Premium
The Hostile Media Effect, Biased Assimilation, and Perceptions of a Presidential Debate 1
Author(s) -
Richardson John D.,
Huddy William P.,
Morgan Shawn M.
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
journal of applied social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.822
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1559-1816
pISSN - 0021-9029
DOI - 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00347.x
Subject(s) - moderation , psychology , social psychology , preference , presidential system , mediation , moderated mediation , assimilation (phonology) , perception , political science , law , statistics , philosophy , linguistics , neuroscience , politics , mathematics
This study examined the relation between 2 seemingly inconsistent phenomena: hostile media effect and biased assimilation. Participants ( N = 156) reported their preference for George W. Bush or John Kerry and then viewed a live broadcast of the first Bush–Kerry Presidential debate. Consistent with biased assimilation, candidate preference influenced participants on both sides to perceive their candidate won the debate. Nevertheless, candidate preference modestly induced participants to perceive hostile bias from the debate moderator, Jim Lehrer. The influence of anticipated third‐person effects was also examined. Overall, the results suggest biased assimilation and the hostile media effect are not inconsistent. In some situations, they occur simultaneously. Moreover, the hostile media effect appears to extend beyond news reports to other forms of mediation.