirischen Sozialforschung [The Broadcast Listener and His Program: A Contribution to Empirical Social Research]. Berlin: Colloquium.
   Google Scholar
• Emmer, Martin, Gerhard Vowe, Jens Wolling, and Markus Seifert. 2011. Buerger Online: Die Entwicklung der politischen Online-Kommunikation in Deutschland [Citizens Online: The Development of Political Online Communication in Germany]. Konstanz: UVK.
   Google Scholar
• Erlei, Mathias. 1992. Meritorische Gueter: Die theoretische Konzeption und ihre Anwendung auf Rauschgifte als demeritorische Gueter [Merit Goods: The Theoretical Conception and Its Application to Drugs as Demerit Goods]. Muenster: Lit.
   Google Scholar
• Fiedler, Christin. 2012. “Nachrichtenqualitaet aus Rezipientensicht: Eine qualitative Studie [News Quality from the Recipients' Perspective: A Qualitative Study].” Bachelor Thesis, Technical University Ilmenau.
   Google Scholar
• Fineberg, Howard, and Martha Stone. 2002. “Digital Journalism Credibility Study.” Accessed July 3. http://banners.noticiasdot.com/termometro/boletines/docs/marcom/prensa/ona/2002/ona_credibilitystudy2001report.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Flanagin, Andrew, and Miriam Metzger. 2000. “Perceptions of Internet Information Credibility.” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 77 (3): 515–540. doi:10.1177/107769900007700304.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gantz, John, and David Reinsel. 2011. “The 2011 Digital Universe Study: Extracting Value from Chaos.” Accessed July 7. http://www.emc.com/collateral/analyst-reports/idc-extracting-value-from-chaos-ar.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Gladney, George. 1996. “How Editors and Readers Rank and Rate the Importance of Eighteen Traditional Standards of Newspaper Excellence.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 73 (2): 319–331. doi:10.1177/107769909607300204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habermas, Jürgen. 2006. “Political Communication in Media Society: Does Democracy Still Enjoy an Epistemic Dimension? The Impact of Normative Theory on Empirical Research.” Communication Theory 16 (4): 411–426. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00280.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagen, Lutz. 1995. Informationsqualitaet von Nachrichten: Meßmethoden und ihre Anwendung auf die Dienste von Nachrichtenagenturen [Information Quality of News: Methods of Measurement and Their Application to News Agencies Services]. Opladen: Westdt.
   Google Scholar
• Hasebrink, Uwe. 2011. “Giving the Audience a Voice: The Role of Research in Making Media Regulation More Responsive to the Needs of the Audience.” Journal of Information Policy 1: 321–336.
   Google Scholar
• Hovland, Carl, Irving Janis, and Harold Kelley. 1982. Communication and Persuasion: Psychological Studies of Opinion Change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobsson, Adam, and Eva-Maria Jacobsson. 2010. “Quality of the News.” In The International Encyclopedia of Communication, edited by Wolfgang Donsbach. Oxford: Blackwell. http://wwwdb.dbod.de:2141/subscriber/tocnode.html?id=g9781405131995_yr2011_chunk_g978140513199522_ss2-1.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, Thomas, and Shahira Fahmy. 2006. “See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Judge as Evil? Examining the Degree to Which Users of Al-Jazeera English-Language Website Transfer Credibility Views to its Satellite Network Counterpart.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association, Dresden, June 16.
   Google Scholar
• Jungnickel, Katrin. 2011. “Nachrichtenqualitaet aus Nutzersicht: Ein Vergleich zwischen Leserurteilen und wissenschaftlich-normativen Qualitaetsanspruechen [News Quality from the Users' Perspective: A Comparison between Readers' Evaluations and Scientific-Normative Quality Claims].” Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft 59 (3): 360–378. doi:10.5771/1615-634x-2011-3-360.
   Google Scholar
• Kliment, Tibor. 1996. “Mein Radio, meine Heimat? Rezeptionsansprueche der Hoererschaften des Lokalradios und des oeffentlich-rechtlichen Hoerfunks in Nordrhein-Westfalen [My Radio, My Home? Reception Expectations of Local Radio Listeners and Public Radio Listeners in North Rhine-Westphalia].” Rundfunk & Fernsehen 4 (4): 499–530.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, Tien-Tsung. 2010. “Why They Don't Trust the Media: An Examination of Factors Predicting Trust.” American Behavioral Scientist 54 (1): 8–21. doi:10.1177/0002764210376308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lichtenstein, Allen, and Lawrence Rosenfeld. 1984. “Normative Expectations and Individual Decisions concerning Media Gratification Choices.” Communication Research 11 (3): 393–413. doi:10.1177/009365084011003004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lieske, Sandra. 2008. Das Image von Journalisten: Eine qualitative Untersuchung [The Image of Journalist: A Qualitative Study]. Wiesbaden: VS.
   Google Scholar
• McQuail, Denis. 1992. Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Meijer, Irene. 2001. “The Public Quality of Popular Journalism: Developing a Normative Framework.” Journalism Studies 2 (2): 189–205. doi:10.1080/14616700120042079.
   Google Scholar
• Merbold, Claus, and Uwe Johanssen. 1977. Maße der Leser-Blatt-Bindung: Kriterien zur qualitativen Media-Planung [Metrics of Readers' Loyalty: Criteria for the Qualitative Media Planning]. Hamburg: Gruner & Jahr.
   Google Scholar
• Murry, John, John Lastovicka, and Surendra Singh. 1992. “Feeling and Liking Responses to Television Programs: An Examination of Two Explanations for Media-Context Effects.” Journal of Consumer Research 18 (4): 441–451. doi:10.1086/209272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nandan, Shiva. 2005. “An Exploration of the Brand Identity–Brand Image Linkage: A Communications Perspective.” Brand Management 12 (4): 264–278. doi:10.1057/palgrave.bm.2540222.
   Google Scholar
• Newhagen, John, and Clifford Nass. 1989. “Differential Criteria for Evaluating Credibility of Newspapers and TV News.” Journalism Quarterly 66 (2): 277–284. doi:10.1177/107769908906600202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olson, Michael, and Richard Kendrick. 2008. “Origins of Attitudes.” In Attitudes and Attitude Change, edited by William Crano, and Radmila Prislin, 111–130. East Sussex: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Petty, Richard, and John Cacioppo. 1986. “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 19: 123–205. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2.
   Google Scholar
• Pew Research (Pew Research Center for the People and the Press). 2012. “Press Widely Criticized, but Trusted More than Other Information Sources.” Accessed July 7. http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/9-22-2011MediaAttitudesRelease.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Poettker, Horst. 2000. “Kompensation von Komplexitaet: Journalismustheorie als Begruendung journalistischer Qualitaetsmaßstaebe [Compensation of Complexity: Using Journalism Theory to Establish Journalistic Quality Standards].” In Theorien des Journalismus [Theories of Journalism], edited by Martin Loeffelholz, 375–390. Wiesbaden: VS.
   Google Scholar
• Rager, Guenther. 1993. “Qualitaet in der Zeitung: Ergebnisse erster Untersuchungen [Quality in the Newspaper: Results from First Investigations].” In Redaktion 1994. Jahrbuch fuer Journalisten [News Desk 1994. Yearbook for Journalists], edited by Initiative Tageszeitung, 165–169. Bonn: Oberauer.
   Google Scholar
• Ridder, Christa-Maria, and Bernhard Engel. 2010. “Massenkommunikation 2010: Funktionen und Images der Medien im Vergleich [Mass Communication 2010: Comparing Functions and Images of Mass Media].” Media Perspektiven 11: 537–548.
   Google Scholar
• Salverria, Ramón. 2005. “An Immature Medium: Strength and Weaknesses of Online Newspapers on September 11.” Gazette 67 (1): 69–86.
   Google Scholar
• Schatz, Heribert, and Winnfried Schulz. 1992. “Qualitaet von Fernsehprogrammen: Kriterien und Methoden zur Beurteilung von Programmqualitaet im dualen Fernsehsystem [Quality of TV Programs: Criteria and Methods to Investigate Program Quality in the Public TV System].” Media Perspektiven 11: 690–712.
   Google Scholar
• Schoenbach, Klaus, and Lutz Goertz. 1995. Radio-Nachrichten-bunt und fluechtig? Eine Untersuchung zu Praesentationsformen von Hoerfunknachrichten und ihren Leistungen [Radio News – Colourful and Volatile? A Study Investigating Radio Presentation Styles and Their Performance]. Berlin: Vistas.
   Google Scholar
• Schumann, David. 1986. “Program Impact on Attitude toward TV Commercial.” In Proceedings of the Division of Consumer Psychology, edited by Joel Saegert, 67–73. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Slater, Michael, and Donna Rouner. 1996. “How Message Evaluation and Source Attributes May Influence Credibility Assessment and Belief Change.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 73 (4): 974–991. doi:10.1177/107769909607300415.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trepte, Sabine, Leonard Reinecke, and Katharina-Maria Behr. 2008. “Qualitaetserwartungen und ethischer Anspruch bei der Lektuere von Blogs und Tageszeitungen [Quality Expectations and Ethical Claims while Reading Blogs and Newspapers].” Publizistik 53 (4): 509–534. doi:10.1007/s11616-008-0017-6.
   Google Scholar
• Tsfati, Yariv. 2010. “Online News Exposure and Trust in the Mainstream Media: Exploring Possible Associations.” American Behavioral Scientist 54 (1): 22–42. doi:10.1177/0002764210376309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsfati, Yariv, Oren Meyersand, and Yoram Peri. 2006. “What Is Good Journalism? Comparing Israeli Public and Journalists' Perspectives.” Journalism & Mass Communication Educator 7 (2): 152–173.
   Google Scholar
• Wallisch, Gianluca. 1995. Journalistische Qualitaet: Definitionen – Modelle – Kritik [Journalistic Quality: Definitions, Models, Critique]. Konstanz: UVK.
   Google Scholar
• Willnat, Lars, and David Weaver. 1998. “Public Opinion on Investigative Reporting in the 1990s: Has Anything Changed since the 1980s.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 75 (3): 449–463. doi:10.1177/107769909807500302.
   Google Scholar
• Wolling, Jens. 2002. “Aufmerksamkeit durch Qualitaet? Empirische Befunde zum Verhaeltnis von Nachrichtenqualitaet und Nachrichtennutzung [Attention by Quality? Empirical Findings Regarding the Relationship between News Quality and News Reception].” In Fakten und Fiktionen [Facts and Fictions], edited by Achim Baum, and Siegfried Schmidt, 202–216. Konstanz: UVK.
   Google Scholar
• YouGov. 2009. “Journalisten aus Sicht der Bundesbuerger angesehen aber manipulierbar: Studie ‘Journalismus 2009’: Zum Status des deutschen Journalismus [German Citizens Respect Journalist but Think They Are Manipulable: Study Journalism 2009 – The Status of German Journalists].” Accessed July 7. http://cdn.yougov.com/de-pdf/PM%20Journalisten%20Studie.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Zajonc, Robert, and Hazel Markus. 1982. “Affective and Cognitive Factors in Preferences.” Journal of Consumer Research 9 (2): 123–131. doi:10.1086/208905.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zubayr, Camille, and Stefan Geese. 2009. “Die Informationsqualitaet der Fernsehnachrichten aus Zuschauersicht [The Information Quality of TV News from the Audiences' Perspective].” Media Perspektiven 4: 158–173.
   Google Scholar