Understanding person perceptions: Comparing four common statistical approaches to third-person research

Michael Grant Schmierbach, Michael P. Boyle, Douglas M. Mcleod

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article addresses whether current methods of measurement are sufficient to reflect all nuances of the third-person effect. We do so by content analyzing all major third-person effect (3PE) articles, assessing measurement and analysis approaches employed by 3PE researchers. We revisit data from two published studies, comparing analytical models that emerged as commonly used by 3PE researchers (i.e., the standard subtractive measure, Whitt's Diamond model, first and third-person estimates entered separately, and the subtractive measure with self-estimates as a control). Ultimately our analysis helps us understand past research and makes suggestions for research approaches in the future. First, researchers need to more carefully explore the role of first and third-person perceptions in the behavioral hypothesis. Second, using only one analytical model does not tell the complete story. To that end, we propose a multimodel approach to analyses in third-person research be applied to extant and future work in this area.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)492-513
Number of pages22
JournalMass Communication and Society
Volume11
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2008

Fingerprint

human being
Analytical models
Diamonds
research approach

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Communication

Cite this

@article{bd6e38f1551841d990e895a16da0fc41,
title = "Understanding person perceptions: Comparing four common statistical approaches to third-person research",
abstract = "This article addresses whether current methods of measurement are sufficient to reflect all nuances of the third-person effect. We do so by content analyzing all major third-person effect (3PE) articles, assessing measurement and analysis approaches employed by 3PE researchers. We revisit data from two published studies, comparing analytical models that emerged as commonly used by 3PE researchers (i.e., the standard subtractive measure, Whitt's Diamond model, first and third-person estimates entered separately, and the subtractive measure with self-estimates as a control). Ultimately our analysis helps us understand past research and makes suggestions for research approaches in the future. First, researchers need to more carefully explore the role of first and third-person perceptions in the behavioral hypothesis. Second, using only one analytical model does not tell the complete story. To that end, we propose a multimodel approach to analyses in third-person research be applied to extant and future work in this area.",
author = "Schmierbach, {Michael Grant} and Boyle, {Michael P.} and Mcleod, {Douglas M.}",
year = "2008",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/15205430802375311",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "492--513",
journal = "Mass Communication and Society",
issn = "1520-5436",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "4",

}

Understanding person perceptions : Comparing four common statistical approaches to third-person research. / Schmierbach, Michael Grant; Boyle, Michael P.; Mcleod, Douglas M.

In: Mass Communication and Society, Vol. 11, No. 4, 01.12.2008, p. 492-513.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Understanding person perceptions

T2 - Comparing four common statistical approaches to third-person research

AU - Schmierbach, Michael Grant

AU - Boyle, Michael P.

AU - Mcleod, Douglas M.

PY - 2008/12/1

Y1 - 2008/12/1

N2 - This article addresses whether current methods of measurement are sufficient to reflect all nuances of the third-person effect. We do so by content analyzing all major third-person effect (3PE) articles, assessing measurement and analysis approaches employed by 3PE researchers. We revisit data from two published studies, comparing analytical models that emerged as commonly used by 3PE researchers (i.e., the standard subtractive measure, Whitt's Diamond model, first and third-person estimates entered separately, and the subtractive measure with self-estimates as a control). Ultimately our analysis helps us understand past research and makes suggestions for research approaches in the future. First, researchers need to more carefully explore the role of first and third-person perceptions in the behavioral hypothesis. Second, using only one analytical model does not tell the complete story. To that end, we propose a multimodel approach to analyses in third-person research be applied to extant and future work in this area.

AB - This article addresses whether current methods of measurement are sufficient to reflect all nuances of the third-person effect. We do so by content analyzing all major third-person effect (3PE) articles, assessing measurement and analysis approaches employed by 3PE researchers. We revisit data from two published studies, comparing analytical models that emerged as commonly used by 3PE researchers (i.e., the standard subtractive measure, Whitt's Diamond model, first and third-person estimates entered separately, and the subtractive measure with self-estimates as a control). Ultimately our analysis helps us understand past research and makes suggestions for research approaches in the future. First, researchers need to more carefully explore the role of first and third-person perceptions in the behavioral hypothesis. Second, using only one analytical model does not tell the complete story. To that end, we propose a multimodel approach to analyses in third-person research be applied to extant and future work in this area.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=69849132586&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=69849132586&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/15205430802375311

DO - 10.1080/15205430802375311

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:69849132586

VL - 11

SP - 492

EP - 513

JO - Mass Communication and Society

JF - Mass Communication and Society

SN - 1520-5436

IS - 4

ER -