11
Media and Emotion
Robin L. Nabi
Emotions are central to the human experience. Yet, given the historical bias toward cognition in the
study of media eﬀects, emotions have served as a focus of only a small proportion of the extant
research. Fortunately, this trend has been changing, and in more recent years, rapidly increasing
attention has been paid to the role of emotions in the selection, processing, and inﬂuence of media
content. The purpose of this chapter is to overview the ways in which emotion has been integrated
into media eﬀects research and how future research might beneﬁt from more systematic inclusion
of emotion-related constructs.
This chapter begins by deﬁning the construct of emotion, followed by an examination of the
theoretical frameworks and research paths that have considered emotion as (a) an impetus for
message selection, (b) an outcome of message exposure, and (c) a mechanism by which other
media eﬀects (e.g., persuasive inﬂuence) emerge. In light of existing limitations in the body of
scholarship at present, the chapter concludes by highlighting fruitful directions for future
research, with a particular eye towards the role of newer communication technologies.
Deﬁning Emotion
Although a clear deﬁnition of emotion has proven elusive (Izard, 2007), in general emotions are
viewed as internal, mental states representing evaluative, valenced reactions to events, agents, or
objects that vary in intensity (e.g., Ortony, Clore, & Collins, 1988). They are generally short-lived,
intense, and directed at some external stimuli. This is in contrast to moods, which are untargeted
and more enduring experiences (see Fiske & Taylor, 1991, for a review). Although diﬀerent scholars
emphasize diﬀerent physiological, subjective, or motivational factors, general consensus suggests
that emotions consist of ﬁve components: (1) cognitive appraisal or evaluation of a situation; (2) the
physiological component of arousal; (3) a subjective feeling state; (4) a motivational component,
including behavior intentions or action readiness; and (5) motor expression (Scherer, 1984).
Two basic models of emotion underlie the majority of the extant media research: dimensional
and discrete. Dimensional views focus on emotion as a motivational state characterized primarily
by two broad aﬀective dimensions: arousal and valence (e.g., Russell, 1980). Related research focuses
on how the degree of positive or negative feeling evoked by a stimulus aﬀects various physiological,
163
164 • Robin L. Nabi
cognitive, and behavioral outcomes. Discrete emotion perspectives, on the other hand, focus on the
arousal and eﬀects of individual emotional states, like fear, anger, and hope. The discrete perspective
holds that particular patterns of thoughts, or cognitive appraisals, are associated with unique emotional
states (e.g., Frijda, 1986; Izard, 1977; Lazarus, 1991; Plutchik, 1980). Each emotion state is
associated with physiological changes and action tendencies (e.g., ﬂight for fear, attack for anger)
that inﬂuence perceptions, cognitions, and behaviors in ways consistent with each particular emotion’s
adaptive goal (e.g., protection, retribution). This chapter focuses primarily on discrete emotions,
though it incorporates other perspectives on emotion as warranted.
Emotion as the Impetus for Media Selection
One of the more long-standing and important questions posed by media eﬀects scholars is:
Why do audiences select the media messages that they do? Given the centrality of emotion in
determining action and the propensity of media to provide emotional experiences, it is unsurprising
that one of the most well developed lines of emotion and media research focuses on the
role of aﬀect in selecting media content. Zillmann’s (1988, 2000) seminal work on mood management
theory (MMT) asserts that people, driven by hedonistic desires, strive to both alter
negative moods as well as maintain and prolong positive ones. Consequently, they will arrange
their environments (consciously or not) to adjust various moods using any type of communication
available, including a host of media options. He notes four message features that might
impact mood-based message selection: excitatory potential, absorption potential, semantic aﬃnity,
and hedonic valence. For each, the underlying principle is the same: If a message reﬂects
one or more features that might perpetuate the negative state, the message is likely to be
avoided in favor of one that would interrupt the negative state.
Much research supports mood management theory’s predictions (see Chapter 10 in this
volume). However, its boundaries have been challenged by the consideration of aﬀective motivations
not linked to hedonic pleasure. Most notably, Knobloch’s (2003) mood adjustment
theory asserts that when anticipating a future activity, people might use media to achieve the
mood they believe will be most conducive to completing that task (i.e., mood optimization).
Further, Oliver (2008) argued that media consumers are at times driven not by hedonism, but
by eudaimonia, or happiness rooted in greater insight and connection to the human experience.
This motivation, she argues, explains viewers’ desires to consume more poignant or tragic fare.
Further still, Nabi, Finnerty, Domschke, and Hull (2006) examined media preference driven by
discrete emotions—regret in particular—ﬁnding results counter to MMT predictions. This and
other related ﬁndings suggest that discrete emotions may function diﬀerently than moods in the
media-selection process, facilitating coping (rather than simple regulation) needs.
By expanding the vision of what emotional needs drive media selection, this tradition of media
research has been rejuvenated. Indeed, Knobloch-Westerwick’s (2015) Selective Exposure Self- and
Aﬀect-Management (SESAM) model aﬀords aﬀect a central role in the selection process, highlighting
how aﬀect and the working self interrelate to inﬂuence motivation for selective exposure.
In sum, it is unquestionable that moods and emotions impact media message selection, and
given the necessity of message exposure to media eﬀects, it is critical that we more fully explore
emotion’s role in selection processes. Future research would do well to conceptually distinguish
moods from emotions and to consider how a range of diﬀerent discrete emotions (e.g., fear,
anger, jealousy, grief, hope, pride) result in the selection of diﬀerent forms of content such that
regulation, optimization, and coping needs are met.
Media and Emotion • 165
Emotion as Outcome of Media Exposure
In addition to examining emotions as predictors of media exposure, media eﬀects scholars have
also focused on the emotional experiences that result from message exposure. Such research
addresses both speciﬁc emotions (fear especially), as well as more general aﬀective experiences,
including enjoyment and self-transcendence.
Fright Responses to the Media
The most long-standing line of media research with emotional response as the central focus
involves children’s fright reactions to media fare (see Cantor, 2009; Wilson & Drogos, 2009, for
reviews). In essence, this body of research (a) documents that children experience fear in response
to the media content they consume, whether intentionally selected or not; (b) addresses the conditions
under which such reactions emerge; and (c) explores the lingering eﬀects of such fright,
including anxiety and sleep disturbance. Speciﬁc content that frightens children of diﬀerent ages
(e.g., monsters vs. abstract threats), the individual diﬀerences that moderate fright reactions (e.g.,
empathy, gender), and the eﬀectiveness of coping strategies to manage potentially fright-inducing
media exposure have all been explored. To explain why people have emotional responses to what
are not immediate threats to the viewer, Cantor draws from the notion of stimulus generalization,
arguing that because what we see in the media approximates reality, we respond to the media
content as though it is real. Although some media consumers enjoy the experience of being frightened,
the negative eﬀects of exposure to fright-inducing media (e.g., anxiety, sleep disturbances)
have served as the primary impetus for this line of inquiry.
Media Enjoyment
More generally, the ongoing inquiry into issues related to media enjoyment ﬁts nicely within the
category of media-generated aﬀective response as the outcome of media exposure. Although
media enjoyment has been conceptualized in a variety of ways (see Oliver & Nabi, 2004, for
a series of articles on this issue, and Tamborini, Bowman, Eden, Grizzard, & Organ, 2010), and
likely derives from a collection of aﬀective, cognitive, and even behavioral elements, it has primarily
been considered an aﬀectively driven construct that largely represents the degree of liking for
media fare (Raney & Bryant, 2002). Given the importance of message liking to continued exposure,
understanding why people enjoy what they do is an important issue to address.
Apart from the examination of personality traits in media enjoyment (see Krcmar, 2009;
Weaver, 2000), the most systematic, theoretically driven line of research in this domain focuses
on the disposition theory of drama, which in essence suggests that viewers’ enjoyment of media
content is based on their aﬀective dispositions, or feelings, towards media characters, and the
outcomes the characters experience (e.g., Raney & Bryant, 2002; Zillmann, 1980, 1991). More
speciﬁcally, viewers enjoy seeing good things happen to liked characters, and bad things happen
to disliked characters. It is less enjoyable, however, to watch bad things happen to good guys,
and good things happen to bad guys (see Raney, 2003). The role of moral judgments and
empathy have traditionally been considered integral to this process, though there have been
evolutions in thinking about exactly how such judgments relate. For example, Raney (2004)
introduced the role of schemas in setting expectations for various characters, suggesting that the
type of character (protagonist or antagonist) may inﬂuence character liking ﬁrst and assessment
166 • Robin L. Nabi
of behavior morality second. More recently, Tamborini et al. (2010) highlighted the role of need
satisfaction as a key predictor of media enjoyment. Drawing from self-determination theory,
Tamborini and colleagues provide evidence that media that fulﬁll the psychological needs of
autonomy, competence, and relatedness explain about half the variance in video game enjoyment.
In sum, understanding the relationships among a range of variables, including moral
judgments, psychological needs, and aﬀective response, and how they ultimately contribute to
media enjoyment is still a very active and ongoing conversation.
Meaningful/Self-Transcendent Media Experiences
Given media eﬀects research has focused overwhelmingly on the negative consequences of
media exposure, it is unsurprising that researchers have tended to focus on negative emotional
responses to media content. Yet, on the heels of the positive psychology movement, media
scholars have recently begun to explore a wider range of emotional states under the umbrella of
meaningful media experiences, which are marked by more complex or mixed aﬀective
responses, such as feelings of poignancy or of being touched or moved (Oliver, 2008; see also
Chapter 17 in this volume).
Particularly salient is the recent work focusing on self-transcendent emotions, such as elevation,
gratitude, and admiration, which capture feelings associated with reduced attention to the
self and one’s own goals and a reorientation to something larger than one’s own concerns (Haidt
& Morris, 2009). Given that such states can associate with positive outcomes, including doing
good deeds and greater focus on relationships (Haidt & Morris, 2009), there has been burgeoning
interest in the capacity of media to elicit such states. As Oliver and her colleagues (2018) argue,
self-transcendent media experiences arise when media consumers become aware of a shared
humanity and “the potential for moral beauty, humility, courage, and hope” (p. 384). As such,
they may experience elevation above their individual concerns, increased interconnectedness, and
thus increased appreciation for the larger environment, including other people, natural wonders,
and moral virtues. As this line of research is still in its infancy, investigations into the message
features and experiences that generate feelings of self-transcendence and their subsequent social,
psychological, and physical impacts oﬀer an exciting avenue for future research.
Intensity of Emotional Response to Media Content
In addition to research that focuses on aﬀective responses to the media, two additional theories
help to explain, at a very general level, the intensity of the emotional reactions people have to
the media they consume: excitation transfer theory and desensitization. Excitation transfer
theory (Zillmann, 1983) highlights the role of physiology in emotional experiences, asserting
that if one is aroused physiologically, one’s emotional response to subsequent events, including
media exposure, is likely to be more intensely experienced. Thus, if one feels fright watching
a ﬁlm protagonist running for her life, one will feel even more relief than one would have
otherwise once she has reached safety (Oliver, 1994; Zillmann, 1980).
Desensitization, on the other hand, focuses on the dampening of the intensity of emotional
experience. Drawing from the therapeutic technique designed to help people overcome
phobias (e.g., fear of ﬂying), media desensitization suggests that repeated exposure to
messages that typically evoke an emotionally based physiological response (e.g., those that
contain violence) lose their capacity to do so (e.g., Carnagey, Anderson, & Bushman, 2007;
Media and Emotion • 167
Cline, Croft, & Courrier, 1973). Although a strict interpretation of desensitization focuses
on physiological response (see also excitatory habituation, Zillmann & Bryant, 1984),
research has expanded to consider self-reported arousal, emotional responses, and cognitive
reactions (e.g., Mullin & Linz, 1995). The concern associated with desensitization, of course,
is that this emotional dampening will transfer to the real world such that people will also
have reduced emotional reactions to situations that might beneﬁt from action (e.g., oﬀering
aid to someone in need) or may minimize the disincentive to engage in antisocial behavior
(e.g., aggression).
Ultimately, both excitation transfer and desensitization have implications for the intensity of
emotional arousal, though the speciﬁcs in terms of the scope of these eﬀects are remarkably
unexplored. For example, we know little about whether these processes work equally well for
various negative or positive emotions. Can one be desensitized to fear appeals? To “feel-good”
movies? Does excitation transfer work equally well for humor compared to fright? How might
these processes be harnessed to positive eﬀect? To the extent emotional intensity has implications
for outcomes like attention, encoding, recall, and behavior (see below), a more complete
understanding of these processes would be of great value.
Emotion as the Mechanism of Eﬀect
Emotions as outcomes of media exposure—which emotions are elicited and under what circumstances—are
intriguing in their own right. But the inﬂuence of that emotional arousal on subsequent
outcomes, such as message engagement, attitude formation, and behavior in a host of
contexts, is paramount as these eﬀects form the fabric of our personal experiences and our
social interactions. Although space precludes an extensive discussion of these issues, four such
eﬀects that represent steps along the inﬂuence continuum are highlighted here: message processing,
persuasion, aggressive behavior, and message sharing.
Emotion and Message Processing
Lang’s (2000) limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing (LC4MP)
represents an especially well-developed conceptualization of the inﬂuence of emotion and
message engagement. The LC4MP essentially asserts that media consumers have limited capacity
to allocate cognitive resources to the messages they choose to process. Yet these
resources must be spread among the processing tasks of attention, encoding, storage, and
retrieval. How those resources are allocated is argued to be driven by the message’s characteristics,
signal properties, and motivational relevance (see Lang, 2000, for a detailed model
description; see also Chapter 13 in this volume). Lang further argues that the motivational
activation underlying and enabling emotional experiences inﬂuence the distribution of cognitive
resources. More speciﬁcally, aversive (or avoid) system activation leads to negative
emotional experience, and appetitive (or approach) system activation leads to positive emotional
experiences. As the level of appetitive system activation increases, relatively more
resources are expected to be allocated to encoding and storage of message information. As
the level of aversive system activation increases, an increase, followed by a slight decrease,
in allocation to encoding is expected.
The LC4MP serves as a useful guide for understanding the message features that stimulate the
motivational systems that, in turn, impact the information attention, encoding, storage, and
168 • Robin L. Nabi
retrieval that underlie media messages’ eﬀects on knowledge structures and decision-making.
Thus, the LC4MP is poised as a foundational model in emotion and media eﬀects. Although
squarely rooted in the dimensional perspective of emotion, it would be of great interest to expand
its scope to consider how discrete emotions, like fear, anger, and sadness, inﬂuence resource allocations,
especially given such emotions vary in their approach and avoidant tendencies.
Emotion and Persuasion
The study of emotional persuasive appeals is arguably the most well-known and well-researched
area of emotion as a mechanism of media eﬀects. Although the persuasive inﬂuence of a range of
emotions has been examined in the extant literature (e.g., guilt, anger, amusement, hope, pride), the
overwhelming majority of this research has focused on fear arousal and its eﬀects on both message
processing and persuasion-related outcomes (e.g., attitudes, behavioral intentions, and behaviors).
Fear Appeal Research
The fear appeal literature has cycled through several theoretical perspectives over the past 60
years (see Myrick & Nabi, 2017, for a detailed discussion), including (a) the drive model, that
conceptualized fear resembles a drive state, motivating people to adopt recommendations expected
to alleviate the unpleasant state (e.g., Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953); (b) the parallel processing
model (PPM; Leventhal, 1970), which separated the motivational from the cognitive approach to
processing fear appeals, suggesting that those who respond to fear appeals by focusing on the
threat (cognition) would engage in adaptive responses, whereas those responding with fear (emotion)
would engage in maladaptive responses; (c) the expectancy-value based protection motivation
theory (PMT; Rogers, 1975, 1983), distinguished by its focus on four categories of thought
generated in response to fear appeals—judgments of threat severity, threat susceptibility, response
eﬃcacy, and self-eﬃcacy—and how they might combine to predict message acceptance; and (d)
the extended parallel process model (EPPM; Witte, 1992), which integrated the PPM and PMT,
predicting that if perceived eﬃcacy outweighs perceived threat, danger control and adaptive
change will ensue. If, however, perceived threat outweighs perceived eﬃcacy, then fear control
and maladaptive behaviors are expected.
Although meta-analytic research has concluded that the cognitions identiﬁed in the PMT,
and later the EPPM, are important to fear appeal eﬀectiveness, no model of fear appeals has
been endorsed as accurately capturing the process of fear’s eﬀects on decision-making (see Tannenbaum
et al., 2015; Witte & Allen, 2000). Regardless, evidence does support a positive linear
relationship between fear and attitude, behavioral intention, and behavior change. Thus, to the
extent message features evoke perceptions of susceptibility and severity, as well as response and
self-eﬃcacy, fear may moderate persuasive outcomes, though important questions about the
interrelationships among these constructs remain unanswered.
Recently, scholars have adopted a more nuanced approach to the study of fear appeals.
Most notable, research examining the individual’s experience of fear throughout message
exposure (vs. focusing on fear assessment after message exposure) suggests that an invertedU
pattern of fear response may be a valid predictor of a fear appeal’s persuasiveness (Meczkowski,
Dillard, & Shen, 2016). Further, the recently advanced emotional ﬂow perspective
(Nabi, 2015) suggests that fear appeals likely evoke emotions not only in response to threatening
information (i.e., fear) but also in response to eﬃcacy information (e.g., hope). As
Media and Emotion • 169
such, the sequencing of emotional experiences may help to explain the conditions under
which fear appeals are more likely to be eﬀective (see Nabi & Myrick, 2019, for supportive
evidence). These lines of research make it clear that the study of fear appeals is still evolving
in interesting and illuminating ways.
Beyond Fear Appeals
Importantly, interest in understanding the eﬀects of emotions other than fear in the processing
of persuasive messages is on the rise, guided by recently proposed models attempting to examine
those processes (see Nabi, 2007, 2017). For example, the cognitive functional model (CFM;
Nabi, 1999) aims to explain how message-relevant negative emotions (e.g., fear, anger, sadness,
guilt, disgust) aﬀect the direction and stability of persuasive outcome based on three constructs:
emotion-driven motivated attention, motivated processing, and expectation of message reassurance.
Further, models focusing on the persuasive eﬀect of particular emotional experiences,
including anger (the anger activism model; Turner, 2007) and hope (persuasive hope theory;
Chadwick, 2015), have emerged in recent years, both of which highlight eﬃcacy as a critical
component to the success of anger and hope appeals respectively.
More generally, Nabi (2003, 2007) has proposed the emotions-as-frames model (EFM), conceptualizing
emotions as frames (or lenses) through which incoming stimuli are interpreted.
The EFM begins by noting that message features contribute to the evocation of various discrete
emotions. These emotional experiences, moderated by individual diﬀerences (e.g., schema development,
coping style), are predicted to inﬂuence both information accessibility and information
seeking, which ultimately combine to generate emotion-consistent decisions and action. With
growing evidence of the link between message framing and emotional arousal, Nabi argues that
this perspective may illuminate our understanding of the potentially central role emotions may
play in how a range of media messages—not just those designed to persuade—might impact
attitudes and behaviors. Ultimately, as much attention as has been paid to the study of emotion
and persuasion to this point, much remains to be discovered in terms of the inﬂuence of individual
emotions, as well as emotions in combination, on message processing and outcomes, and
how to best structure messages to capitalize on emotions’ drive to action.
Emotion and Aggressive Behavior
Although it is important to examine the eﬀects of media messages on emotional arousal and, in
turn, mental processes, most people interested in media eﬀects are especially concerned with
audience behavior. Indeed, one of the earliest lines of research in this domain stemmed from
concern over the potentially violence-inducing eﬀects of ﬁlm and comic book consumption.
Scholarly interest in the area of media violence has yet to wane, with meta-analyses revealing
a small but signiﬁcant association between media exposure and anti-social behavior (e.g.,
Anderson & Bushman, 2001; see also Chapter 14 in this volume).
As this research program has matured, attention to the processes through which such eﬀects
emerge has developed. Most notable is the General Aggression Model (GAM; Anderson &
Bushman, 2002), which suggests that aggression is a function of the learning, activation, and
application of aggression-related knowledge structures. Thus, exposure to violent media content
can promote short-term aggressive behavior by priming aggressive cognitions, increasing
arousal, and generating an aggressive (i.e., angry) aﬀective state. Further, the GAM suggests that
170 • Robin L. Nabi
over time each exposure to media violence is another opportunity to learn that aggression is an
appropriate way to deal with life’s obstacles.
Clearly, emotions (e.g., anger, shame) play a central role in explaining the link between
media exposure and aggressive behavior (see also Baumeister & Bushman, 2007). If we
assume that other behavioral responses to media messages operate similarly, and recognizing
that emotions function to motivate behavior (e.g., Izard, 1977; Lazarus, 1991), then it is reasonable
to imagine that any research on the behavioral outcomes resulting from media
exposure (e.g., voting, consumer, or health behaviors) should consider the emotions underlying
those eﬀects.
Emotion and Message Sharing
A less developed, but increasingly relevant, way in which emotions mediate responses to
media consumption is through the social sharing that occurs as a result of exposure to emotionally
charged media content. Although the social sharing of information obtained through
the media is at the foundation of one of the earlier models of media eﬀects (i.e., two-step
ﬂow model of communication; Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955), the role of emotion was not of concern
at that time. Yet a growing body of literature on the social sharing of emotions indicates
that people have an instinctive need to disclose to others when they experience
emotionally charged events, which has been widely documented across cultures, gender, and
age groups (Rimé, 1995). Further, the more intense the emotional experience or the greater
the emotional disruption, the more likely it is to be socially shared (Rimé, Mesquita, Philippot,
& Boca, 1991; Rimé et al., 1994) and shared repeatedly over an extended period of time
(Harber & Cohen, 2005; Rimé, 1995). The emotional broadcaster theory (EBT) of emotional
disclosure suggests that this intrapsychic need to share emotional experiences results in both
emotion and information traveling across social networks, and research documents that the
extent to which stories travel reﬂects the degree to which the original teller was aﬀected by
the experience shared (Harber & Cohen, 2005).
Given the emotional nature of much media content, it is only logical to imagine that media
messages may be the source of much social sharing. Although surprisingly little research speaks
directly to this issue, growing evidence exists in multiple media contexts that the emotionality
of media messages, including shocking news stories (e.g., Kubey & Peluso, 1990), health messages
(e.g., Dunlop, Wakeﬁeld, & Kashima, 2009), and viral videos (Berger & Milkman, 2012),
is associated with their diﬀusing through social networks. In essence, these bodies of literature
suggest that emotional intensity (rather than valence) is a key predictor of whether media messages
are shared, along with the elements of novelty and surprise. In light of technological
innovations that allow for the mass sharing of media messages to one’s social network via social
media sites, the opportunity for the rapid diﬀusion of emotionally charged media messages is at
a level heretofore unprecedented. Further, and of critical importance, to the extent such sharing
inﬂuences audience behaviors, from health behavior change to political action, the study of
emotion’s role in message sharing holds tremendous social signiﬁcance.
Limitations and Future Research Directions
Despite mounting evidence that emotions are not only important, but arguably central, to
a host of media eﬀects, there are still numerous ways in which research could expand to ﬁll the
Media and Emotion • 171
many gaps that still exist in our understanding of how emotions relate to media consumption
and, in turn, audiences’ lived experiences. This section highlights just a few of the more promising
research directions, including emotion’s role in the theorizing of past media eﬀects, media’s
association with emotional well-being, and the intersection of emotion and new media.
Role of Emotion in Existing Media Eﬀects Paradigms
Given media eﬀects research tends to be rooted in psychological approaches and in light of the
cognitive revolution experienced by the discipline of psychology in the 1960s and 1970s, it is
not surprising that the dominant theories of media eﬀects that have driven the vast majority of
research since the 1970s have emphasized cognition as a primary explanatory mechanism. In
light of the “discovery” of the importance of emotion in all aspects of message engagement, it is
appropriate for media eﬀects scholars to revisit these theories to consider the role emotion may
be playing in their process of eﬀects.
For example, cultivation theory, one of the most frequently referenced media eﬀects theories,
addresses the relationship between TV content and viewers’ beliefs about social reality. Speciﬁcally,
cultivation theory asserts that, compared to light TV viewers, heavy viewers perceive their social
environment as more similar to the world as portrayed on TV than it really is, and a signiﬁcant
body of evidence supports this hypothesis (e.g., Morgan, 2009; see also Chapter 5 in this volume).
Although such research acknowledges that exposure to violence can generate fear of victimization,
cultivation research is extremely limited in its consideration of emotion generally. By considering
how media diets result in the cultivation of emotions other than fear—like anger or gratitude, for
example—or how emotional portrayals might be particularly inﬂuential in cultivating a range of
content-related beliefs, this long-standing thread of media eﬀects research could be greatly enriched.
As a second example, Bandura’s social cognitive theory (SCT) revolves primarily around
the functions and processes of observational learning (Bandura, 1986; see also Chapter 7 in
this volume, and Pajares, Prestin, Chen, & Nabi, 2009). That is, by observing others’ behaviors,
including those of media ﬁgures, one may develop rules to guide subsequent actions. As
observational learning occurs via symbolic representations, the eﬀects are potentially longlasting,
and self-eﬃcacy is believed to be central to behavioral performance. SCT focuses primarily
on the cognitive elements of outcome expectancies and self-eﬃcacy. However, one can
easily imagine the role of emotion in these processes. For example, emotional experiences
(e.g., regret, pride) might be conceptualized as relevant outcomes (i.e., positive or negative
cues) that inﬂuence behavior. Also, how one feels about performing the behavior—not just
whether one thinks one can perform it—may be relevant. That is, if one believes one can
begin a program of exercise, but does not feel excited about that prospect, one may be less
likely to do it, despite having high self-eﬃcacy. Thus, integrating emotion into SCT-based
research could be both illuminating and useful.
The integration of emotion into existing theory has already begun in the context of social
comparison theory (Festinger, 1954), which asserts that people are driven to evaluate their own
opinions and abilities, and when objective assessment is not possible, people compare themselves
to others who are both similar on ability-related (though sometimes unrelated) attributes
and are close (but not too close) in ability or opinion. Discrepancy on the target dimension
then sets both the standard and the motivation for achievement. Recently, the role of emotion
as a mediator of social comparison processes has been asserted, with the idea being that it is
not the discrepancy per se but how one feels about the discrepancy that inﬂuences what
172 • Robin L. Nabi
behaviors might result. For example, Nabi and Keblusek (2014) examined the emotions media
consumers typically reported feeling while watching cosmetic surgery makeover programs and
found that diﬀerent emotional reactions (envy, hope, happiness) positively associated with social
comparison. However, only envy mediated the relationship between social comparison and
desire for plastic surgery. Exploring the conditions under which diﬀerent emotions aﬀect the
outcome of social comparison processes stimulated by media exposure would be a most welcome
avenue for future research.
In sum, a host of media eﬀects theories purport to explain how media aﬀect beliefs, attitudes,
and behaviors. However, they underplay the critical role of emotions in motivating the translation
of thoughts into action. Were research to better incorporate emotion constructs, the
explanatory power of these (and other) models and theories would surely improve.
Role of Emotion in Explaining Media Eﬀects-Related Behaviors
Media eﬀects research might be further illuminated not simply by focusing on how emotion
inﬂuences the process of eﬀects, but also how it might more directly associate with behaviors of
interest. For example, one popular and enduring line of media research involves the eﬀects of
media exposure on viewers’ body image (Levine & Harrison, 2009). Most research attempts to
explain the role of media in disordered eating behaviors by focusing on socialization, modeling,
or social comparison processes. However, absent from this discussion is the recognition that
eating (or not eating) may be tightly linked to emotional experience. The notions of “comfort
food” or drowning one’s sorrows in a tub of ice cream capture this association well. Thus, any
consideration of media’s role in inﬂuencing disordered eating or other behaviors associated
with body dysmorphia would be well-served by considering how media messages contribute to
the link between emotion and food consumption. Similarly, the positive emotions associated
with sexual behavior or the anger associated with violent behavior cannot readily be disassociated.
Future research would do well to assess not simply the emotions evoked by media messages
that, in turn, link to certain behaviors but also the emotions associated with the behaviors
themselves to gain a more complete view of the media exposure-emotion-behavior dynamic.
Media and Emotional Well-Being
A newer area of emotion and media inquiry follows the trend of positive psychology by investigating
the role of media use in well-being (see Reinecke & Oliver, 2017, for a volume focused
on this issue). Despite previous research on constructs like mood management and enjoyment,
only recently have scholars begun to explore how media use, ranging from television to serious
games to mobile apps, relates to the construct of psychological well-being and more speciﬁcally
to its underlying components of recovery (or recuperating from stress) and vitality (or feelings
of “aliveness” and energy). Contemporary research has begun to explore how media use might
aid in the recovery process through the replenishment of depleted physical, cognitive, and emotional
resources, with ﬁndings suggesting that consuming hedonic entertainment inﬂuences
relaxation and psychological detachment (e.g., Reinecke, 2009; Rieger, Reinecke, Frischlich, &
Bente, 2014). Given recovery has been linked to improved well-being, energy, positive aﬀect,
and cognitive performance as well as decreased fatigue and burnout, and given the destructive
psychological and physical eﬀects of emotional dysregulation (e.g., Gross, 2013), understanding
with more precision how media use may improve, or compromise, emotional well-being,
Media and Emotion • 173
especially via the emotions they promote, may be one of the most important lines of media
research of this and future generations (see Nabi & Prestin, 2017).
Emotion and the New Media Environment
In light of the rapid development of new technologies through which media are created and
displayed, it is essential to consider emotion’s role in these phenomena. Indeed there are
numerous possibilities. First, given the wealth of information available online, examining the
role of emotion in information seeking and content selection is fundamental (e.g., Myrick,
2017; Valentino, Hutchings, Banks, & Davis, 2008).
Second, as noted earlier, new technologies aﬀord the opportunity for social sharing: not
simply sharing emotionally evocative stories but sharing personal insights and life events,
particularly through social media. How emotions inﬂuence what is shared via social media,
by whom, and to what eﬀect (on both self and others) have become questions of great social
interest (see Tettegah, 2016, for a broad overview). Research on such issues is developing
rapidly, though no clear syntheses have emerged as yet. However, a particularly compelling
question is: How does the use of social media inﬂuence emotions which, in turn, inﬂuence
psychological health? Do Facebook posts expressing anxiety actually generate supportive
comments that build closer relationships, and thus enhance subjective well-being? Does reading
posts boasting of others’ accomplishments produce feelings of envy, and in turn create
distance with online friends, thus diminishing well-being? As users learn about events in
their friends’ lives—relationship break-ups, engagements, illnesses, and so on—not only are
emotions likely to shift (e.g., Muise, Christoﬁdes, & Desmarais, 2009), but behaviors consistent
with those emotions (e.g., oﬀering or seeking social support) are likely to shift as well,
which may have important implications for psychological well-being worthy of investigation.
Third, given the explosion of user-generated content on the internet, it behooves us to consider
how the emotions that people experience are expressed via the content they generate. For
example, it is likely that blogging could serve as a relatively productive way to vent anger and
frustration or generate feelings of well-being via social connection (e.g., McDaniel, Coyne, &
Holmes, 2012), whereas excitement to express creativity may lead to the creation and posting of
videos on YouTube. Such activities may contribute to feelings of self-actualization (Shao, 2009)
and, in turn, life satisfaction. Indeed given that mastery within leisure experiences is central to
the leisure activity–subjective well-being link (Kuykendall, Tay, & Ng, 2015), the creation of
media content may serve as a leisure activity that exceeds the potential of mere consumption to
inﬂuence subjective and psychological well-being.
Conclusion
As social psychological research evolved from behaviorism to cognitivism, it was generally
accepted that what we think drives our actions. Given increasing recognition of the centrality
of emotion to the human experience, it is perhaps more fair to say that it is emotion, in conjunction
with thought, that leads to action. Further, without emotional impetus, the thoughts
we do have are less likely to translate into behavior. Clearly, this is a highly dynamic process
in which cognitions, emotions, and behaviors inﬂuence one another over time, but in essence,
this conceptualization indicates that to understand media eﬀects processes and outcomes, we
must more carefully examine the many ways in which emotions may be relevant. This
174 • Robin L. Nabi
includes considering emotions not just as simple outcomes of media exposure but looking at
a range of emotional experiences as the stimulus for and moderators of a far broader range of
outcomes than we have considered to this point. To do so will surely improve our ability to
understand and explain the diverse and exciting ways media impact our personal, social, and
emotional lives.
References
Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Eﬀects of violent video games on aggressive behavior,
aggressive cognition, aggressive aﬀect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A
meta-analytic review of the scientiﬁc literature. Psychological Science, 12, 353–359. doi:10.1111/
1467-9280.00366
Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53,
27–51. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood
Cliﬀs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2007). Angry emotions and aggressive behaviors. In
G. Steﬀgen & M. Gollwitzer (Eds.), Emotions and aggressive behavior (pp. 61–75). Ashland,
OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
Berger, J., & Milkman, K. L. (2012). What makes online content viral? Journal of Marketing
Research, 49, 192–205. doi:10.1509/jmr.10.0353
Cantor, J. (2009). Fright reactions to mass media. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media eﬀects:
Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 287–303). New York, NY: Routledge.
Carnagey, N. L., Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2007). The eﬀect of video game violence on
physiological desensitization to real-life violence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43,
489–496. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.003
Chadwick, A. E. (2015). Toward a theory of persuasive hope: Eﬀects of cognitive appraisals, hope
appeals, and hope in the context of climate change. Health Communication, 30, 598–611.
doi:10.1080/10410236.2014.916777
Cline, V. B., Croft, R. G., & Courrier, S. (1973). Desensitization of children to television violence.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 360–365. doi:10.1037/h0034945
Dunlop, S. M., Wakeﬁeld, M., & Kashima, Y. (2009). Something to talk about: Aﬀective responses
to public health mass media campaigns and behavior change. Journal of Health & Mass Communication,
1(3/4), 211–234.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.
doi:10.1177/001872675400700202
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Gross, J. J. (2013). Emotion regulation: Taking stock and moving forward. Emotion, 13, 359–365.
doi:10.1037/a0032135
Haidt, J., & Morris, J. P. (2009). Finding the self in self-transcendent emotions. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Science, 106, 7687–7688. doi:10.1073/pnas.0903076106
Harber, K. D., & Cohen, D. J. (2005). The emotional broadcaster theory of social sharing. Journal
of Language and Social Psychology, 24, 382–400. doi:10.1177/0261927X05281426
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press.
Izard, C. E. (1977). Human emotions. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Izard, C. E. (2007). Basic emotions, natural kinds, emotion schemas, and a new paradigm. Perspectives
on Psychological Science, 2, 260–280. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00044.x
Media and Emotion • 175
Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. (1955). Personal inﬂuence. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Knobloch, S. (2003). Mood adjustment via mass communication. Journal of Communication, 53,
233–250. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2003.tb02588.x
Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2015). The selective exposure self- and aﬀect-management (SESAM)
model: Applications in the realms of race, politics, and health. Communication Research, 42,
959–985. doi:10.1177/0093650214539173
Krcmar, M. (2009). Individual diﬀerences in media eﬀects. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver
(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and eﬀects (pp. 237–250). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Kubey, R. W., & Peluso, T. (1990). Emotional response as a cause of interpersonal news diﬀusion:
The case of the space shuttle tragedy. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 34, 69–76.
doi:10.1080/08838159009386726
Kuykendall, L., Tay, L., & Ng, V. (2015). Leisure engagement and subjective well-being: A
meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 364–403. doi:10.1037/a0038508
Lang, A. (2000). The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. Journal of Communication,
50, 46–71. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02833.x
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Leventhal, H. (1970). Findings and theory in the study of fear communications. In L. Berkowitz
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 119–186). New York, NY: Academic
Press. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60091-X
Levine, M. P., & Harrison, K. (2009). Eﬀects of media on eating disorders and body image. In
J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media eﬀects: Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp.
490–516). New York, NY: Routledge.
McDaniel, B. T., Coyne, S. M., & Holmes, E. K. (2012). New mothers and media use: Association
between blogging, social networking, and maternal well-being. Maternal and Child Health Journal,
16, 1509–1517. doi:10.1007/s10995-011-0918-2
Meczkowski, E. J., Dillard, J. P., & Shen, L. (2016). Threat appeals and persuasion: Seeking and
ﬁnding the elusive curvilinear eﬀect. Communication Monographs, 83, 1–23. doi:10.1080/
03637751.2016.1158412
Morgan, M. (2009). Cultivation analysis and media eﬀects. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Eds.),
The SAGE handbook of media processes and eﬀects (pp. 69–82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Muise, A., Christoﬁdes, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009). More information than you ever wanted: Does
Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12, 441–
444. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0263
Mullin, C. R., & Linz, D. (1995). Desensitization and resensitization to violence against
women: Eﬀects of exposure to sexually violent ﬁlms on judgments of domestic violence
victims. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 449–459. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.69.3.449
Myrick, J. G. (2017). The role of emotions and social cognitive variables in online health information
seeking processes and eﬀects. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 422–433. doi:10.1016/j.
chb.2016.11.071
Myrick, J. G., & Nabi, R. L. (2017). Fear arousal and health and risk messaging. In R. Parrott
(Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of health and risk message design and processing. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.266
Nabi, R. L. (1999). A cognitive-functional model for the eﬀects of discrete negative emotions on
information processing, attitude change, and recall. Communication Theory, 9, 292–320.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00172.x
Nabi, R. L. (2003). The framing eﬀects of emotion: Can discrete emotions inﬂuence information recall
and policy preference? Communication Research, 30, 224–247. doi:10.1177/0093650202250881
176 • Robin L. Nabi
Nabi, R. L. (2007). Emotion and persuasion: A social cognitive perspective. In D. R. RoskosEwoldsen
& J. Monahan (Eds.), Social cognition and communication: Theories and methods
(pp. 377–398). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Nabi, R. L. (2015). Emotional ﬂow in persuasive health messages. Health Communication, 30,
114–124. doi:10.1080/10410236.2014.974129
Nabi, R. L. (2017). Emotion in media persuasion. In P. Roessler (Ed.), International encyclopedia
of media eﬀects. Boston, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0161
Nabi, R. L., Finnerty, K., Domschke, T., & Hull, S. (2006). Does misery love company? Exploring
the therapeutic eﬀects of TV viewing on regretted experiences. Journal of Communication, 56,
689–706. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00315.x
Nabi, R. L., & Keblusek, L. (2014). Inspired by hope, motivated by envy: Comparing the eﬀects of
discrete emotions in the process of social comparison to media ﬁgures. Media Psychology, 17,
208–234. doi:10.1080/15213269.2013.878663
Nabi, R. L., & Myrick, J. G. (2019). Uplifting fear appeals: Considering the role of hope in fear-based
persuasive messages. Health Communication, 34, 463–474. doi:10.1080/10410236.2017.1422847
Nabi, R. L., & Prestin, A. (2017). The tie that binds: Reﬂecting on emotion’s role in the relationship
between media use and subjective well-being. In L. Reinecke & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Handbook
of media use and well-being: International perspectives on theory and research on positive
media eﬀects (pp. 51–64). New York, NY: Routledge.
Oliver, M. B. (1994). Contributions of sexual portrayals to viewers’ responses to graphic horror.
Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 38, 1–17. doi:10.1080/08838159409364242
Oliver, M. B. (2008). Tender aﬀective states as predictors of entertainment preference. Journal of
Communication, 58, 40–61. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00373.x
Oliver, M. B., & Nabi, R. L. (2004). Special Issue: Conceptualizing media enjoyment. Media Psychology,
14(4).
Oliver, M. B., Raney, A. A., Slater, M. D., Appel, M., Hartmann, T., Bartsch, A., … Das, H. H. J.
(2018). Self-transcendent media experiences: Taking meaningful media to a higher level. Journal
of Communication, 68, 380–389. doi:10.1093/joc/jqx020
Ortony, A., Clore, G. L., & Collins, A. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
Pajares, F., Prestin, A., Chen, J., & Nabi, R. L. (2009). Social cognitive theory and mass media
eﬀects. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and eﬀects
(pp. 283–298). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Plutchik, R. (1980). Emotion: A psychoevolutionary synthesis. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Raney, A. A. (2003). Disposition-based theories of enjoyment. In J. Bryant, D. Roskos-Ewoldsen,
& J. Cantor (Eds.), Communication and emotion: Essays in honor of Dolf Zillmann (pp. 61–84).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Raney, A. A. (2004). Expanding disposition theory: Reconsidering character liking, moral evaluations,
and enjoyment. Communication Theory, 14, 348–369. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00319.x
Raney, A. A., & Bryant, J. (2002). Moral judgment and crime drama: An integrated theory of
enjoyment. Journal of Communication, 52, 402–415. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02552.x
Reinecke, L. (2009). Games and recovery: The use of video and computer games to recuperate from
stress and strain. Journal of Media Psychology, 21, 126–142. doi:10.1027/1864-1105.21.3.126
Reinecke, L., & Oliver, M. B. (Eds.). (2017). The Routledge handbook of media use and well-being:
International perspectives on theory and research on positive media eﬀects. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Rieger, D., Reinecke, L., Frischlich, L., & Bente, G. (2014). Media entertainment and well being:
Linking hedonic and eudaimonic entertainment experience to media-induced recovery and
vitality. Journal of Communication, 64, 456–478. doi:10.1111/jcom.12097
Media and Emotion • 177
Rimé, B. (1995). The social sharing of emotion as a source for the social knowledge of emotion. In
J. A. Russell, J.-M. Fernández-Dols, A. S. R. Manstead, & J. C. Wellenkamp (Eds.), Everyday
conceptions of emotion: An introduction to the psychology, anthropology, and linguistics of emotion
(pp. 475–489). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Rimé, B., Mesquita, B., Philippot, P., & Boca, S. (1991). Beyond the emotional event: Six studies
on the social sharing of emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 5, 435–465. doi:10.1080/
02699939108411052
Rimé, B., Philippot, P., Finkenauer, C., Legast, S., Moorkens, P., & Tornqvist, J. (1994). Mental
rumination and social sharing in current life emotion (Unpublished manuscript). University of
Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Rogers, R. W. (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal
of Psychology, 91, 93–114. doi:10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803
Rogers, R. W. (1983). Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change:
A revised theory of protection motivation. In J. T. Cacioppo & R. E. Petty (Eds.), Social psychophysiology
(pp. 153–176). New York: Guilford.
Russell, J. A. (1980). The circumplex model of aﬀect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
39, 1161–1178. doi:10.1037/h0077714
Scherer, K. R. (1984). On the nature and function of emotion: A component process approach. In
K. R. Scherer & P. Ekman (Eds.), Approaches to emotion (pp. 293–318). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Shao, G. (2009). Understanding the appeal of user‐generated media: A uses and gratiﬁcation perspective.
Internet Research, 19, 7–25. doi:10.1108/10662240910927795
Tamborini, R., Bowman, N. D., Eden, A., Grizzard, M., & Organ, A. (2010). Deﬁning media enjoyment
as the satisfaction of intrinsic needs. Journal of Communication, 60, 758–777. doi:10.1111/
j.1460-2466.2010.01513.x
Tannenbaum, M. B., Hepler, J., Zimmerman, R. S., Saul, L., Jacobs, S., Wilson, K., &
Albarracín, D. (2015). Appealing to fear: A meta-analysis of fear appeal eﬀectiveness and
theories. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 1178–1204. doi:10.1037/a0039729
Tettegah, S. Y. (Ed.). (2016). Emotions, technology, and social media. London, UK: Elsevier.
Turner, M. M. (2007). Using emotion in risk communication: The anger activism model. Public
Relations Review, 33, 114–119. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.11.013
Valentino, N. A., Hutchings, V. L., Banks, A. J., & Davis, A. K. (2008). Is a worried citizen a good
citizen? Emotions, political information seeking, and learning via the Internet. Political Psychology,
29, 247–273. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00625.x
Weaver, J. B. (2000). Personality and entertainment preferences. In D. Zillmann & P. Vorderer
(Eds.), Media entertainment: The psychology of its appeal (pp. 235–248). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Wilson, B. J., & Drogos, K. L. (2009). Children and adolescents: Distinctive audiences of media
content. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and eﬀects
(pp. 469–485). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model.
Communication Monographs, 59, 329–349. doi:10.1080/03637759209376276
Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for eﬀective public
health campaigns. Health Education & Behavior, 27, 591–615. doi:10.1177/
109019810002700506
Zillmann, D. (1980). Anatomy of suspense. In P. H. Tannenbaum (Ed.), The entertainment functions
of television (pp. 133–163). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Zillmann, D. (1983). Transfer of excitation in emotional behavior. In J. T. Cacioppo & R. E. Petty
(Eds.), Social psychophysiology: A sourcebook (pp. 215–240). New York: Guilford.
178 • Robin L. Nabi
Zillmann, D. (1988). Mood management: Using entertainment to full advantage. In L. Donohew
& H. E. Sypher (Eds.), Communication, social cognition, and aﬀect (pp. 147–171). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Zillmann, D. (1991). Empathy: Aﬀect from bearing witness to the emotions of others. In J. Bryant
& D. Zillmann (Eds.), Responding to the screen: Reception and reaction processes (pp. 135–167).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Zillmann, D. (2000). Mood management in the context of selective exposure theory. Communication
Yearbook, 23, 103–123. doi:10.1080/23808985.2000.11678971
Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1984). Eﬀects of massive exposure to pornography. In N. M. Malamuth
& E. Donnerstein (Eds.), Pornography and sexual aggression (pp. 115–138). New York, NY:
Academic.