Hasil (
Bahasa Indonesia) 1:
[Salinan]Disalin!
KETERBATASAN DAN ARAH MASA DEPAN UNTUK PRIMING AGRESIWhile numerous studies have supported both of these models of aggression, they have their limitations. First, several studies have failed to find the predicted effects of exposure to aggression on indirect measures of aggression, such as the accessibility of aggressive concepts. Recall that the second state of the GAAM predicts that exposure to aggression-related stimuli should increase the accessibility of violence-related concepts, which in turn will influence primary appraisals. To investigate this, Roskos-Ewoldsen, Eno, Okdie, Guadano, and DeCoster (2008) had two participants play a violent video game (Halo) simultaneously. Participants engaged in a direct competition condition in which they killed each other, an indirect competition condition in which they played separately with the goal of getting farther through the game than their opponent, a cooperative play condition in which they worked together against the aliens, or a no play control condition. After playing the game (or not), participants completed a lexical decision task (i.e., “Is a string of letters a word or not?”). For those targets that were words, people should make lexical decisions regarding a concept faster when the concept has been primed by a related, compared with an unrelated, concept. Across the four conditions, the accessibility of aggression-related targets was expected to be highest for the killing condition, with decreasing accessibility for the other conditions. Contrary to the predictions of the GAAM, however, there were no differences across the conditions in RTs for primed, aggression-related target words. There was enough power to detect a difference, so this null result suggests that the accessibility of the concepts may not be the mechanism by which this type of priming occurs. Bluemke and Zumbach (2007) provide another example that contradicts: the predictions of the GAAM. Clearly, more research that tests the early stages of the GAAM is needed.Pembatasan kedua model dan penelitian menyertai mereka adalah bahwa mereka tidak alamat variabel yang dapat mempengaruhi jenis pikiran dan perilaku yang dihasilkan dari media priming. Penggambaran kekerasan di media dapat membangkitkan tanggapan emosional yang berbeda banyak luar agresi, salah satu yang takut. Pada kenyataannya, program TV yang biasa, seperti berita lokal atau drama kejahatan yang terjadi di kota terdekat, menimbulkan tanggapan takut. Demikian pula, penelitian yang luas tentang Teori kultivasi telah menunjukkan bahwa salah satu konsekuensi jangka panjang dari paparan luas kekerasan di media adalah takut {Roskos-Ewoldsen, Davies, & Roskos-Ewoldsen, 2004). Temuan ini menyebabkan beberapa pertanyaan, seperti, apakah keadaan di mana agresi di TV bilangan prima ketakutan? Bagaimana keadaan ini Perdana tanggapan yang berbeda? Apa tanggapan lain mungkin dipikirkan oleh agresi di TV? Penelitian lebih lanjut diperlukan untuk menjawab pertanyaan ini.A third limitation of the research in this area is the inadequate study of moderators of the priming effects of violent TV programming. Several possible moderators exist, such as genre of the TV program. For example, sitcoms that contain a lot of verbal aggression do not prime aggression (Chory-Assad & Tamborini, 2004). Other moderators of violence priming include personality variables, like trait aggressiveness (Josephson, 1987; Roskos-Ewoidsen et al., 2007). Recent research suggests that, at least for the early stages of the GAAM, people low in trait aggression may show stronger priming effects (i.e., greater increases in the accessibility of aggressive thoughts) than people higher in trait aggression (Meier, Robinson, & Wilkowski, 2007). This finding probably reflects the impoverished aggression- related cognitive networks that characterize people who are lower in trait aggression (Bushman, 1996), as impoverished networks are more susceptible to priming effects of aggression-related thoughts and actions (Bartholow, Anderson, Carnagey, & Benjamin, 2005). However, the increased accessibility of aggression-related thoughts in low trait aggression people may not translate into aggressive behavior because they may inhibit their aggressive tendencies during the secondary appraisal stage of the GAAM. Conversely, people high in trait aggression may not show substantial changes in the accessibility of aggression-related thoughts, but the increase may be enough to put them over the threshold for behaving aggressively. Another personality trait—agreeableness— also appears to moderate the priming effects of violence: People who are high in agreeableness are less likely to show priming effects than people who are low in agreeableness (Meier, Robinson, & Wilkowski, 2006). Again, more research is needed in this area. Liputan politik dan Presiden evaluasiAnother major line of research is political priming. Political priming focuses on the idea that the issues that the media are covering influence the information that people use to judge the president (lyengar & Kinder, 1987). When judging how well the president is doing his or her job, people have a lot of different pieces of information they can use to make that judgment. For example, they could use the president’s performance on the economy, civil rights, international affairs, or how well he or she dresses. The idea behind political priming is that the media doesn’t influence what you think, but rather what information you use to make your judgments. Specifically, if the media are focusing primarily on international affairs, international affairs are made salient, and people will use their impressions of how well the president is doing in international affairs to judge how well he or she is doing overall. However, if the media are focusing on domestic affairs, domestic issues are made salient and people will use their impressions of how well the president is doing on domestic issues to judge how well the president is doing overall. During President George H. W. Bush’s presidency (1988—1992), the media focused on the Gulf War and its success, and President Bush enjoyed very high approval ratings. Indeed, many political pundits did not think the Democratic Party would be able to field a candidate who could beat President Bush in 1992. However, after the Gulf War, the media turned its attention away from the Middle East and focused on domestic issues, and people started using their negative evaluations of President Bush’s handling of domestic affairs to judge his overall performance. Consequently, President Bush’s job performance ratings plummeted, despite the fact that people still thought he did a good job of handling international affairs (Iyengar & Simon, 1993).MODEL POLITIK PRIMINGAwal berteori mengenai priming politik digunakan heuristic ketersediaan untuk menjelaskan efek dari liputan media mengenai politik priming (Iyengar & Simon, 1993). Menurut penjelasan ini, media coverage dari masalah pengaruh eksemplar yang diakses dari memori ketika orang membuat penilaian Presiden. Namun, penjelasan ketersediaan belum juga dikembangkan atau mengalami empiris pengujian dalam domain priming politik.Hanya satu model politik priming telah dikembangkan cukup untuk menjelaskan hasil politik priming (Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007). Mirip dengan Berkowitz's model neoassociationistic (1984), harga dan Tewksbury's (1997) model politik priming didasarkan pada model jaringan memori dan peran media bermain dalam meningkatkan aksesibilitas informasi dari memori. Seperti telah dibahas sebelumnya, Jaringan model mempertahankan yang baik kronis dan sementara aksesibilitas konsep pengaruh mereka kemungkinan aktivasi. Selain itu, harga dan Tewksbury memasukkan pengertian tentang penerapan informasi ke dalam model mereka. Penerapan mengacu pada penilaian disengaja relevansi informasi untuk situasi saat ini. Jelas, jika informasi yang prima tidak relevan, itu tidak akan digunakan ketika membuat keputusan politik. Dalam harga dan Tewksbury's model, konsep yang diaktifkan oleh media dan dinilai sebagai berlaku untuk situasi saat ini mempengaruhi bagaimana pesan dirasakan atau ditafsirkan. Di sisi lain, konsep tersebut yang diaktifkan oleh media dan dinilai sebagai tidak berlaku tidak mempengaruhi bagaimana pesan dirasakan.Miller dan Krosnick (2000) ketat diuji komponen aksesibilitas politik priming dengan memanipulasi eksposur media terhadap isu-isu saat ini (misalnya, obat-obatan dan Imigrasi). Mereka berkumpul langkah-langkah keyakinan para peserta tentang masalah-masalah yang paling penting di negara dan persetujuan dari Presiden saat ini kinerja, dan mereka menemukan efek priming dasar. Peserta yang terkena liputan media ditimbang isu-isu yang lebih berat ketika menilai kinerja Presiden daripada orang-orang yang tidak terkena liputan media. Untuk menguji apakah aksesibilitas dari isu-isu ini dimediasi hubungan ini, aksesibilitas terhadap isu-isu diukur melalui RT. bertentangan dengan harapan, namun, peserta yang lebih cepat pada tugas waktu reaksi tidak menimbang informasi dapat diakses lebih berat daripada yang yang lebih lambat. Jadi, para peneliti menyimpulkan bahwa jaringan model penyebaran aktivasi, yang bergantung pada aksesibilitas dari konsep, tidak bisa penyebab langsung priming politik. Sebaliknya, para peneliti berpendapat bahwa ketika konsep-konsep yang sangat diakses diaktifkan, aktivasi menyebabkan proses deliberatif yang kedua. Namun, Miller dan Krosnick (2001) salah menafsirkan peran deliberatif pengolahan sebagai makna bahwa aksesibilitas bukanlah komponen penting dari efek priming politik. Otomatisitas op penelitian terbaru telah menunjukkan bahwa pemrosesan otomatis dapat menyebabkan deliberatif pengolahan (Roskos-Ewoldsen, 1997; Roskos-Ewoldsen, Bischel, Hill, & Hoffman, 2002; Roskos-Ewoldsen, Yu, & Rhodes, 2004).
Sedang diterjemahkan, harap tunggu..
