Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text


Showing 1 through 5 of 639 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 128 - Next  Jump:
2013 - International Communication Association Pages: unavailable || Words: 9728 words || 
1. Chung, Sungeun., Lee, Wonji. and Kwak, Jungwon. "A Social Judgmental Model of the Third-Person Perception Hypothesis: Focusing on the Effect of Pre-Existing Attitudes, the Level of Knowledge, and Message Strength on Judgments on Media Impact" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Hilton Metropole Hotel, London, England, Jun 17, 2013 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-08-17 <>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This study proposed a model of the third-person perception (TPP) based on an assumption that TPP is a social judgment. Hypotheses were proposed regarding the effect of pre-existing attitudes, the level of knowledge about issues, and message strength on perceived impact on self and others, and TPP. An online-experiment was conducted to test those hypotheses (N = 394). A (strong vs. weak) persuasive messages regarding nuclear power plants was presented to either those who opposed nuclear power plants or those who supported nuclear power plants. Perceived impact of messages on self and various groups of others were measured. Results showed that the third person perception was affected by congruence between message position and pre-existing attitudes of self, congruence between message position and pre-existing attitudes of other, the level of knowledge possessed by self, and the level of knowledge possessed by other. The findings supported the proposed model. Theoretical implications of findings were discussed.

2008 - The Law and Society Association Words: 227 words || 
2. Judge, Elizabeth. "Placing and Displacing Judgments: The Judicial Creation of the Legal Canon and the Lineage of Judgments" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, Hilton Bonaventure, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, May 27, 2008 <Not Available>. 2019-08-17 <>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: In his famous essay on “Traditional and the Individual Talent,” T.S. Eliot, as both author and literary critic, examines literary history as a paradoxical relationship between originality and tradition. This paper seeks to do the same for legal history by closely analyzing how judges, as both authors and legal critics, creatively construct order out of a dynamic tradition of precedent. Arguing that Eliot’s insights for literary history as to the “perception, not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence” equally apply to legal history, the paper analyses specific discursive strategies in judgment writing by which this simultaneous sense of timelessness and originality is created. This presentation would focus on three key decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada and the published reflections of Bertha Wilson, Rosalie Abella, and Benjamin Cardozo on law as literature and Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. on the common law to describe the particular writing and judging practices that re-create order from the legal canon and create a sense of precedential timelessness out of dynamic shifts in the lineages of judgments, and how these practices have been implemented in Canada’s high court. Through a close reading of these judgments, the presentation will consider how judgments are placed or displaced within a lineage of cases and within or outside the canon and how judges construct authority for specific judgments.

2005 - American Association For Public Opinion Association Words: 300 words || 
3. Hwang, Hyunseo., Lee, Gun Hyuk. and Park, Sung Gwan. "News discrepancy Perception and News Credibility judgment: The Role of the Self as a Comparison Anchor in Judgmental process of News Credibility" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association For Public Opinion Association, Fontainebleau Resort, Miami Beach, FL, <Not Available>. 2019-08-17 <>
Publication Type: Paper/Poster Proposal
Abstract: Research on news credibility and its antecedents consistently shows perception or judgment of news credibility is both subjective and relativistic. Even though this subjectivity and relativity element of news credibility judgment are key theoretical components in research on media bias perception, they have not been conceptually developed and empirically tested in the research. For example, some scholar measures media bias perception by asking respondents to evaluate whether a given article was neutral, or biased in favor of one side or the other, while others measure news bias perception as asking respondents to evaluate news slant compared to their own views. In addition, different but similar concepts such bias, slant, trust, and credibility have been used without any clear conceptual distinction. To address these measurement and conceptualization problems in the research on media bias perception, this study distinguished media bias perception into two different components – news discrepancy perception and news credibility judgment and then tested the role of the self as a comparison anchor in audience judgmental process of news credibility. Specifically, we constructed two different news discrepancy perceptions – news discrepancy from neutral point and news discrepancy from one’s own view and examined the relationships of each discrepancy perception to both its antecedents (e.g., issue involvement, political ideology, and strength of political ideology) and news credibility judgment.
A Web-based survey with the issue of revision of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) spurred by U.S military vehicle accident in South Korea are used to test several hypothesized relationships among the main variables. Findings reveal that neither antecedent variables of the model nor news credibility were related to perceived news discrepancy from neutral point. In contrast, perceived news discrepancy from one’s own views had strong relationship to issue involvement, political ideology, strength of political ideology, as well as news credibility.

2015 - SRCD Biennial Meeting Pages: unavailable || Words: unavailable || 
4. Bunce, Louise. and Harris, Paul. "The relationship between authenticity judgments and ontological status judgments about fictional characters" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the SRCD Biennial Meeting, Pennsylvania Convention Center and the Philadelphia Marriott Downtown Hotel, Philadelphia, PA, Mar 19, 2015 <Not Available>. 2019-08-17 <>
Publication Type: Individual Poster
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: A developmental improvement occurs around the age of 4-years in children’s ability to categorize characters and events as real or fantastical (Boerger 2011; Corriveau et al., 2009; Tullos & Woolley, 2009; Skolnick & Bloom, 2006). The critical test is usually whether children can provide a verbal judgment of reality status by categorizing the entity as real versus not-real/pretend/make believe. However, it is not always clear what children mean when they judge something as real as the term can refer to ontological status, or authenticity (whether something or someone is genuinely what they appear to be as opposed to an imitation or fake). Bunce and Harris (2008) found that 2-7-year-olds rarely commented on the ontological status of fictional characters in their everyday language but often made statements about the authenticity of representations of fictional characters, e.g., “He’s not the real Father Christmas”.

This study re-examined 3-5-year-olds’ judgments of the real/not-real status of fictional characters given that such judgments can be based either on the ontological status of the character or the authenticity of the character compared to an imitation. The hypotheses were that younger children would be as good making authenticity judgments as older children, but older children and adults would make significantly more accurate ontology judgments than younger children.

Sixty children (4;1-years and 5;3-years) and 20 adults were shown paired photographs of fictional characters (e.g., Bob the Builder) and people dressing-up as those characters (e.g., a person wearing a Bob the Builder costume) (see Figure 1). For each of the two versions of a character, they were asked an ontology question: Does this Bob the Builder live in the real world? and an authenticity question: Is this the real Bob the Builder? They were also asked to justify each judgment.

As expected, accuracy on the authenticity question was similarly high in each age group, whereas accuracy on the ontology question improved with age (see Figure 2).

Justifications were allocated to one of three categories: 1) Authenticity justifications referred to the genuine or fake nature of a property of the figure, e.g., He has the proper tools; He’s got fake glasses 2) Ontological status justifications referred to the category of entity or location in which they belong or come from, e.g., It’s a TV character so he lives on TV; It’s a real person that lives in this world 3) Uninformative included I don’t know or descriptive responses, e.g., He’s wearing a hat.

Irrespective of the question, younger children provided more authenticity justifications than ontological status justifications, supporting the hypothesis that understanding authenticity develops before ontological status. In contrast, adults provided more ontological status justifications than authenticity justifications, irrespective of the question. In other words, when explaining why the fictional character did not live in the real world or why was the real one, they appealed to its ontological status as a cartoon character. Older children produced a similar pattern of justifications to the adults.

Implications for the development of children’s ability to make real/not-real judgments about fictional characters are discussed.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 128 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy