Page 169 - Media Effects Advances in Theory and Research

158 PETTY, PRIESTER, BRIÑOL

influential study of the impact of the media in the 1940 presidential cam-
paign. A major result from this study was that the media appeared to rein-
force people’s already existing attitudes rather than producing new ones
(see also Klapper, 1960; Lord, Ross, & Lepper, 1979). Some researchers
argued that when public attitude change was produced, it was only indi-
rectly attributable to the media. That is, the media were more effective in
influencing various opinion leaders than the average person, and these
opinion leaders were responsible for changes in the mass public (i.e., a
“two-step” flow of communication; Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955).
Studies conducted during World War II reinforced the “limited effects”
view of the media. Most notably, the wartime studies by Carl Hovland
and his colleagues showed that although various military training films
had an impact on the knowledge of the soldier recipients, the films were
relatively ineffective in producing mass changes in attitudes and behav-
ior. Instead, the persuasive power of the films depended on a large num-
ber of moderating variables (Hovland, Lumsdaine, & Sheffield, 1949; see
also Shils & Janowitz, 1948). When World War II ended, Hovland returned
to Yale University, and the systematic examination of these moderating
variables was begun in earnest.

CONTEMPORARY APPROACHES TO MASS MEDIA PERSUASION

The Attitude Construct

Contemporary social psychologists concerned with the study of media
influence, like their predecessors (e.g., Peterson & Thurstone, 1933), have
focused on the concept of “attitudes,” or people’s general predispositions
to evaluate other people, objects, and issues favorably or unfavorably.
People are aware of most of their attitudes (explicit attitudes), but some-
times they come to have favorable or unfavorable predispositions of
which they are unaware (implicit attitudes). For example, people may
harbor implicit prejudices or stereotypes that they consciously reject
(Devine, 1989). In addition, sometimes people are aware of the causes of
their attitudes, and sometimes they are not (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;
Wilson, Lindesy, & Schooler, 2000). The attitude construct achieved its
preeminent position in research on social influence because of the
assumption that a person’s attitude—whether implicit or explicit—is an
important mediating variable between exposure to new information, on
the one hand, and behavioral change, on the other. For example, a televi-
sion commercial might be based on the idea that giving people informa-
tion about a candidate’s issue positions will lead to favorable attitudes
toward the candidate and ultimately to contributing money to and voting