Health Articles

 

Microsoft word - psr_vol.15_b_09_third-person effects in the stock market perception.doc

Jae-Min Jung and Ho-Yeon Kim: Third-person Effects in the Stock Market:Perception of Experts & Non-experts and Impacts on Attitude Third-person Effects in the Stock Market:
Perception of Experts & Non-experts and Impacts on Attitude
Jae-Min Jung* and Ho-Yeon Kim** Abstract: The third-person effect was tested by examining whether people perceive a greater influence of
unidentified information recommending stocks in the Internet on others than on themselves. Findings
confirm the third-person effect but also show subjects with stock market experience perceive a greater
influence on others than did subjects with no stock market experience. Additionally, subjects
demonstrated a larger third-person effect when "others" are specified as novice investors who have little
knowledge or experience in stock trading than when "others" are identified as experienced traders. After
controlling for SES and interest and experience in stock trading, the third-person perception remained.
Keywords: Third-person perception, Behavioral effect, Stock market, Internet information, Expert
as a monster drug even before the FDA approved it. Pfizer's stock has climbed 20%."Of course, the people touting a stock may be company insiders or In his seminal study, Davison (1983) introduced paid promoters who stand to profit at consumers' an interesting example about the third person effect: expense. Thus, when people see an offer on the "Fluctuations in the stock market are not infrequently Internet, they have to determine its legitimacy accounted for by reference to rumors or news reports. through their own independent research. However, The reasoning seems to be that these reports will because a general audience does not have much cause others to sell (or buy) certain categories of information and knowledge to analyze all shares; therefore I will sell (or buy) in order to information, it is difficult to determine whether or not anticipate their action" (Davison, 1983, p. 13). it is reliable information. As a result, many people There are vast amounts of information available rely on the news or recommendations to make online that recommend stocks directly, introduce new decisions in the stock market. This is common product development or provide other news that regardless of countries wherever stocks are being might influence stock buying decisions. The Internet traded in the market. is ideal for financial news because of its real time More individuals are getting involved in the stock information. It is not surprising, then, that more and trading in Korea. A report shows that Internet more people rely on the Internet to check market "rumors" have considerable impacts on stock prices fluctuations for their individual investments. (Ahn, 2007). Paid web sites provide information that Internet users, however, risk becoming a stock reaches hundreds of users, and the number of interest market loss victim due to the lack of pertinent and group communities devoted to stock trade is accurate information. Galarza (1998, p. 36) points to estimated to be several thousand in Korea. the impact of the Internet in one specific case: Furthermore, since more and more people buy and "Pfizer's Viagra was being touted on Yahoo's board sell through e-trading, they frequently scan and adopt news and information from the Internet. At this moment, it is necessary to analyze how * Position, Associate Professor people rely on the information on the web and are Affiliation, KAIST, Korea E-mail : [email protected] affected by the information. Specifically, this study ** Position,Aassociate Professor examines how people are affected by unidentified Affiliation, Kangnam University, Korea information provided on the Web and how they E-mail : [email protected] Pacific Science Review, vol. 15, B, no 4, 2013, pp.48 58 perceive the influence of the information on others as examined the conditions that facilitate these well. Based on the third-person effect theory, the perceptual discrepancies. perceptions of general individuals and that of experts First, perceptions rely on the desirability of the who work at stock trading companies will be message. Self-enhancement theorists assert that compared. In other words, we will compare if people are loathe to admit that they are influenced by individuals who do not have much knowledge and messages when such admission reflects negatively on information and the experts whose daily job is the self. Third-person effects should be particularly analyzing stock market perceive information pronounced when the message is perceived as differently. This study also analyzes whether the undesirable (Perloff, 2009). For example, when the perception about the influence on people's buying messages are undesirable such as television violence, decision leads to behavioral aspects – whether pornography, negative political advertising or anti individuals support warnings or regulations about social rap music, the perceived effects on others are greater (Cohen et al., 1988; Eveland & McLeod, Data utilized here come from survey responses of 1999; Gunther & Mundy, 1993; Hoffner, et al., 1999; 335 professional stock market traders, adults and Lee & Tamborini, 2005; Perloff, 1999). The opposite side to these finding is also possible. According to a self-enhancement view, if the third- person effect is driven by a desire to preserve self- LITERATURE REVIEW
esteem, people should be willing to acknowledge effects of the socially desirable messages such as anti-smoking and drunk driving PSAs (David, Liu, & Third-person Perception
Myser, 2004; Henricsen & Flora, 1999; Meirick, 2005), AIDS prevention ads (Duck, Terry, & Hogg, The strength of the perceptual effect was 1995) and anti-drug ads (Cho & Boster, 2008). substantially supported by meta-analysis of the third- Second, social distance is another factor that has person perception studies (Paul, Salwen, & Dupagne, an influence on the strength of the third-person 2000; Perloff, 1993; Sun, Pan, & Shen, 2008). perception. Social distance is typically defined as the Scholars account for the processes underlying the degree of similarity between the self and others third-person effect by applying attribution theory, (Eveland, Nathanson, Detenber, & McLeod, 1999). namely fundamental attribution error and egotistical Generally, "third persons" in third-person effects differential attributions (Gunther, 1991; Ruciniski & research have been treated as a singular whole with Salmon, 1990). According to the fundamental no effort to break down into smaller parts. However, attribution error, observers generally underestimate the magnitude of the third-person effect hinges on the other people's awareness of situational factors such particular others that observers have in mind when as the persuasive intent of media content and, thus, they estimate media effects (Perloff, 2009). For overestimate other's susceptibility to this content. But example, the third-person effect increases as others in judging themselves, observers are quite aware of become increasingly general (e.g., others in this the persuasive intent and are less susceptible to these classroom, others in this university, others in this message effects. Observers may also engage in self- town, others in this state) and hence more socially positivity bias or egotistical differential attributions distant (Cohen, Mutz, Price, & Gunther, 1988; Jensen (Miller, 1976; Stephan & Gollwitzeer, 1981). When a & Hurley, 2005). Apparently, the greater the message is deemed negative or when being persuaded perceived distance between self and others, the easier by it would be regarded as unintelligent, people it is to assume that others will fall prey to effects. At perceive the message to have more influence on the same time, perceived effects would be greater on others, enhancing their perception of personal others who might be considered more vulnerable to a invulnerability and control (Gunther, 1991). specific message such as pornography to adolescents, Then, what conditions influence the strength of casino gambling to adults (Youn, Faber, & Shah, the third-person perceptions? Researchers have 2000), or private loan commercials to the poor (Jung, 2007). Jae-Min Jung and Ho-Yeon Kim: Third-person Effects in the Stock Market:Perception of Experts & Non-experts and Impacts on Attitude Different individuals or groups also might display misled by media messages (Driscoll & Salwen, 1997; different degrees of effects. That is, according to the Huh & Langteau, 2007; Lasorsa, 1989). perceived knowledge, expertise, or degree of involvement for each topic, people perceive the effects on others differently. For example, highly The Behavioral Effect
educated people are disposed to see themselves as mentally superior to others and therefore should The perceptual component (or the third-person perceive that they are more resistant to persuasive perceptions), which has received frequent research messages (Paul et al, 2000; See also Perloff, 2009). attention and considerable empirical support, states However, education has a mixed result in predicting that people estimate the effects of media messages on third-person perception. For this reason, researchers themselves to be less than the effects on others. have argued that psychological processes may be However, Perloff (2002) argued that "what energizes more crucial than exogeneous factors like education and intrigues us all is the behavioral hypothesis, in explaining third-person effect. which suggests that perceptions can influence Davison's original study (1983) noted that experts, behavior" (p. 499). Rojas et al. (1996) also noted that because of their special knowledge, may exhibit a "researchers interested in the third person effect greater third-person perception than do non-experts. phenomenon should explore the behavioral He further proposed that "in a sense, we are all component with greater scrutiny" (p. 183). In a experts on those subjects that matter to us, in that we similar context, McLeod et al. (1997) also asserted have information not available to other people… that "This first (perceptual) component of the third- Other people, we reason, do not know what we know. person effect, however, is at most interesting Therefore, they are more likely to be influenced by perceptual phenomenon. The perceptual tendency the media" (p. 9). Consistent with this view, self- predicted by the third-person effects becomes more perceived knowledge (perceiving that you have meaningful if it is linked with real-world expertise on the topic in question) predicts the third- consequences as hypothesized by Davison" (p. 154). person perception (Driscoll & Salwen, 1997; Lasorsa, As a result, exploring the behavioral aspect is 1989; Peiser & Peter, 2000; Salwen & Dupagne, now the central of the third-person effect research. 2000). These findings, coupled with evidence that Previous studies showed that perceived effects on self-esteem magnifies third-person perceptions others have an influence in the context of censorship (David & Johnson, 1998), are consistent with the on pornography (Chia, Lu, & McLeod, 2004; view that self-enhancement underlies the third-person Gunther, 1995; Lee & Tomborini, 2005; Lo, 2000; Wu & Koo, 2001), violent TV programs (Rojas, Shah, Thus, the self enhancement or self-serving bias & Faber, 1996; Salwen & Dupagne, 1999), realty has been most commonly used to explain the third- shows (Cohen & Weimann, 2008), antisocial rap person effect phenomenon and more specifically to music (McLeod, Eveland, & Nathanson, 1997), explain the role of knowledge or expertise in fueling negative political campaign (Salwen, 1998), or liquor, greater media effects on others (Driscoll & Salwen, tobacco and casino ads (Shah, Faber, & Youn, 1999; 1997; Jung & Jo, 2013; Huh & Langteau, 2007; Youn, Faber, & Shah, 2000). Perloff, 1999). According to self-enhancement theory, people are motivated to sustain and reinforce positive Research Questions and Hypotheses
self-images. In other words, people are smarter and The first set of hypotheses tested here examine less vulnerable to media influence than are others whether the third-person effect can be applied to the (Eveland, 2002). Applying this notion, individuals use of advice in Internet content devoted to the stock with special knowledge concerning a topic and market. Thus, considering Davison's initial notion, awareness of a message creator's intent are likely to this study tests the third-person effect in a new think that their knowledge protects them from media domain: the stock market, or whether people perceive influence whereas others who are less knowledgeable greater impacts of unidentified information are more susceptible to media influence and easily recommending stocks in the Internet on others than on themselves. Pacific Science Review, vol. 15, B, no 4, 2013, pp.48 58 H1a: Respondents are more likely to believe that According to the previous literature, the greater the unidentified information recommending stocks in perceived effect of media content, the more people the Internet has more influence on others than on support censorship for the content. Thus, we predict a similar outcome here. When measuring the perception of third person, H2a: The greater the perceived effect of unidentified "other" was broken down into the specified groups as information recommending stocks in the Internet "novice investors," and "experienced investors." In on others, the more willing people will be to this case, the degree of perceived effect might be support warning against that information. H2b: The greater the perceived effect of unidentified H1b: Respondents are more likely to believe that information recommending stocks in the Internet unidentified information about stock on others, the more willing people will be to recommendation in the Internet has more support regulation against that information. influence on novice investors than on themselves. Attitude toward warnings or regulation against the H1c: Respondents are more likely to believe that unidentified information recommending stocks in the unidentified information recommending stocks in Internet might be influenced by other factors. Thus, the Internet has more influence on experience the final research question deals with whether the investors than on themselves. third-person perception influence remains after controlling for other variables. H1d: Respondents are more likely to believe that unidentified information recommending stocks in RQ3. After controlling other confounding variables, the Internet has more influence on novice are the third-person perception variables still investors than on experienced investors. predictive of attitudes regarding warnings or regulation toward unidentified information Respondents of the survey in this study are recommending stocks in the Internet? composed of an expert group (employees at stock trading company) and a non-expert group (students and general adults). Whether and how experts and non-experts differently perceive the influence on others are important subjects for study. RQ1: Is there any difference in the perception about the degree of influence among different In April and May 2009, a self-administered survey respondent groups (experts vs. non-experts)? using a convenience sample of professional stock Respondents also can be grouped by the previous traders at stock trading companies, college experience in stock trading. Thus, the next research undergraduate students in communication courses at question asks whether there is any difference in the a university in Seoul, South Korea, and their parents third-person perception based on prior experience in or relatives, was conducted. Final sample size was 335, with 89 professional experts, 126 college students and 120 adults. Of participants, since the RQ2: Is there any difference in the perception about survey was conducted at a women's university, the degree of influence among respondents based college students were all female. In an adult group, on the previous experience in stock trading? 65 respondents were male (54.2%) and in the expert group 82 respondents were male (92.1%). Although A second set of hypotheses tests the effects of the the gender distribution was not proportionate in this third-person perception on the attitude toward the survey, it is not expected to have a critical impact at unidentified information recommending stocks. this research. Jae-Min Jung and Ho-Yeon Kim: Third-person Effects in the Stock Market:Perception of Experts & Non-experts and Impacts on Attitude Measurement
Control Variables
For the purpose of control, prior experience in First person Effect: Influence on Self
stock trading (Yes/No) was asked. Since total amount Survey participants were asked how strongly they of investment is a private issue, degree of interest in agreed or disagreed with the statement asked in the stock trading (5-point Likert scale) was asked, regard to themselves: Unidentified information instead of actual amount. recommending stocks in the Internet has an influence on myself. This question was measured on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly Third Person Effect: Influence on Others
Hypotheses 1a through 1c stated that people Respondents also answered their opinion about would perceive that unidentified information the effects of unidentified information recommending recommending stocks in the Internet has a greater stocks in the Internet on others. "Others" were impact on others than on one's self. To test these specified as others in general, novice investors, and hypotheses, paired t-test were run. A significant experienced investors in stock trading: (a) third- person perception was found in all cases. The Unidentified information recommending stocks in the mean estimate of the impact on others was Internet has an influence on others, (b) Unidentified significantly higher than the mean estimate of the information recommending stocks in the Internet has impacts on themselves. The perceived impact on self an influence on novice investors, and (c) Unidentified was 2.10 and that of others was 3.68. When others information recommending stocks in the Internet has were specifically designated as novice investors and an influence on experienced investors. Answers were experienced investors, both groups also showed measured by 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly higher mean scores in the perception of the impact on disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). others than the impact on self. Thus, the first three hypotheses were supported. Support for Censorship
H1d stated that people would perceived that a In order to measure support for censorship, greater impact would be given to novice investors respondents were asked to indicate how strongly they rather than experienced investors, because novice agreed or disagreed with two statements: (a) A investors are more vulnerable to the information. The warning notice is necessary to protect ordinary mean score of novice investors was 4.17 and that of people from unidentified information recommending experienced investors was 2.60. As expected, people stocks in the Internet, and (b) A strong regulation is perceive that novice investors are more vulnerable to necessary to protect ordinary people from unidentified information about stock unidentified information recommending stocks in the recommendation in the Internet than investors who Internet. Answers were measured by 5-point Likert have more stock trading experience. This hypothesis scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). was also supported. Table 1. Paired t-test of perceived effects of stock recommendation 2.10 (.95) - 3.68 (.67) Self - Novice investors 2.10 (.95) - 4.17 (.83) Self - Experienced investors 2.10 (.95) - 2.60 (.83) Novice investors – Experienced investors 4.17 (.83) - 2.60 (.83) Score ranged from (1) strongly disagree to (5) strongly agree Pacific Science Review, vol. 15, B, no 4, 2013, pp.48 58 Additionally, research question 1 asked the There was a statistical difference among groups in difference in the perception, if any, among the perception about impact on themselves, on others, respondents groups. This study used three types of and on novice investors. However, the perception respondent groups; college students, general adults, about the impact on experienced investors was not and experts in stock trading who work at stock significant among respondent groups. trading companies. An ANOVA test was conducted to answer the research question. Table 2. AVOVA test among three groups Students General N M(s.d) N M(s.d) N M(s.d) 120 2.48(.80) 89 2.72(.52) 2.12 *P< .05; *** p < .001 Further analysis for the difference between two respondents (54.1%) had prior experience in stock groups using Scheffer post hoc test revealed that trading. The independent t-test results showed that mostly the statistical significance in the ANOVA test experience of stock trading had some impacts on the came from the expert group's lower perceived impact perception on others and novice investors. on self and higher perception on others. On the Respondents who had experience showed higher perceived impacts on self, on others, on novice mean scores than respondents with no experience. investors and on experienced investors, there was no This means that people who have stock trading significant difference between students and general experience were more worried about the influence of adults group. In the later analysis, these two unidentified information recommending stocks in the respondent groups are combined as the non-expert Internet on others and especially novice investors. In the perception on themselves and on experienced Research question 2 addressed the impact of investors, regardless of stock trading experience, the previous experience in stock trading. A total of 200 mean score did not reveal any statistical difference. Table 3. Impact of previous stock trading experience on the perception Novice investors Experienced investors ** p<.05' ***p<.001 Jae-Min Jung and Ho-Yeon Kim: Third-person Effects in the Stock Market:Perception of Experts & Non-experts and Impacts on Attitude Hypotheses 2a and 2b predicted that perceived The perceived effect on others also showed effect of unidentified information recommending significant impacts on the both attitudes (β=.176, stocks in the Internet on others would lead to p<.01 for warning; β=.110, p<.068 for regulation). people's willingness to support warnings or However, the perceived effect on experienced regulation against that information. To test these investors showed no statistical significance in the hypotheses, regressions were performed. The impact impacts on warnings or regulation against of first and third-person variables was analyzed unidentified information recommending stocks. individually as independent variables and each Surprisingly, the perceived impacts on self were attitude served as dependent variables. Bivariate significantly related to the attitudes toward correlations were tested between independent unidentified information recommending stocks in the variables to ensure no problems due to Internet. The less perceived impacts on self, the more multicollinearity existed. Although the correlation supported for warning (β=-.128, p<.05). In other between the perceived impact on others and its effect words, people showed strong support for warning on novice investors(r=.53) was high, the tolerence toward unidentified information recommending and VIF (less than 1.5) test showed that stocks in the Internet, because they believe they are multicollinearity was not a problem. cautious and intelligent enough not to be vulnerable The results demonstrated a strong linkage by the information. At the same time, because they between the third-person perception and people's were more worried novice investors might be more attitude toward warnings or regulation. The perceived vulnerable to the information, they support warning effect on novice investors appeared as the strongest against information more. It should be noted, predictor in explaining people's willingness to however, that as expected, the perceived impacts on support warnings and regulation (β=.256, p<.001 for self were not significantly related to attitude toward warnings; β=.254, p<.001 for regulation). Table 4. Regression of attitude on first and third person effect R2 beta Adjusted Others .176** .110+ Novice investors Experienced investors +p<.10; *P<.05; ** p<.01; ***p<.001 To determine if third person variables were still the first block. Respondent group as the expert or the predictive of attitudes after controlling other non-expert, prior stock trading experience, and the confounding variables, and to estimate the degree of interest in stock trading were included in incremental and total variance associated with the the second block. And each of the first and third variable groups in accounting for attitudes such as person variables was then entered lastly. The order of supporting warnings or regulation, hierarchical entry of the variable groups followed the approach regression analyses were conducted. advocated by Werner (1985), proceeding from Eleven independent variables were divided into general characteristics of the subjects to specific three separate blocks. Demographic variables such as values or attitudes, and then to perceptions – here, the gender, age, income, and education were entered in third person perceptions. Pacific Science Review, vol. 15, B, no 4, 2013, pp.48 58 Table 5. Hierarchical regression of attitudes on demographic, involvement, and third person variables Education .012 -.036 Income .090+ .116* Block 2 Previous experience Interest .153+ .213* Block 3 Others .167** .100 Experienced investor Adjusted R2 .156 Model fitness (F) 6.854 *** 9.284*** +p<.10; *P<.05; ** p<.01; ***p<.001 Overall, all variables included in this analyses Overall, in predicting pro-warning attitudes, accounted for 15.6% of total variance in the pro- people who worried about impacts on the others warning attitude and 20.1% in the pro-regulation showed more active attitudes to support it. It should attitude. After all other variables were controlled for, be noted, however, that when others were specified the impact of the third person effect variable, as novice investors and experienced investors, the particularly the perceived effect on novice investors, results were clearly different. The reason why people remained stable and as the most powerful predictor support warnings against unidentified information for each attitude toward unidentified information recommending stocks in the Internet lies in the recommending stocks in the Internet. concern about the novice investors rather than In the case of pro-warning attitude, both estimated experienced investors. They believe caution should impacts on others (ß=.167, p<.01) and novice be emphasized to protect novice investors who are investors (ß=.235, p<.001) continued to be powerful vulnerable to the unidentified information. predictors of people's willingness to support Pro-regulation attitudes showed slightly different warnings. However, the perceived impact on results. As in the case of pro-warning, the perceived experienced investors did not show any statistical impact on novice investors was the strongest significance. On the other hand, the perceived impact predictor (ß=.248, p<.001). However, the variable of on self showed significant result (ß=-.158, p<.05) in general others did not show statistical significance predicting pro-warning attitudes. People who believe after controlling other variables. On the other hand, they are less influenced by unidentified information the perceived impacts on self was revealed as a recommending stocks in the Internet showed more significant predictor (β=-.184, p<.01). The less supportive attitudes toward warning against that impact on self, the more positive respondents were information. Income and the degree of interest in toward supporting regulation. stock trading showed some marginal significance at Several variables such as income, prior stock the p<.10 level in predicting pro-warning attitudes. trading experience and the degree of interest in stock People who have more income and more interest in trading also showed significant results. Higher stock trading were more supportive for warnings. income (ß=.116, p<.05) was related to pro-regulation, Jae-Min Jung and Ho-Yeon Kim: Third-person Effects in the Stock Market:Perception of Experts & Non-experts and Impacts on Attitude and people who have stock trading experience in the prices in chat rooms, bulletin boards and interest past (ß=.240, p<.001) showed stronger pro-regulation groups in the Internet have intensified anxiety about attitudes. Unlike the case of pro-warning attitude, the the protection of less experienced stock investors. prior experience in stock trading significantly Clearly, the current study revealed that people are predicted the pro-regulation attitude. That is, people worried about novice investors who are more who have some experience in stock trading were vulnerable to the unidentified information concerned about negative impact from unidentified recommending stocks. Moreover, experts who work information recommending stocks in the Internet and at stock trading companies showed high levels of supported regulation against those information. The concern for novice investors. This concern leads to degree of interest in stock trading also showed behavioral support for warnings and regulation of significance at .05 level (β=.213) in predicting pro- unidentified information recommending stocks in the regulation attitudes. Overall, in predicting pro-regulation attitudes, The present study has some limitations. people who worried about impacts on novice Compared to the sample of the non-expert group, that investors showed the strongest attitude to support it. of the expert group is limited due to the difficulty in They believe the regulation is necessary to protect collecting the data. Future studies may add more novice investors who are more vulnerable to stock samples to test the third-person effect in stock trading. Another limitation involves some of the measures used in this study. The measurement of expertness was self-reported. Instead of measuring the self- DISCUSSION
perceived knowledge, this study defined the experts as employees working for the stock trading companies. Since they sell and buy stocks as a This study found support for the contention that a common duty in daily life, it is no doubt that they third-person effect occurs when people consider the have more information and further knowledge in the potential impact of media content on others in the stock market. However, it is plausible that the degree context of stock trading. Particularly, this study of self-perceived knowledge might be different, even surveyed general public and expert groups to though they work as professional stock traders. In the compare the perceived impacts, if any, on self and measurement of third-person perception consequence, others. Several significant findings emerged. this study used the degree of pro-warning or pro- Furthermore, this study investigated influences on regulation about the unidentified information respondents support for warning statements on sites recommending stocks in the Internet. However, it is and regulation restricting stock trading information. unlikely that these actions will be implemented. When the third-person is assumed as a member of a Future research can challenge the issue of compliance specific vulnerable group rather than just others in versus defiance as a consequence of the third-person general, the third-person effect is more significant in perception in the stock trading. predicting attitudes. Respondents worried that the In spite of these limitations, this study makes novice investors are more vulnerable to the some contributions to the body of mass unidentified information recommending stocks in the communication research. First, the current study empirically tested the third-person perception and The Internet is an ideal medium to distribute consequence of that perception in the context of stock financial information because of its real time updates market. Thus, it expanded the area of the third-person and wide accessibility. Certainly, the influence of the study application. Second, this study empirically information in the Internet cannot be exaggerated in tested Davidson's initial third-person speculation on the society. However, unidentified and unaccountable experts' perception of greater media influence on stock buying or selling recommendations might others and showed that experts do tend to attribute confuse or mislead to general public, especially those greater media influence on others than do non-experts. who do not have much information and knowledge in Third, typically, self-other disparities grow in stock trading. Unaccountable stories about stock magnitude with increases in perceived distance Pacific Science Review, vol. 15, B, no 4, 2013, pp.48 58 between self and comparison others, as predicted by effects in the context of positive media content. Basic research of social distance. By specifying others as and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 305-325. stock trading novices and experienced stock traders, Eveland, W. P. (2002). The impacts of news and this study showed people support warnings and entertainment media on the contributions to the special regulation of content due to the concern about the issue. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(2), 233-241. Eveland, W. P., & McLeod, D. M. (1999). The effect of novice traders who are more vulnerable to the social desirability on perceived media impact: unidentified information recommending stocks in the Implications for third-person perceptions. International Internet. This could be another approach regarding Journal of Public Opinion Research, 11(4), 315-333. the social distance corollary. Eveland, W. P., Nathanson, A. I., Detenber, B. H., & McLeod, D. M. (1999). Rethinking the social distance corollary: Perceived likelihood of exposure and the REFERENCES
third-person perception. Communication Research, 26 (3), 275-302. Frey, J. H. (1998). Federal involvement in U.S. gaming regulation. The Annals of the American Academy of Ahn, J. (2007. 6. 12). Unqualified stock professionals in the Political and Social Science. 556, 138-152. Internet. I news 24. Available at: Galarza, P. (1998 June). Buzz Board. Money, 27 (6), 36. Gunther, A. C., & Mundy, P. (1993). Biased optimism and 0&g_serial+244426. the third-person effect. Journalism Quarterly, 70(1), 58- Boddewyn, J. J. (1994). Cigarette advertising bans and smoking: The flawed policy connection. International Gunther, A. C. (1991). What we think others think: cause Journal of Advertising, 13, 311-332. and consequence in the third-person effect. Chia, S. C., Lu, K-H., & McLeod, D. M. (2004). Sex, lies, Communication Research, 18(3), 355-372. and video compact disc: A case study on third-person Gunther, A. C. (1995). Overrating the X-rating: The third- perception and motivations for media censorship. person perception and support for censorship of Communication Research, 31(1), 109-130. pornography. Journal of Communication, 45(1), 27-38. Cho, H., & Boster, F. J. (2008). First and third person Gunther, A. C., Bolt, D., Borzekowski, D. L., Liebhart, J. perceptions on anti-drug ads among adolescents. L., & Dillard, J. P. (2006). Presumed influence on peer Communication Research, 35(2), 169-189. norms: How mass media indirectly affect adolescent Cohen, J., Mutz, D., Price. V., & Gunther, A. (1988). smoking. Journal of Communication, 56(1), 52-69. Perceived impact of defamation: An experiment on Henriksen, L., & Flora, J. A. (1999). Third-person third-person effects. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 161- perception and children: Perceived impact of pro-and anti-smoking ads. Communication Research, 26, 643- Cohen, J., & Weimann, G. (2008). Who's afraid of reality shows? Exploring the effects of perceived influence of Hoffner, C., et al. (1999). Support for censorship of reality shows and the concern over their social effects on television violence: The role of the third-person effect willingness to censor. Communication research, 35(3), and news exposure. Communication Research, 26(6), David, P., & Johnson, M. A. (1998). The role of self in Huh, J., & Langteau, R. (2007). Presumed influence of third-person effects about body image. Journal of DTC prescription drug advertising: Do experts and Communication, 48(4), 37-58. novices think differently? Communication Research, David, P., Liu, K., & Myser, M. (2004). Methodological 34(1), 25-52. artifact or persistent bias? Testing the robustness of Jensen, J. D., & Hurley, R. J. (2005). Third-person effects third-person and reverse third-person effects for alcohol and the environment: Social distance, social desirability, messages. Communication Research, 31(2), 206-233. and presumed behavior. Journal of Communication, 55, Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1-15. Jung, J. (2007). The third-person perception and behavioral Driscoll, P. D., & Salwen, M. B. (1997). Self-perceived effect in the private loan TV commercial. Korean knowledge of the O. J. Simpson trial: Third-person Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 51(6), perception and perceptions of guilt. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 541-556. Jung, J., & Jo. S. (2013). Third-person effects of Internet Duck, J. M., Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1995). The stock recommendation. Soical Behavior & perceived influence of AIDS advertising : Third-person Personality.41(9), 1435-1444. Jae-Min Jung and Ho-Yeon Kim: Third-person Effects in the Stock Market:Perception of Experts & Non-experts and Impacts on Attitude Lasorsa, D. L. (1989). Real and perceived effects of International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, "Amerika". Journalism Quarterly, 66, 373-378. Lee, B., & Tamborini, R. (2005) Third-person effect and Rucinski, D., & Salmon, C. (1990). The "other" as the Internet pornography: The influence of collectivism and vulnerable voter: A study of the third-person effect in Internet self-efficacy. Journal of Communication, 55(2), the '88 campaign. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 2, 345-368. Lo, V-H., & Wei, R. (2002). Third person effect, gender, Salwen, M. B. (1998). Perceptions of media influence and and pornography on the Internet. Journal of support for censorship: The third-person effect in the Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46(1), 13-33. 1996 presidential election. Communication Research, 25, McLeod, D. M., Eveland, W. P., Jr., & Nathanson, A. I. (1997). Support for censorship of violent and misogynic Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne, M. (1999). The third-person rap lyrics: An analysis of the third-person effect. effect: Perceptions of the media's influence and immoral Communication Research, 24(2), 153-174. consequences. Communication Research, 26, 523-549. Meirick, P. C. (2005). Rethinking the target corollary: The Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne, M. (2000). Self-perceived effects of social distance, perceived exposure, and knowledge of television violence and the third-person perceived predispositions on first-person and third- effect: Predicting media influence on self and others. person perceptions. Communication Research, 32(6), Paper presented to the annual convention of the ICA, Acapulco, Mexico. Miller, D. T. (1976). Ego involvement and attributions for Shah, D. V., Faber, R. J., & Youn, S. (1999). Susceptibility success and failure. Journal of Personality and Social and severity: Perceptual dimensions underlying the Psychology, 34, 901-906. third-person effect. Communication Research, 26, 240- Palmer, E. A. (1998, January 24). Politically charged task faces gambling panel. Congressional Quarterly Weekly Stephan, W. G., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1981). Affect as a Report, 56, 184. mediator of attributional egotism. Journal of Pan, Z., Abisaid, J. L., Paek, H-J., Sun, Y., & Houden, D. Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 442-458. (2006). Exploring the perception gap in perceived Sun, Y., Pan, Z., & Shen, L. (2008). Understanding the effects of media reports of opinion polls. International third-person perception: Evidence from a meta-analysis. Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 340-350. Journal of Communication, 58(2), 280-300. Paul, B., Salwen, M. B., & Dupagne. M. (2000). The third- Wu, W., & Koo, S. H. (2001). Perceived effects of sexually person effect: A meta analysis of the perceptual explicit internet content: The third-person effect in hypothesis. Mass communication & Society, 3, 57-85. Singapore. Journalism & Mass Communication Peiser, W., & Peter, J. (2000). Third-person perception of Quarterly, 78(2), 260-274. television-viewing behavior. Journal of Communication, Youn, S. Y., Faber, R. J., & Shah, D. V. (2000). Restricting 50(1), 25-43. gambling advertising and the Perloff, R. M. (1993). Third-person effect research 1983- third-person effect. Psychology & Marketing, 17(7), 633- 1992: A review and synthesis. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 5, 167-184. Perloff, R. M. (1999). The third-person effect: A critical review and synthesis. Media Psychology, 1, 353-378. Perloff, R. M. (2002). The third-person effect. In J. Bryant & D. Zillman (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 489-506). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Perloff, R. M. (2009). Mass media, social perception, and the third-person effect. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 252-268). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Price, V., & Stroud, N. J. (2006). Public attitude toward polls: Evidence from the 2000 U.S. presidential election. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 393-421. Rojas, H., Shah, D. V., & Faber, R. J. (1996). For the good of others: Censorship and the third-person effect.

Source: http://psr.kangnam.ac.kr/psr_bk_iss/vol15/V15_04_B_09.pdf