Cognitive, Emotional and Excitative Responses to Satirical News

References

• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumgartner, J., & Morris, J. S. (2006). The Daily Show effect: Candidate evaluations, efficacy, and American youth. American Politics Research, 34(3), 341–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X05280074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becker, A. B. (2020). Applying mass communication frameworks to study humor’s impact: Advancing the study of political satire. Annals of the International Communication Association, 44(3), 273–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2020.1794925
   Google Scholar
• Berlyne, D. E. (1972). Humor and its kin. In J. H. Goldstein & P. E. McGhee (Eds.), The psychology of humor (pp. 43–60). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bettiga, D., Lamberti, L., & Noci, G. (2017). Do mind and body agree? Unconscious versus conscious arousal in product attitude formation. Journal of Business Research, 75, 108–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.02.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boukes, M., Boomgaarden, H. G., Moorman, M., & De Vreese, C. H. (2015). At odds: Laughing and thinking? The appreciation, processing, and persuasiveness of political satire. Journal of Communication, 65(5), 721–744. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12173
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, P. R., & McKnight, J. (2017). “A statistically representative climate change debate”: Satirical television news, scientific consensus, and public perceptions of global warming. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 25(3), 166–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2017.1324453
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgers, C., & Brugman, B. C. (2021). Effects of satirical news on learning and persuasion: A three-level random-effects meta-analysis. Communication Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502211032100
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Berntson, G. G. (1999). The affect system has parallel and integrative processing components: Form follows function. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(5), 839–869. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.5.839
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, J. T., Tassinary, L. G., Stonebraker, T. B., & Petty, R. E. (1987). Self-report and cardiovascular measures of arousal: Fractionation during residual arousal. Biological Psychology, 25(2), 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-0511(87)90034-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, H. T., Gan, C., & Sun, P. (2017). How does political satire influence political participation? Examining the role of counter-and pro-attitudinal exposure, anger, and personal issue importance. International Journal of Communication, 11, 3011–3029. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/6158/2098
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisend, M. (2009). A meta-analysis of humor in advertising. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(2), 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-008-0096-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faseur, T., & Geuens, M. (2006). Different positive feelings leading to different ad evaluations: The case of coziness, excitement, and romance. Journal of Advertising, 35(4), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367350409
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, J. T., Keene, J. R., Huskey, R., & Weber, R. (2018). The limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing: Taking stock of the past. Annals of the International Communication Association, 42(4), 270–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2018.1534552
   Google Scholar
• Fox, J. (2018). Journalist or jokester? In J. C. Baumgartner, and A. B. Becker (Eds.), Political humor in a changing media landscape: A new generation of research (pp.11–28). Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, J. R., Koloen, G., & Sahin, V. (2007). No joke: A comparison of substance in The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and broadcast television coverage of the 2004 presidential election campaign. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 51(2), 213–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838150701304621
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F., & Scharkow, M. (2013). The relative trustworthiness of inferential tests of the indirect effect in statistical mediation analysis: Does method really matter? Psychological Science, 24(10), 1918–1927. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613480187
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holbert, R. L., Hmielowski, J., Jain, P., Lather, J., & Morey, A. (2011). Adding nuance to the study of political humor effects: Experimental research on Juvenalian satire versus Horatian satire. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(3), 187–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764210392156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kijkonderzoek. (2020). Jaar top 100. https://kijkonderzoek.nl/component/kijkcijfers/file,n1-0-1-p
   Google Scholar
• Kim, Y. M., & Vishak, J. (2008). Just laugh! You don’t need to remember: The effects of entertainment media on political information acquisition and information processing in political judgment. Journal of Communication, 58(2), 338–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00388.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LaMarre, H. L., Landreville, K. D., Young, D., & Gilkerson, N. (2014). Humor works in funny ways: Examining satirical tone as a key determinant in political humor message processing. Mass Communication and Society, 17(3), 400–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2014.891137
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lang, A. (1990). Involuntary attention and physiological arousal evoked by structural features and emotional content in TV commercials. Communication Research, 17(3), 275–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365090017003001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lang, A. (2006). Using the limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing to design effective cancer communication messages. Journal of Communication, 56(1), 57–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00283.x
   Google Scholar
• Lang, A., Park, B., Sanders-Jackson, A. N., Wilson, B. D., & Wang, Z. (2007). Cognition and emotion in TV message processing: How valence, arousing content, structural complexity, and information density affect the availability of cognitive resources. Media Psychology, 10(3), 317–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260701532880
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lang, A., Sanders-Jackson, A., Wang, Z., & Rubenking, B. (2013). Motivated message processing: How motivational activation influences resource allocation, encoding, and storage of TV messages. Motivation and Emotion, 37(3), 508–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-012-9329-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lecheler, S., Schuck, A. R., & de Vreese, C. H. (2013). Dealing with feelings: Positive and negative discrete emotions as mediators of news framing effects. Communications - the European Journal of Communication Research, 38(2), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2013-0011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, H., & Jang, S. M. (2017). Talking about what provokes us: Political satire, emotions, and interpersonal talk. American Politics Research, 45(1), 128–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X16657805
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moyer-Gusé, E. (2008). Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages. Communication Theory, 18(3), 407–425. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00328.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nabi, R. L. (2010). The case for emphasizing discrete emotions in communication research. Communication Monographs, 77(2), 153–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751003790444
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nabi, R. L., Moyer-Gusé, E., & Byrne, S. (2007). All joking aside: A serious investigation into the persuasive effect of funny social issue messages. Communication Monographs, 74(1), 29–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750701196896
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ödmark, S. (2021). Making news funny: Differences in news framing between journalists and comedians. Journalism, 22(6), 1540–1557. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884918820432
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peifer, J. T., & Landreville, K. D. (2020). Spoofing presidential hopefuls: The roles of affective disposition and positive emotions in prompting the social transmission of debate parody. International Journal of Communication, 14, 200–220. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/11439/2904
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances In Experimental Social Psychology (pp. 123–205). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Polk, J., Young, D. G., & Holbert, R. L. (2009). Humor complexity and political influence: An elaboration likelihood approach to the effects of humor type in The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 17(4), 202–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870903210055
   Google Scholar
• Potter, R. F., & Bolls, P. D. (2012). Psychophysiological measurement and meaning: Cognitive and emotional processing of media. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ravaja, N. (2004). Contributions of psychophysiology to media research: Review and recommendations. Media Psychology, 6(2), 193–225. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532785xmep0602_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renshon, J., Lee, J. J., & Tingley, D. (2015). Physiological arousal and political beliefs. Political Psychology, 36(5), 569–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12173
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salomon, G. (1984). Television is “easy” and print is “tough”: The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 647–658. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.76.4.647
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, S. R. (2002). The humour effect: Differential processing and privileged retrieval. Memory, 10(2), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210143000263
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soroka, S., & McAdams, S. (2015). News, politics, and negativity. Political Communication, 32(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2014.881942
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sparks, J. V., & Lang, A. (2015). Mechanisms underlying the effects of sexy and humorous content in advertisements. Communication Monographs, 82(1), 134–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2014.976236
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tandoc, E. C., Lim, Z. W., & Ling, R. (2018). Defining “fake news” A typology of scholarly definitions. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 137–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Test, G. (1991). Satire: Spirit and art. University of South Florida Press.
   Google Scholar
• Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2013). The differential susceptibility to media effects model. Journal of Communication, 63(2), 221–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter, N., Cody, M. J., Xu, L. Z., & Murphy, S. T. (2018). A priest, a rabbi, and a minister walk into a bar: A meta-analysis of humor effects on persuasion. Human Communication Research, 44(4), 343–373. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqy005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, D. G. (2008). The privileged role of the late-night joke: Exploring humor’s role in disrupting argument scrutiny. Media Psychology, 11(1), 119–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260701837073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, D. G. (2013). Laughter, learning, or enlightenment? Viewing and avoidance motivations behind The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 57(2), 153–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2013.787080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, D. G. (2019). Irony and outrage: The polarized landscape of rage, fear, and laughter in the United States. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar