Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis
Identifieur interne : 000794 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000793; suivant : 000795Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis
Auteurs : D. D'Alessio ; M. AllenSource :
- Journal of Communication [ 0021-9916 ] ; 2000-12.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Beverly hills, Bias, Campaign coverage, Campaign news, Campaign year, Case study, Chicago press, Cmpa, Column inches, Content analysis, Coverage, Coverage bias, Doll bradley, Effect size, Effect sizes, Effects models, Electoral politics, Equal time, Evarts, Evarts stempel, Facial expressions, Francisco newspapers, Gatekeeping, Gatekeeping bias, Gatekeeping biases, Hofstetter, Hofstetter zukin, Human communication research, Hunter schmidt, Journalism, Kenney, Kenney simpson, Klein maccoby, Knowledge claims, Liberal media, Literature review, Lowry, Lowry shidler, Major newsmagazines, Malaney buss, Many others, Mass communication, Mccord weaver, Measurement error, Media bias, Media consumers, Media coverage, Media effects, Media outlets, Media studies center, Michigan state university, Mike allen, Moderator analysis, Moriarty garramone, Moriarty popovich, Network television coverage, Network television news, Newbury park, News bias, News coverage, News media, News twisters, Newsmagazine coverage, Newsmagazines, Newspaper coverage, Newspaper industry, Newspaper studies, Nollet, Other forms, Other hand, Overall analysis, Partisan bias, Partisan media bias, Political beliefs, Political candidates, Political science, Population data, Presidential campaign, Presidential campaigns, Presidential candidate, Presidential candidates, Presidential election, Presidential election campaigns, Presidential elections, Presidential race, Press coverage, Prestige press, Public opinion, Random effects models, Relative amounts, Repass chaffee, Republican candidates, Research synthesis, Robinson sheehan, Russell sage foundation, Sage, Sample size, Sampling error, Schmidt, Schmidt jackson, Schneider lewis, Selection bias, Single newspaper, Small number, Social psychology, Social research, Statement bias, Statement biases, Staten sloss, Statistic, Stempel, Stempel windhauser, Stovall, Structural elements, Subgroup, Television network news, Television networks, Television news, Television news coverage, Total number, Unbiased, Various studies, Waldman devitt, Weighting factor, Windhauser, Windhauser evarts.
- Teeft :
- Beverly hills, Bias, Campaign coverage, Campaign news, Campaign year, Case study, Chicago press, Cmpa, Column inches, Content analysis, Coverage, Coverage bias, Doll bradley, Effect size, Effect sizes, Effects models, Electoral politics, Equal time, Evarts, Evarts stempel, Facial expressions, Francisco newspapers, Gatekeeping, Gatekeeping bias, Gatekeeping biases, Hofstetter, Hofstetter zukin, Human communication research, Hunter schmidt, Journalism, Kenney, Kenney simpson, Klein maccoby, Knowledge claims, Liberal media, Literature review, Lowry, Lowry shidler, Major newsmagazines, Malaney buss, Many others, Mass communication, Mccord weaver, Measurement error, Media bias, Media consumers, Media coverage, Media effects, Media outlets, Media studies center, Michigan state university, Mike allen, Moderator analysis, Moriarty garramone, Moriarty popovich, Network television coverage, Network television news, Newbury park, News bias, News coverage, News media, News twisters, Newsmagazine coverage, Newsmagazines, Newspaper coverage, Newspaper industry, Newspaper studies, Nollet, Other forms, Other hand, Overall analysis, Partisan bias, Partisan media bias, Political beliefs, Political candidates, Political science, Population data, Presidential campaign, Presidential campaigns, Presidential candidate, Presidential candidates, Presidential election, Presidential election campaigns, Presidential elections, Presidential race, Press coverage, Prestige press, Public opinion, Random effects models, Relative amounts, Repass chaffee, Republican candidates, Research synthesis, Robinson sheehan, Russell sage foundation, Sage, Sample size, Sampling error, Schmidt, Schmidt jackson, Schneider lewis, Selection bias, Single newspaper, Small number, Social psychology, Social research, Statement bias, Statement biases, Staten sloss, Statistic, Stempel, Stempel windhauser, Stovall, Structural elements, Subgroup, Television network news, Television networks, Television news, Television news coverage, Total number, Unbiased, Various studies, Waldman devitt, Weighting factor, Windhauser, Windhauser evarts.
Abstract
A meta‐analysis considered 59 quantitative studies containing data concerned with partisan media bias in presidential election campaigns since 1948. Types of bias considered were gatekeeping bias, which is the preference for selecting stories from one party or the other; coverage bias, which considers the relative amounts of coverage each party receives; and statement bias, which focuses on the favorability of coverage toward one party or the other. On the whole, no significant biases were found for the newspaper industry. Biases in newsmagazines were virtually zero as well. However, meta‐analysis of studies of television network news showed small, measurable, but probably insubstantial coverage and statement biases.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02866.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EFLe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis</title><author><name sortKey="D Alessio, D" sort="D Alessio, D" uniqKey="D Alessio D" first="D" last="D'Alessio">D. D'Alessio</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Connecticut‐Stamford, Stamford, CT, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Allen, M" sort="Allen, M" uniqKey="Allen M" first="M" last="Allen">M. Allen</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Communication, University of Wisconsin‐Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF</idno><date when="2000" year="2000">2000</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02866.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000794</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">000794</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis</title><author><name sortKey="D Alessio, D" sort="D Alessio, D" uniqKey="D Alessio D" first="D" last="D'Alessio">D. D'Alessio</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Connecticut‐Stamford, Stamford, CT, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Allen, M" sort="Allen, M" uniqKey="Allen M" first="M" last="Allen">M. Allen</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Communication, University of Wisconsin‐Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j" type="main">Journal of Communication</title><title level="j" type="alt">JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION</title><idno type="ISSN">0021-9916</idno><idno type="eISSN">1460-2466</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">50</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="133">133</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="156">156</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">24</biblScope><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2000-12">2000-12</date></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0021-9916</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0021-9916</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Beverly hills</term><term>Bias</term><term>Campaign coverage</term><term>Campaign news</term><term>Campaign year</term><term>Case study</term><term>Chicago press</term><term>Cmpa</term><term>Column inches</term><term>Content analysis</term><term>Coverage</term><term>Coverage bias</term><term>Doll bradley</term><term>Effect size</term><term>Effect sizes</term><term>Effects models</term><term>Electoral politics</term><term>Equal time</term><term>Evarts</term><term>Evarts stempel</term><term>Facial expressions</term><term>Francisco newspapers</term><term>Gatekeeping</term><term>Gatekeeping bias</term><term>Gatekeeping biases</term><term>Hofstetter</term><term>Hofstetter zukin</term><term>Human communication research</term><term>Hunter schmidt</term><term>Journalism</term><term>Kenney</term><term>Kenney simpson</term><term>Klein maccoby</term><term>Knowledge claims</term><term>Liberal media</term><term>Literature review</term><term>Lowry</term><term>Lowry shidler</term><term>Major newsmagazines</term><term>Malaney buss</term><term>Many others</term><term>Mass communication</term><term>Mccord weaver</term><term>Measurement error</term><term>Media bias</term><term>Media consumers</term><term>Media coverage</term><term>Media effects</term><term>Media outlets</term><term>Media studies center</term><term>Michigan state university</term><term>Mike allen</term><term>Moderator analysis</term><term>Moriarty garramone</term><term>Moriarty popovich</term><term>Network television coverage</term><term>Network television news</term><term>Newbury park</term><term>News bias</term><term>News coverage</term><term>News media</term><term>News twisters</term><term>Newsmagazine coverage</term><term>Newsmagazines</term><term>Newspaper coverage</term><term>Newspaper industry</term><term>Newspaper studies</term><term>Nollet</term><term>Other forms</term><term>Other hand</term><term>Overall analysis</term><term>Partisan bias</term><term>Partisan media bias</term><term>Political beliefs</term><term>Political candidates</term><term>Political science</term><term>Population data</term><term>Presidential campaign</term><term>Presidential campaigns</term><term>Presidential candidate</term><term>Presidential candidates</term><term>Presidential election</term><term>Presidential election campaigns</term><term>Presidential elections</term><term>Presidential race</term><term>Press coverage</term><term>Prestige press</term><term>Public opinion</term><term>Random effects models</term><term>Relative amounts</term><term>Repass chaffee</term><term>Republican candidates</term><term>Research synthesis</term><term>Robinson sheehan</term><term>Russell sage foundation</term><term>Sage</term><term>Sample size</term><term>Sampling error</term><term>Schmidt</term><term>Schmidt jackson</term><term>Schneider lewis</term><term>Selection bias</term><term>Single newspaper</term><term>Small number</term><term>Social psychology</term><term>Social research</term><term>Statement bias</term><term>Statement biases</term><term>Staten sloss</term><term>Statistic</term><term>Stempel</term><term>Stempel windhauser</term><term>Stovall</term><term>Structural elements</term><term>Subgroup</term><term>Television network news</term><term>Television networks</term><term>Television news</term><term>Television news coverage</term><term>Total number</term><term>Unbiased</term><term>Various studies</term><term>Waldman devitt</term><term>Weighting factor</term><term>Windhauser</term><term>Windhauser evarts</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Beverly hills</term><term>Bias</term><term>Campaign coverage</term><term>Campaign news</term><term>Campaign year</term><term>Case study</term><term>Chicago press</term><term>Cmpa</term><term>Column inches</term><term>Content analysis</term><term>Coverage</term><term>Coverage bias</term><term>Doll bradley</term><term>Effect size</term><term>Effect sizes</term><term>Effects models</term><term>Electoral politics</term><term>Equal time</term><term>Evarts</term><term>Evarts stempel</term><term>Facial expressions</term><term>Francisco newspapers</term><term>Gatekeeping</term><term>Gatekeeping bias</term><term>Gatekeeping biases</term><term>Hofstetter</term><term>Hofstetter zukin</term><term>Human communication research</term><term>Hunter schmidt</term><term>Journalism</term><term>Kenney</term><term>Kenney simpson</term><term>Klein maccoby</term><term>Knowledge claims</term><term>Liberal media</term><term>Literature review</term><term>Lowry</term><term>Lowry shidler</term><term>Major newsmagazines</term><term>Malaney buss</term><term>Many others</term><term>Mass communication</term><term>Mccord weaver</term><term>Measurement error</term><term>Media bias</term><term>Media consumers</term><term>Media coverage</term><term>Media effects</term><term>Media outlets</term><term>Media studies center</term><term>Michigan state university</term><term>Mike allen</term><term>Moderator analysis</term><term>Moriarty garramone</term><term>Moriarty popovich</term><term>Network television coverage</term><term>Network television news</term><term>Newbury park</term><term>News bias</term><term>News coverage</term><term>News media</term><term>News twisters</term><term>Newsmagazine coverage</term><term>Newsmagazines</term><term>Newspaper coverage</term><term>Newspaper industry</term><term>Newspaper studies</term><term>Nollet</term><term>Other forms</term><term>Other hand</term><term>Overall analysis</term><term>Partisan bias</term><term>Partisan media bias</term><term>Political beliefs</term><term>Political candidates</term><term>Political science</term><term>Population data</term><term>Presidential campaign</term><term>Presidential campaigns</term><term>Presidential candidate</term><term>Presidential candidates</term><term>Presidential election</term><term>Presidential election campaigns</term><term>Presidential elections</term><term>Presidential race</term><term>Press coverage</term><term>Prestige press</term><term>Public opinion</term><term>Random effects models</term><term>Relative amounts</term><term>Repass chaffee</term><term>Republican candidates</term><term>Research synthesis</term><term>Robinson sheehan</term><term>Russell sage foundation</term><term>Sage</term><term>Sample size</term><term>Sampling error</term><term>Schmidt</term><term>Schmidt jackson</term><term>Schneider lewis</term><term>Selection bias</term><term>Single newspaper</term><term>Small number</term><term>Social psychology</term><term>Social research</term><term>Statement bias</term><term>Statement biases</term><term>Staten sloss</term><term>Statistic</term><term>Stempel</term><term>Stempel windhauser</term><term>Stovall</term><term>Structural elements</term><term>Subgroup</term><term>Television network news</term><term>Television networks</term><term>Television news</term><term>Television news coverage</term><term>Total number</term><term>Unbiased</term><term>Various studies</term><term>Waldman devitt</term><term>Weighting factor</term><term>Windhauser</term><term>Windhauser evarts</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">A meta‐analysis considered 59 quantitative studies containing data concerned with partisan media bias in presidential election campaigns since 1948. Types of bias considered were gatekeeping bias, which is the preference for selecting stories from one party or the other; coverage bias, which considers the relative amounts of coverage each party receives; and statement bias, which focuses on the favorability of coverage toward one party or the other. On the whole, no significant biases were found for the newspaper industry. Biases in newsmagazines were virtually zero as well. However, meta‐analysis of studies of television network news showed small, measurable, but probably insubstantial coverage and statement biases.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>stempel</json:string><json:string>media bias</json:string><json:string>presidential campaign</json:string><json:string>statement bias</json:string><json:string>windhauser</json:string><json:string>presidential campaigns</json:string><json:string>newsmagazines</json:string><json:string>hofstetter</json:string><json:string>gatekeeping</json:string><json:string>coverage bias</json:string><json:string>stovall</json:string><json:string>public opinion</json:string><json:string>campaign coverage</json:string><json:string>bias</json:string><json:string>lowry</json:string><json:string>statistic</json:string><json:string>subgroup</json:string><json:string>evarts</json:string><json:string>gatekeeping bias</json:string><json:string>newspaper coverage</json:string><json:string>cmpa</json:string><json:string>nollet</json:string><json:string>unbiased</json:string><json:string>stempel windhauser</json:string><json:string>kenney</json:string><json:string>population data</json:string><json:string>content analysis</json:string><json:string>presidential election</json:string><json:string>television network news</json:string><json:string>column inches</json:string><json:string>prestige press</json:string><json:string>effect sizes</json:string><json:string>kenney simpson</json:string><json:string>schmidt</json:string><json:string>windhauser evarts</json:string><json:string>sampling error</json:string><json:string>selection bias</json:string><json:string>campaign year</json:string><json:string>network television news</json:string><json:string>klein maccoby</json:string><json:string>media outlets</json:string><json:string>media studies center</json:string><json:string>newspaper industry</json:string><json:string>presidential elections</json:string><json:string>random effects models</json:string><json:string>presidential race</json:string><json:string>presidential election campaigns</json:string><json:string>news coverage</json:string><json:string>partisan bias</json:string><json:string>hunter schmidt</json:string><json:string>evarts stempel</json:string><json:string>malaney buss</json:string><json:string>sample size</json:string><json:string>media coverage</json:string><json:string>michigan state university</json:string><json:string>newsmagazine coverage</json:string><json:string>television networks</json:string><json:string>chicago press</json:string><json:string>other hand</json:string><json:string>news media</json:string><json:string>mass communication</json:string><json:string>newbury park</json:string><json:string>coverage</json:string><json:string>schneider lewis</json:string><json:string>various studies</json:string><json:string>liberal media</json:string><json:string>effect size</json:string><json:string>gatekeeping biases</json:string><json:string>effects models</json:string><json:string>moderator analysis</json:string><json:string>research synthesis</json:string><json:string>total number</json:string><json:string>statement biases</json:string><json:string>many others</json:string><json:string>partisan media bias</json:string><json:string>literature review</json:string><json:string>repass chaffee</json:string><json:string>mike allen</json:string><json:string>knowledge claims</json:string><json:string>doll bradley</json:string><json:string>electoral politics</json:string><json:string>hofstetter zukin</json:string><json:string>moriarty garramone</json:string><json:string>schmidt jackson</json:string><json:string>moriarty popovich</json:string><json:string>political beliefs</json:string><json:string>mccord weaver</json:string><json:string>lowry shidler</json:string><json:string>staten sloss</json:string><json:string>waldman devitt</json:string><json:string>measurement error</json:string><json:string>political candidates</json:string><json:string>republican candidates</json:string><json:string>newspaper studies</json:string><json:string>network television coverage</json:string><json:string>major newsmagazines</json:string><json:string>other forms</json:string><json:string>overall analysis</json:string><json:string>equal time</json:string><json:string>small number</json:string><json:string>campaign news</json:string><json:string>media consumers</json:string><json:string>television news coverage</json:string><json:string>human communication research</json:string><json:string>social research</json:string><json:string>robinson sheehan</json:string><json:string>media effects</json:string><json:string>presidential candidate</json:string><json:string>press coverage</json:string><json:string>television news</json:string><json:string>francisco newspapers</json:string><json:string>relative amounts</json:string><json:string>news twisters</json:string><json:string>weighting factor</json:string><json:string>facial expressions</json:string><json:string>case study</json:string><json:string>social psychology</json:string><json:string>news bias</json:string><json:string>single newspaper</json:string><json:string>russell sage foundation</json:string><json:string>beverly hills</json:string><json:string>presidential candidates</json:string><json:string>political science</json:string><json:string>structural elements</json:string><json:string>sage</json:string><json:string>journalism</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>D D'Alessio</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Connecticut‐Stamford, Stamford, CT, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>M Allen</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Communication, University of Wisconsin‐Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>JCOM133</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/WNG-VBWXF7SH-N</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>A meta‐analysis considered 59 quantitative studies containing data concerned with partisan media bias in presidential election campaigns since 1948. Types of bias considered were gatekeeping bias, which is the preference for selecting stories from one party or the other; coverage bias, which considers the relative amounts of coverage each party receives; and statement bias, which focuses on the favorability of coverage toward one party or the other. On the whole, no significant biases were found for the newspaper industry. Biases in newsmagazines were virtually zero as well. However, meta‐analysis of studies of television network news showed small, measurable, but probably insubstantial coverage and statement biases.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>8.26</score><pdfWordCount>9748</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>61012</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>24</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>492 x 701 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>105</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>726</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>0</keywordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis</title><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><title>Journal of Communication</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1460-2466</json:string></doi><issn><json:string>0021-9916</json:string></issn><eissn><json:string>1460-2466</json:string></eissn><publisherId><json:string>JCOM</json:string></publisherId><volume>50</volume><issue>4</issue><pages><first>133</first><last>156</last><total>24</total></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>2000</json:string><json:string>1968, 1980, 1992, and 1996</json:string><json:string>1952</json:string><json:string>1992</json:string><json:string>1960s</json:string><json:string>1972</json:string><json:string>1948</json:string><json:string>1956</json:string></date><geogName></geogName><orgName><json:string>Roper Center</json:string><json:string>Department of Communication</json:string><json:string>*CMPA</json:string><json:string>Michigan State University</json:string><json:string>Media Studies Center‐Roper Center</json:string><json:string>Media Studies Center</json:string><json:string>University of Connecticut-Stamford</json:string><json:string>University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee</json:string></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>Newsmagazines</json:string><json:string>Shoemaker</json:string><json:string>Gates</json:string><json:string>American</json:string><json:string>Stevenson</json:string><json:string>Eisenhower</json:string><json:string>Quayle</json:string><json:string>Reese</json:string><json:string>Clinton</json:string><json:string>A. J. Liebling</json:string><json:string>Dole</json:string><json:string>Agnew</json:string><json:string>Franklin Roosevelt</json:string><json:string>U.S. News</json:string><json:string>World</json:string></persName><placeName><json:string>D.C.</json:string><json:string>United States</json:string><json:string>Washington</json:string><json:string>San Francisco</json:string><json:string>Indianapolis</json:string></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl><json:string>Bishop & Brown, 1967</json:string><json:string>Domke et al. (1997)</json:string><json:string>Stevenson et al. (1973)</json:string><json:string>Westley et al. (1963)</json:string><json:string>Schneider & Lewis, 1985</json:string><json:string>Millspaugh, 1949</json:string><json:string>Stempel (1991)</json:string><json:string>Kenney & Simpson, 1993</json:string><json:string>Robinson & Sheehan, 1983</json:string><json:string>Lowry, Bridges, & Barefield, 1990</json:string><json:string>Johnson, 1997</json:string><json:string>Hedges and Olkin (1985)</json:string><json:string>Merron & Gaddy, 1986</json:string><json:string>Ostroff & Sardell, 1989</json:string><json:string>Noyes, Lichter, & Amundson, 1993</json:string><json:string>Shoemaker and Reese (1991)</json:string><json:string>Stempel, 1961</json:string><json:string>Keely, 1971</json:string><json:string>Donaldson, 1987</json:string><json:string>Page and Shapiro (1992)</json:string><json:string>Blumberg (1954)</json:string><json:string>D’Alessio, 1997</json:string><json:string>Shadish and Haddock (1994)</json:string><json:string>Efron, 1971</json:string><json:string>White, 1950</json:string><json:string>Kenney and Simpson (1993)</json:string><json:string>Hunter and Schmidt (1990)</json:string><json:string>Lee & Solomon, 1991</json:string><json:string>Babbie, 1995</json:string><json:string>Batlin, 1954</json:string><json:string>1985, 1988</json:string><json:string>Dennis, 1996</json:string><json:string>Hastorf & Cantril, 1954</json:string><json:string>Lichter, 1992</json:string><json:string>Cooper & Soley, 1990</json:string><json:string>Stempel, 1965</json:string><json:string>Tracz (1985)</json:string><json:string>Berelson et al. (1954)</json:string><json:string>Stempel & Windhauser, 1989</json:string><json:string>Dindia and Allen (1992)</json:string><json:string>Stovall, 1985</json:string><json:string>Bozell, 1992</json:string><json:string>Rosenthal, 1991</json:string><json:string>such as Liebling, 1964/1975</json:string><json:string>Coffey, 1975</json:string><json:string>Stevenson and Greene (1980)</json:string><json:string>Hofstetter, 1976</json:string><json:string>Klein & Maccoby, 1954</json:string><json:string>Emery, 1964</json:string><json:string>Wells & King, 1994</json:string><json:string>Agnew, 1969a, 1969b</json:string><json:string>Hunter, Schmidt & Jackson, 1982</json:string><json:string>Nollet, 1968</json:string><json:string>Cook and Leviton (1980)</json:string><json:string>Debenport, 1992</json:string><json:string>Bozell & Baker, 1990</json:string><json:string>Media Studies Center/Roper Center, 1996</json:string><json:string>Farley, 1938</json:string><json:string>Stempel, 1969</json:string><json:string>also provided by Rosenthal, 1991</json:string><json:string>Fan & Tims, 1989</json:string><json:string>Wolf, 1986</json:string><json:string>Hunter & Schmidt, 1990</json:string><json:string>Russonello & Wolf, 1979</json:string><json:string>Seelye, 1996</json:string><json:string>Bower, 1985</json:string><json:string>Hofstetter and Buss (1978)</json:string><json:string>Popovich et al. (1993)</json:string><json:string>Mullin et al. (1986)</json:string><json:string>Patterson, 1989</json:string><json:string>Hunter & Hamilton, 1994</json:string><json:string>Stevenson, Eisinger, Feinberg, & Kotok, 1973</json:string><json:string>Bauer, 1964</json:string><json:string>Shoemaker & Reese, 1991</json:string><json:string>Doll & Bradley, 1974</json:string><json:string>Graber, 1971</json:string><json:string>see Krippendorf, 1980</json:string></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/WNG-VBWXF7SH-N</json:string></ark><categories><wos><json:string>1 - social science</json:string><json:string>2 - communication</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>1 - arts & humanities</json:string><json:string>2 - communication & textual studies</json:string><json:string>3 - communication & media studies</json:string></scienceMetrix><scopus><json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>3 - Linguistics and Language</json:string><json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Arts and Humanities</json:string><json:string>3 - Language and Linguistics</json:string><json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>3 - Communication</json:string></scopus><inist><json:string>1 - sciences humaines et sociales</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>2000</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2000</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02866.x</json:string></doi><id>101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main">Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2000-12"></date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="content-type" subtype="article" source="article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</note><note type="publication-type" subtype="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="article"><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">D</forename><surname>D'Alessio</surname></persName><affiliation>University of Connecticut‐Stamford, Stamford, CT, USA<address><country key="US"></country></address></affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">M</forename><surname>Allen</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Communication, University of Wisconsin‐Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA<address><country key="US"></country></address></affiliation></author><idno type="istex">101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF</idno><idno type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-VBWXF7SH-N</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02866.x</idno><idno type="unit">JCOM133</idno><idno type="toTypesetVersion">file:JCOM.JCOM133.pdf</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j" type="main">Journal of Communication</title><title level="j" type="alt">JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION</title><idno type="pISSN">0021-9916</idno><idno type="eISSN">1460-2466</idno><idno type="book-DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1460-2466</idno><idno type="book-part-DOI">10.1111/jcom.2000.50.issue-4</idno><idno type="product">JCOM</idno><idno type="publisherDivision">ST</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">50</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="133">133</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="156">156</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">24</biblScope><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2000-12"></date></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><abstract xml:lang="en" style="main"><p>A meta‐analysis considered 59 quantitative studies containing data concerned with partisan media bias in presidential election campaigns since 1948. Types of bias considered were gatekeeping bias, which is the preference for selecting stories from one party or the other; coverage bias, which considers the relative amounts of coverage each party receives; and statement bias, which focuses on the favorability of coverage toward one party or the other. On the whole, no significant biases were found for the newspaper industry. Biases in newsmagazines were virtually zero as well. However, meta‐analysis of studies of television network news showed small, measurable, but probably insubstantial coverage and statement biases.</p></abstract><langUsage><language ident="en"></language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisherName><publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1460-2466</doi><issn type="print">0021-9916</issn><issn type="electronic">1460-2466</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="JCOM"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION">Journal of Communication</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="12004"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/jcom.2000.50.issue-4</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="50">50</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="4">4</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2000-12">December 2000</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="0013300" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02866.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="JCOM133"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="24"></count></countGroup><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2006-01-10"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2006-01-10"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.5 mode:FullText source:HeaderRef result:HeaderRef" date="2010-04-06"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-30"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-24"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="133">133</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="156">156</numbering></numberingGroup><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:JCOM.JCOM133.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><countGroup><count type="referenceTotal" number="123"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="2"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>D</givenNames><familyName>D'Alessio</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>M</givenNames><familyName>Allen</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1" countryCode="US"><unparsedAffiliation>University of Connecticut‐Stamford, Stamford, CT, USA</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a2" countryCode="US"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Communication, University of Wisconsin‐Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p>A meta‐analysis considered 59 quantitative studies containing data concerned with partisan media bias in presidential election campaigns since 1948. Types of bias considered were gatekeeping bias, which is the preference for selecting stories from one party or the other; coverage bias, which considers the relative amounts of coverage each party receives; and statement bias, which focuses on the favorability of coverage toward one party or the other. On the whole, no significant biases were found for the newspaper industry. Biases in newsmagazines were virtually zero as well. However, meta‐analysis of studies of television network news showed small, measurable, but probably insubstantial coverage and statement biases.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">D</namePart><namePart type="family">D'Alessio</namePart><affiliation>University of Connecticut‐Stamford, Stamford, CT, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">M</namePart><namePart type="family">Allen</namePart><affiliation>Department of Communication, University of Wisconsin‐Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2000-12</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2000</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><extent unit="references">123</extent><extent unit="linksCrossRef">2</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">A meta‐analysis considered 59 quantitative studies containing data concerned with partisan media bias in presidential election campaigns since 1948. Types of bias considered were gatekeeping bias, which is the preference for selecting stories from one party or the other; coverage bias, which considers the relative amounts of coverage each party receives; and statement bias, which focuses on the favorability of coverage toward one party or the other. On the whole, no significant biases were found for the newspaper industry. Biases in newsmagazines were virtually zero as well. However, meta‐analysis of studies of television network news showed small, measurable, but probably insubstantial coverage and statement biases.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Journal of Communication</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0021-9916</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1460-2466</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1460-2466</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">JCOM</identifier><part><date>2000</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>50</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>4</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>133</start><end>156</end><total>24</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-VBWXF7SH-N</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02866.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">JCOM133</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-L0C46X92-X">wiley</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000794 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000794 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:101C0EBEFF219AE0BC2FD6CB509760A27600C8EF
|texte= Media bias in presidential elections: a meta‐analysis
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |