跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.201.97.224) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/04/14 19:04
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:三浦百合子
研究生(外文):Miura, Yuriko
論文名稱:框架與日本民眾對同性戀議題的態度
論文名稱(外文):The Effects of Message Framing on Japanese Attitudes toward Homosexuality, Same-sex Marriage and Civil Unions
指導教授:施琮仁施琮仁引用關係
指導教授(外文):Shih, Tsung Jen
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立政治大學
系所名稱:國際傳播英語碩士學位學程(IMICS)
學門:傳播學門
學類:一般大眾傳播學類
論文種類:學術論文
畢業學年度:103
語文別:英文
論文頁數:100
中文關鍵詞:框架同性戀同性婚姻
外文關鍵詞:framinghomosexualitysame-sex marriage
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:367
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
本研究主要目的是利用統計手法分析框架效應與日本民眾對同性戀議題的態度。此外,這項研究另外還探討個人的認知需求(NFC)與宗教信仰對於框架效應的影響程度。此論文為在網路上針對日本人進行實驗,樣本數為150人。結果呈現在框架操縱對於同性婚姻態度的主要效應。並顯示出框架與NFC以及框架與宗教信仰之間無交互作用。
The main purpose of this study was to statistically determine the effects of message framing regarding homosexuality-related issues on Japanese audiences’ attitudes towards homosexual people and legalization of same-sex marriage and civil unions. Furthermore, this study also investigates the moderating role of individuals’ need for cognition (NFC) and religiosity on the framing effects. An online experiment was conducted with 150 Japanese participants. Attribute frame is manipulated by framing the issue of legalization of same-sex marriage either in terms of “equal rights” or “a threat to traditional religion and values.” Results suggested a main effect of framing manipulation on attitudes toward same-sex marriage and civil unions. No statistical significance was observed for interactions between frames and NFC as well as frames and religiosity.
Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction 1
1.1 Research Background 1
1.2 Purpose of the Study 5
Chapter 2: Literature Review 7
2.1 Homosexuality in Japan 7
2.1.1 Homosexuality in Modern Japan 7
2.1.2 Japanese’ Attitudes toward Homosexuality and Same-sex Marriage 10
2.2 Framing 13
2.2.1 Definition 13
2.2.2 Framing Homosexuality and Same-sex Marriage 15
2.2.3 Portrayal of Homosexuality in Japanese Media 22
2.2.4 Impact of Framing Effect on Attitudes toward Homosexuality and Same-sex Marriage 24
2.3 Moderators of Framing Effects 27
2.4 Need for Cognition 29
2.4.1 Definition 29
2.4.2 Elaboration Likelihood Model 31
2.4.3 Moderating Effects of NFC 33
2.5 Religiosity 35
2.5.1 Religion and Homosexuality 35
2.5.2 Moderating Effects of Religiosity 36
Chapter 3: Methodology 41
3.1 Design and Procedure 41
3.2 Data Collection 41
3.3 Framing Manipulation 43
3.4 Measures 44
3.4.1 Attitudes toward Homosexuality 44
3.4.2 Attitudes toward Same-sex Marriage and Civil Unions 46
3.4.3 Need for Cognition 46
3.4.4 Religious Affiliation and Religiosity 47
3.4.5 Demographics 50
3.5 Pilot Study 53
3.6 Manipulation Check 53
Chapter 4: Results 56
4.1 General Findings 56
4.2 Hypotheses Testing 57
Chapter 5: Discussion and Conclusion 63
5.1 Discussion 63
5.2 Limitation and Suggestion for Future Research 67
5.3 Conclusion 69
References 71
Appendix A 87
Appendix B 92
Appendix C 97
Appendix D 99


List of Tables

Table 1. The Exploratory Factor Analysis for ATLG scale 45
Table 2. Religious Affiliation and Religiosity 48
Table 3. Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations between Variables 49
Table 4. Demographic Information 51
Table 5. Demographic Distribution of the Participants 52
Table 6. t-test Results Comparing Pro-gay and Anti-gay Framing Conditions on Manipulation Check 55
Table 7. ANCOVA Results for the Effects of Demographic Characteristics on Attitudes toward Homosexuality and Same-sex Marriage/Civil Unions and NFC Scores 58
Table 8. t-test Results Comparing Attitudes toward Homosexuality and Same-sex Marriage/Civil Unions between Pro-gay and Anti-gay Message Framing Conditions 58
Table 9. ANOVA Results for Interaction Effect of Framing × Need for Cognition on Attitudes 61
Table 10. Comparison of Attitudes toward Homosexuality and Same-sex Marriage/Civil Unions Across Experimental Conditions 61
Table 11. ANOVA Results for Interaction Effect of Framing ×Religiosity on Attitudes 62
Table 12. Comparison of Attitudes toward Homosexuality and Same-sex Marriage/Civil Unions Across Experimental Conditions 62

References

Altman, D. (1996). On global queering. Australian Humanities Review, (2). Retrieved August 3, 2013, from http://www.lib.latrobe.edu.au
Axsom, D., Yates, S. M., & Chaiken, S. (1987). Audience response as heuristic cue in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 30-40.
Bachmann, D., Elfrink, J., & Vazzana, G. (1996). Tracking the progress of e-mail versus snail mail, Marketing Research, 8(2), 31-35.
Ballard, S., &Morris, M. (1998). Sources of sexuality information for university students. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 24(4), 278–287.
Bennett, L. (2000). Fifty years of prejudice in the media. Gay & Lesbian Review Worldwide, 7(2), 30–35.
Birnbaum, M. H. (2004). Human research and data collection via the Internet. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 803-832.
Block, L. G., & Keller, P. A. (1995). When to accentuate the negative: The effects of perceived efficacy and message framing on intentions to perform a health-related behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(2), 192-203.
Brewer, P. R. (2002). Framing, value words, and citizens’ explanations of their issue opinions. Political Communication, 19, 303–316.
Brewer, P. R. (2003). Values, political knowledge, and public opinion about gay rights: A framing-based account. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(2), 173–201.
Brewer, P. R., & Gross, K. (2005). Values, framing, and citizens’ thoughts about policy issues: Effects on content and quantity. Political Psychology, 26(6), 929-948.
Brown, J., Halpern, C., & L’Engle, K. (2005). Mass media as a sexual super peer for early maturing girls. Journal of Adolescent Health, 36(5), 420–427.
Bullock, H. E., & Fernald, J. L. (2005). Predicting support for eliminating the dividend tax: The role of framing and attributions of wealth. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 5(1), 35-41.
Burgess, C. (2004). Maintaining identities: Discourses in a rapidly globalizing Japan. Electronic Journal of Contemporary Japanese Studies. Retrieved November 5, 2013, from http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/03/25/rel3f.pdf
Calzo, J. P., & Ward, L. M. (2009). Media exposure and viewers’ attitudes toward homosexuality: Evidence for mainstreaming or resonance? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(2), 280-299.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Morris, K. (1983). Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 805-818.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Rodriguez, R. (1986). Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(5), 1032-1043.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J, A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197–253.
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.
Cheng, F., & Wu, C. (2010). Debiasing the framing effect: The effect of warning and involvement. Decision Support Systems, 49, 328-334.
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57, 99–118.
Chung, S. K. (2007). Media literacy art education: Deconstructing lesbian and gay stereotypes in the media. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 26(1), 98-107.
Clayton, J. L. (2011) How the Media Suppress Japan's Gay Past. The Gay & Lesbian Review Worldwide, 18(6), 10.
Clayton, R. L., & Werking, G. S. (1998). Business surveys of the future: The World Wide Web as a data collection method. In: Couper, M. P., Baker, R. P., Bethlehem, J., Clark, Z. F., Martin, J., Nicholls II, W. L., and O’Reilly, J. M. (Eds.), Computer Assisted Survey Information Collection (pp. 543–562). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
CNN/ORC International Survey (2013). Retrieved November 5, 2013, from http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/03/25/rel3f.pdf
Cohen, A., Stotland, E., & Wolfe, D. (1955). An experimental investigation of need for cognition. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(2), 291-294.
Cruz-Malave, A., & Manalansan, M. (2002). Introduction: Dissident sexualities/alternative globalisms. Queer Globalizations: Citizenship and the Afterlife of Colonialism, New York & London: New York University Press. 1-10.
Davidson, C. (1991). Can we end media bias against gays? USA Today, 120, 72-74.
de Vreese, C. H., Boomgaarden, H. G., & Semetko, H. A. (2011). (In)direct framing effects: The effects of news media framing on public support for Turkish membership in the European Union. Communication Research, 38(2), 179–205.
Dentsu Communication Institute Inc.. (2012). Dentsu Souken LGBT chousa [Dentsu LGBT report]. Retrieved November 5, 2013, from http://www.dentsu.co.jp/dii/project/other/pdf/120701.pdf
Deutskens, E., Ruyter, K. D., Wetzels, M., & Ooosterveld, P. (2004). Response rate and response quality of internet-based surveys: An experimental study. Marketing Letters, 15(1), 21-36.
Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Druckman, J. N. (2001). On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame?. The Journal of Politics, 63(4), 1041-1066.
Druckman, J. N., & Nelson, K. R. (2003). Framing and deliberation: How citizens’ conversations limit elite influence. American Journal of Political Science, 47(4), 729-745.
Eastin, M. S., & LaRose, R. (2000, September). Internet self-efficacy and the psychology of the digital divide. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1).
Entman, R.M. (1989). Democracy without citizens: Media and the decay of American politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 43(4), 51-58.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149-1160.
Ferguson, J. M. (2010). Queer Japanese cinema: A rich and diverse cultural history’s challenge to hegemonic ideologies of gender and sexuality. The University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Ganzach, Y. & Karsahi, N. (1995). Message framing and buying behavior: A field experiment. Journal Business Research, 32(1), 11–17.
The gay divide (2014, Oct 11). The Economist. Retrieved January 12, 2015 from http://www.economist.com.
Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making and unmaking of the new left. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Gjestland, L. (1996). Net? Not yet. Source Marketing Research, 8(1), 26-29.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Global attitudes project, the global divide on homosexuality. Retrieved August 3, 2013, from http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-homosexuality/
Gross, L. (1991). Out of mainstream: Sexual minorities and the mass media. Journal of Homosexuality, 21(1-2), 19-46.
Haider-Markel, D. P., & Joslyn, M. R. (2008). Beliefs about the origins of homosexuality and support for gay rights: An empirical test of attribution theory. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(2), 291-310.
Hart, K. P. R. (2000). Representing gay men on American television. The Journal of Men's Studies, 9(1), 59-79.
Hartman, T. K., & Weber, C. R. (2009). Who said what?: The effects of source cues in issue frames. Political Behavior, 31(4), 537-558.
Haugtvedt, C. P., Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1992). Need for cognition and advertising: Understanding the role of personality variables in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(3), 239–260.
Heider, F. (1944). Social perception and phenomenal causality. Psychological Review, 51, 358-374.
Heppner, P. P., Reeder, B. L. & Larson, L. M. (1983). Cognitive variables associated with personal problem-solving appraisal: Implications for counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30, 537-45.
Herman, D. (2005). “I’m gay”: Declarations, desire, and coming out on prime-time television. Sexualities, 8(1), 7–29.
Herek, G.M. (in press - 1997). The attitudes toward lesbians and gay men (ATLG) scale. In C.M. Davis, W.H. Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Schreer, & S.L. Davis (Eds.), Sexuality-related measures: A compendium. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hidaka, Y. (2007). Gei/Baisekushuaru dansei no kenkou repooto [A report on health of gay and bisexual men]. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Retrieved Sep 1, 2013, from http://www.j-msm.com/report/report02/
Hidaka Y., Operario, D., Takenaka, M., Omori, S., Ichikawa, S., & Shirasaka, T. (2008). Attempted suicide and associated risk factors among youth in urban Japan, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 43, 752-757.
Holbrook, A. L., Krosnick, J. A., Visser, P. S., Gardner, W. L., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2001). Attitudes toward presidential candidates and political parties: Initial optimism, inertial first impressions, and a focus on flaws. American Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 930–50.
Hongo, J. (2008, September 1). Gay scene: Tolerance, legal limbo. The Japan Times. Retrieved September 1, 2013, from http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2008/12/23/reference/gay-scene-tolerance-legal-limbo/#.Uo0GBBb86jd
Ichikawa, Y. (2004). 「?合演習」?生????「見????人」????同性愛者???話. 國學院大學教育?研究室紀要, 39, 176-192.
Ispos/Reuter (2013). Global @dvisor: Same-sex marriage. Retrieved November 5, 2013, from http://www.ipsos-na.com/download/pr.aspx?id=12795
Ito, S. (1996) Douseiai no kiso chishiki [Basic information about homosexuality], Tokyo: Ayumi shuppan.
Iyengar, S. (1991). Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jacks, J. Z., & Devine, P. G. (2000). Attitude importance, forewarning of message content, and resistance to persuasion. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 22(1), 19-29.
Jacoby, W. G. (2000). Issue framing and public opinion on government spending. American Journal of Political Science, 44(4), 750-767.
Johnson, R. B., Oxendine, S., Taub, D. J., & Robertson, J. (2013), Suicide prevention for LGBT students. New Directions for Student Services, 141, 55–69.
Johnson, T. (2012). Equality, morality, and the impact of media framing: Explaining opposition to same-sex marriage and civil unions. Politics & Policy, 40(6), 1053-1080.
Jones, L. W., Sinclair, R. C. and Courneya, K. S. (2003), The effects of source credibility and message framing on exercise intentions, behaviors, and attitudes: An integration of the elaboration likelihood model and prospect theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(1), 179–196.
Kanouse, D. E. (1984). Explaining negativity biases in evaluation and choice behavior: Theory and research. In T. C. Kinnear (Ed.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 11, pp. 703-708). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.
Kenny, C. (2013, March 31). The global gay-rights revolution. Bloomberg Businessweek. Retrieved September 1, 2013, from http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-31/the-global-gay-rights-revolution
Kernell, S. (1977). Presidential popularity and negative voting: An alternative explanation of the midterm congressional decline of the president’s party. American Political Science Review, 71(1), 44–66.
Kielwasser, A. P., & Wolf, M. A. (1994). Silence, difference, and annihilation: Understanding the impact of mediated heterosexism on high school students. The High School Journal, December/January, 58-77.
Kiesler, S. & Sproull, L. S. (1986). Response effects in the electronic survey, Public Opinion Quarterly, 50(3), 402-413.
Kinder, D. R., & Sanders, L. M. (1990). Mimicking political debate with survey questions: The case of white opinion on affirmative action for blacks. Social Cognition, 8(1), 73-103.
Kinder, D. R., & Sanders, L. M. (1996). Divided by color: Racial politics and democratic ideals. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Krosnick, J. A., & Brannon, L. A. (1993). The impact of the Gulf War on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Multidimensional effects of political involvement. American Political Science Review, 87(4), 963-975.
Lau, R. R. (1985). Two explanations for negativity effects in political behavior. American Journal of Political Science, 29(1), 119–38.
Lauriola, M., & Levin, I. P. (2001). Relating individual differences in attitude toward ambiguity to risky choices. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 14(2), 107–122.
LeBoeuf, R. A., & Shafir, E. (2003). Deep thoughts and shallow frames: On the susceptibility to framing effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 77-92.
Lecheler, S., de Vreese, C. H., & Slothuus, R. (2009). Issue importance as a moderator of framing effects. Communication Research, 36(3), 400-425.
Leone, C., & Dalton, C. H. (1988). Some effects of the need for cognition on course grades. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 67, 175-178.
Levin, I. P., & Gaeth, G. J. (1988). How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 374-378.
Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., Schreiber, J., Lauriola, M. (2002) A new look at framing effects: Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organ Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88(1), 411-429.
Levina, M., Waldo, C. R., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (2000). We’re here, we’re queer, we’re on TV: The effects of visual media on heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men and lesbians. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(4), 738-758.
Long, D. (1996). Formation processes of some Japanese gay argot terms. American Speech, 71(2), 215-224.
Mackie, D. M., Hamilton, D. L., Susskind, J., & Rosselli, F. (1996). Social psychological foundations of stereotype formation. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stangor, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping (pp. 41-78). New York: The Guilford Press.
Maheswaran, D., & Meyers-Levy, J. (1990). The influence of message framing and issue involvement. Journal of Marketing Research, 27(3), 361–367
Manfreda, K. L. & Vehovar, V. (2002). Do mail and web surveys provide same results?, Development in Social Science Methodology, 18, 150-169.
Martin A. D., & Hetrick E. S. (1988). The stigmatization of the gay and lesbian adolescent. Journal of Homosexuality, 15(1-2), 163-183.
McCroskey, J. C., & Wright, D.W. (1971). A comparison of the effects of punishment-oriented and reward-oriented messages in persuasive communication. Journal of Communication, 21, 81-93.
McLelland, M. (2000a). Male homosexuality and popular culture in modern Japan. Intersections: Gender, History and Culture in the Asian Context, (3). Retrieved August 3, 2013, from http://intersections.anu.edu.au/issue3/mclelland2.html#t1
McLelland, M. (2000b). Is there a Japanese “gay identity”?, Culture, Health & Sexuality, 2(4), 459-472.
McLelland, M. (2006). Japan’s original gay boom. Faculty of Arts – Papers. University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Mehta, R. & Sivadas, E. (1995). Comparing response rates and response content in mail versus electronic surveys. Journal of Market Research Society, 37(4), 429-439.
Miller, P. M., & Fagley, N. S. (1991). The effects of framing, problem variations, and providing rationale on choice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 517-522.
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (2011). Act on Special Cases in Handling Gender for People with Gender Identity Disorder. Tokyo, Japan. Retrieved September 1, 2013, from http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/H15/H15HO111.html
Nardi, P. M. (2003). Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative methods. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M., & Clawson, R. A. (1997a). Toward a psychology of framing effects. Political Behavior, 19(3), 221-246.
Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M., & Clawson, R. A. (1997b). Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review 91(3), 567-583.
Nelson, T. E., & Kinder, D. R. (1996). Issue frames and group centrism in American public opinion. The Journal of Politics, 58(4), 1055-1078.
Nelson, T. E., & Oxley, Z. M. (1999). Issue framing effects on belief importance. The Journal of Politics, 61(4), 1040-1087.
Nelson, T. E., Lecheler, S., Schuck, A. R. T., & de Vreese, C. H. (2012). Framing Effects on Values, Emotions, and Attitudes. Paper presented at the 2012 meeting of the Western Political Science Association, Portland, OR.
Ogata, E. F. (2001, March 24). ‘Selectively out’: Being a gay foreign national in japan. The Daily Yomiuri. Retrieved September 1, 2013, from http://www.glapn.org/sodomylaws/world/japan/jpnews001.htm
O’Keefe, D. J. (1990). Persuasion: Theory and Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.The Pew Research Center (2013).
O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2006). The advantages of compliance or the disadvantages of noncompliance?: A meta-analytic review of the relative persuasive effectiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages. Communication Yearbook, 30, 1-43.
Olson, K., Camp, C., & Fuller, D. (1984). Curiosity and need for cognition. Psychological Reports, 54, 71-74.
Palmquist, J., and Stueve, A. (1996). Stay plugged into new opportunities. Marketing Research, 8(1), 13–15.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 135-146.
Petty, R. E. & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). Central and peripheral route to persuasion: Application to advertising. In L. Percvy (Eds.), Advertising and Consumer Psychology (pp. 3-23), Woodside A. G., Lexington: Lexington Books.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Price, V., Nir, L., & Cappella, J. N. (2005). Framing public discussion of gay civil unions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69(2), 179-212.
Price, V., Tewksbury, D., & Powers, E. (1997). Switching trains of thought: The impact of news frames on readers' cognitive responses. Communication Research, 24, 481-506.
Proctor, C. D., & Groze, V. K. (1994). Risk factors for suicide among gay, lesbian, and bisexual youths. Social Work, 39(5), 504-513.
Ratcliff, J. J., Lassiter, G. D., Markman, K. D., & Snyder, C. J. (2006). Gender difference in attitudes toward gay men and lesbians: The role of motivation to respond without prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(10), 1325-1338
Riggs, D. W., & Patterson, A. (2009). The smiling faces of contemporary homophobia and transphobia. Gay & Lesbian Issues and Psychology Review, 5(3), 185-190.
Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., Antone, C., Keough, K., & Martin, C. D. (1993). The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29(5), 408-433.
Russell S. T., & Joyner K. (2001), Adolescent sexual orientation and suicide risk: Evidence from a national study. American Journal of Public Health, 91(8), 1276-1281.
Sadowski, C., & Gulgoz, S. (1992). Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the need for cognition scale. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 74, 610-610.
Sakalli, N. (2002). Application of the attribution-value model of prejudice to homosexuality. Journal of Social Psychology, 142(2), 267-271.
Schaefer, D. R. & Dillman, D. A. (1988). Development of a standard email methodology: Results of an experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62(3), 378-397.
Schmidt, W. C. (1997). World Wide Web survey research: Benefits, potential problems, and solutions. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments. & Computers, 29(2), 274-279.
Schneider, T. R., Salovey, P., Apanovitch, A. M., Pizarro, J., McCarthy, D., Zullo, J., et al. (2001). The effects of message framing and ethnic targeting on mammography use among low-income women. Health Psychology, 20, 256-266.
Schuck, A. R. T., & de Vreese, C. H. (2006). Framing the EU enlargement: News media content and effects. European Journal of Communication, 21(1), 5-32.
Shah, D., Kwak, N., Schmierbach, M., & Zubric, J. (2004). The interplay of news frames on cognitive complexity. Human Communication Research, 30(1), 102-120.
Shen, F. Y., & Edwards, H. H. (2005). Economic individualism, humanitarianism, and welfare reform: A value-based account of framing effects. Journal of Communication, 55(4), 795-809.
Shiv, B., Edell, J. A., & Payne, J. W. (1997). Factors affecting the impact of negatively and positively framed ad messages. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(3), 285-294.
Shiv, B., Edell, J. A., & Payne, J. W. (2004). Does elaboration increase or decrease the effectiveness of negatively versus positively framed messages?, Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 199-208.
Sieck, W., & Yates, J. F. (1997). Exposition effects on decision making: Choice and confidence in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70, 207-219.
Simon, A. F., Fagley, N. S., & Halleran, J. G. (2004). Decision framing: Moderating effects of individual differences and cognitive processing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17, 77-93.
Skitka, L. J., & Sargis, E. G. (2006). The Internet as psychological laboratory. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 529-555
Slothuus, R., & de Vreese, C. H. (2008). Political parties, motivated reasoning, and issue framing effects. The Journal of Politics, 72(3), 630-645.
Smith, G. E. (1996). Framing in advertising and the moderating impact of consumer education. Journal of Advertising Research, 36(5), 49-64.
Smith, S. M., & Levin, I. P. (1996). Need for cognition and choice framing effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9, 283-290.
Sniderman, P. M., & Theriault, S. M. (2004). The structure of political argument and the logic of issue framing. In W. E. Saris & P. M. Sniderman (Eds.), Studies in public opinion (pp. 133-165). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Sohn, C. (2001). Validity of web-based survey in IS related research as an alternative to mail survey. AMCIS 2001 Proceedings. Paper 318. 1646-1653.
Stanovich, K. (1999). Who is rational?: Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Steward, W. T., Schneider, T. R., Pizarro, J., & Salovey, P. (2003). Need for cognition moderates responses to framed smoking-cessation messages. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(12), 2439-2464.
Sunagawa, H. (2006a). Japan's gay history, Intersections: Gender, History and Culture in the Asian Context, 12.
Sunagawa, H. (2006b). The social situation facing gays in Japan. Intersections: Gender, History and Culture in the Asian Context, 12.
Takemura, K. (1993). The effect of decision frame and decision justification on risky choice. Japanese Psychological Research, 35, 36-40.
Takemura, K. (1994). Influence of elaboration on the framing of decisions. Journal of Psychology, 128, 33-39.
Tourangeau, R. (2004). Survey research and societal change. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 775-801.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The Framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
Tygart, C.E. (2000). Genetic causation attribution and public support of gay rights. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 12(3), 259-275.
Uhlig, C. E., Seitz, B., Promesberger, J., Eter, N., Busse, H. (2014). Response quality of self-administered questionnaires: A comparison between paper and web questionnaires. Social Science Computer Review, 32(1), 256-269.
Valentine, J. (1997). Pots and pans: Identification of queer Japanese in terms of discrimination. In A. Livia & K. Hall (Eds.), Queerly Phrased: Language, Gender and Sexuality. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
van ’t Riet, J., Ruiter, R. A. C., Werrij, M. Q., & de Vries, H. (2009). What difference does a frame make? Potential moderators of framing effects and the role of self-efficacy. The European Health Psychologist, 11, 26-29.
Verplanken, B. (1989). Beliefs, attitudes, and intentions toward nuclear energy before and after Chernobyl in a longitudinal within-subjects design. Environment and Behavior, 21(4), 371-392.
Verplanken, B., Hazenberg, P. T., & Palenewen, G. R. (1992). Need for cognition and external information search effort, Journal of Research in Personality, 26(2): 128–136.
Ward, L. M. (2003). Understanding the role of entertainment media in the sexual socialization of American youth: A review of empirical research. Developmental Review, 23, 347–388.
Weinberger, M. G., Allen, C. T., & Dillon, W. R. (1981). Negative information: Perspectives and research directions. In K. Monroe (Ed.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 8, pp. 398-404). Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.
Weible, R., and Wallace, J. (1998). The impact of the Internet on data collection, Marketing Research, 10(3), 18-31.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548-573.
Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experience. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 3–25.
Weiner, B., Perry, R. P., & Magnusson, J. (1988). An attributional analysis of reactions to stigmas. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(5), 738-748.
Westlake, A. (2012, July 30). Gay marriage debate: Japan next, hope equal rights activists. The Japan Daily Press. Retrieved August 3, 2013, from http://japandailypress.com/gay-marriage-debate-japan-next-hope-equal-rights-activists-307751/
Wilcox, S. A. (2003). Cultural context and the conventions of science journalism: Drama and contradiction in media coverage of biological ideas about sexuality. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 20(3), 225-247.
Wilcox, C., & Wolpert, R. (2000). Gay rights in the public sphere: Public opinion on gay and lesbian equality. In G.A. Rimmerman, K.D. Wald, & C. Wilcox (Eds.), The politics of gay right (pp. 409-432). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
WIN-Gallup International (2012). Global index of religiosity and atheism. Retrieved January 14, 2015, from http://www.wingia.com
Wood, P.B., & Bartkowski, J.P. (2004). Attribution style and public policy attitudes toward gay rights. Social Science Quarterly, 85(1), 58-74.
Wright, K. B. (2005). Researching internet-based populations: Advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (10)3.
Wright, P. (1974). Analyzing media effects on advertising responses. Public Opinion Quarterly, 38, 192-192.
Wright, P. & Weitz, B. (1977). Time horizon effects on product evaluation strategies, Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 429-43.
Yoshino, K. (2006). Covering: The hidden assault on our civil rights. New York: Random House.
Zhang, Y. (1996). Responses to humorous advertising: the moderating role of need for cognition. Journal of Advertising, 25(1), 15-32.
Zhang, Y., & Buda, R. (1999). Moderating effects of need for cognition on responses to positively versus negatively framed advertising messages. Journal of Advertising, 28(2), 1-15.
Zhang, L., & Min, Y. (2013). Effects of entertainment media framing on support for gay rights in China: Mechanisms of attribution and value framing. Asian Journal of Communication, 23(3), 248-267.

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊