So Close and Yet So Far: Construal Level Moderates Cultivation Effects

REFERENCES

• Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). Effects of fluency on psychological distance and mental construal (or why New York is a large city, but New York is a civilized jungle). Psychological Science, 19, 161–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ball-Rokeach, S. J., & DeFleur, M. L. (1976). A dependency model of mass media effects. Communication Research, 3, 3–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bar-Anan, Y., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2006). The association between psychological distance and construal level: Evidence from an implicit association test. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 609–622.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauer, M. W. (2005). Distinguishing red and green biotechnology: Cultivation effects of the elite press. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17, 63–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bilandzic, H., & Busselle, R. (2012). A narrative perspective on genre-specific cultivation. In M. Morgan, J. Shanahan, & N. Signorielli (Eds.), Living with television now: Advances in cultivation theory and research (pp. 261–285). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Bilandzic, H., & Rössler, P. (2004). Life according to television. Implications of genre-specific cultivation effects: The gratification/cultivation model. Communications, 29, 295–326.
   Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Kao, C. F., & Rodriguez, R. (1986). Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1032.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujita, K., Eyal, T., Chaiken, S., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2008). Influencing attitudes toward near and distant objects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 562–572.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujita, K., Henderson, M. D., Eng, J., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2006). Spatial distance and mental construal of social events. Psychological Science, 17, 278–282.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujita, K., Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Levin-Sagi, M. (2006). Construal levels and self-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 351–367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerbner, G., & Gross. L. (1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal of Communication, 26, 173–199.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gong, H., & Medin, D. L. (2012). Construal levels and moral judgment: Some complications. Judgment and Decision Making, 7, 628–638.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grabe, M. E., & Drew, D. G. (2007). Crime cultivation: Comparisons across media genres and channels. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 51, 147–171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawkins, R. P., Pingree, S., & Adler, I. (1987). Searching for cognitive processes in the cultivation effect adult and adolescent samples in the United States and Australia. Human Communication Research, 13, 553–557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F. (2013). Mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, M., & Trope, Y. (2009). The effects of abstraction on integrative agreements: When seeing the forest helps avoid getting tangled in the trees. Social Cognition, 27, 402–417.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ledgerwood, A., Trope, Y., & Chaiken, S. (2010). Flexibility now, consistency later: Psychological distance and construal shape evaluative responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 32–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McComas, K., & Shanahan, J. (1999). Telling stories about global climate change: Measuring the impact of narratives on issue cycles. Communication Research, 26, 30–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, M., & Shanahan, J. (1997). Two decades of cultivation research: An appraisal and meta-analysis. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.), Communication Yearbook, 20 (pp. 1–45). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, M. & Shanahan, J. (2010). The state of cultivation. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 54, 337–355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan, M., Shanahan, J., & Signorielli, N. (2012). The stories we tell: Cultivation theory and research. In M. Morgan, J. Shanahan, & N. Signorielli (Eds.), Living with television now: Advances in cultivation theory and research. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Nabi, R. L., & Riddle, K. (2005). Personality traits, television viewing, and the cultivation effect. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 52, 327–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potter, W. J. (1991). The relationships between first-and second-order measures of cultivation. Human Communication Research, 18, 92–113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romer, D., Jamieson, K. H., & Aday, S. (2003). Television news and the cultivation of fear of crime. Journal of Communication, 53, 88–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosch, E. (1999). Principles of categorization. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Concepts: Core readings (pp. 189–206). Boston, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382–439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roskos-Ewoldsen, B., Davies, J., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. (2004). Implications of the mental models approach for cultivation theory. Communications, 29, 345–363.
   Google Scholar
• Shanahan, & Morgan, M. (1999). Television and the mainstream: The development of cultivation research. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shrum, L. J. (2001). Processing strategy moderates the cultivation effect. Human Communication Research, 27, 94–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shrum, L. J. (2009). Media consumption and perceptions of social reality: Effects and underlying processes. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 50–73). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Shrum, L. J., Burroughs, J. E., & Rindfleisch, A. (2005). Television's cultivation of material values. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 473–479.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shrum, L. J., Wyer, Jr., R. S., & O'Guinn, T. C. (1998). The effects of television consumption on social perceptions: The use of priming procedures to investigate psychological processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 447–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, S. L., & Wilson, B. J. (2002). Children's comprehension of and fear reactions to television news. Media Psychology, 4, 1–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are so often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 845–851.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117, 440–463. doi:10.1037/a0018963
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wakslak, C., & Trope, Y. (2009). The effect of construal level on subjective probability estimates. Psychological Science, 20, 52–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar