Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

The influence of 'Personal Influence' on the study of audiences

By Sonia Livingstone
Topics: H Social Sciences (General)
Publisher: Sage Publications
Year: 2006
DOI identifier: 10.1177/0002716206292325
OAI identifier:
Provided by: LSE Research Online
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • (external link)
  • (external link)
  • (external link)
  • Suggested articles


    1. (1987). 11 In his memoirs, Lowenthal, a founder member of the Frankfurt Institute of Social Research, discusses how he found it easier than Adorno 'to combine the theoretical and historical outlook with the empirical requisites of sociological research'
    2. (1985). 13 Symptomatic of contemporary uses and gratifications, the typology of the active viewer proposed by Levy and Windahl
    3. (1969). 14 The roots of the disputes in media theory over social psychology – i.e. about the autonomy and rationality of individuals subject to media influence - can be traced back to the 1920s and 30s. Adorno's
    4. (1989). 5 Yet misreadings persist: for Sproule
    5. (1988). 6 Thus the social psychology of the group is used to account for the diffusion of media effects, thereby linking interpersonal and mass communications in a manner often neglected in subsequent research (although see Hawkins,
    6. (1980). 9 Katz characterizes each decade in the history of mass communications as an oscillation between conceptions of active and passive viewers, and hence between minimal effects and powerful media (Katz,
    7. (1955). A paradigm for the study of the sociology of knowledge.
    8. (1993). Active audience theory: Pendulums and pitfalls. doi
    9. (1988). Advancing Communication Science: Merging Mass and Interpersonal Processes.
    10. (1980). also the opening pages of Morley’s Nationwide Audience
    11. (1969). An episode in the history of social research: A memoir. In doi
    12. (1987). An Unmastered Past: The Autobiographical Reflections of Leo Lowenthal.
    13. (1998). Audience research at the crossroads: The 'implied audience' in media theory. doi
    14. (2005). Audiences and Publics: When Cultural Engagement Matters for the Public Sphere. doi
    15. (1993). Can cultural studies find true happiness in communication? doi
    16. (1953). Communication and Persuasion. New Haven: doi
    17. (1989). Communication as culture: essays on media and society. doi
    18. (1960). Communication research and the image of society: Convergence of two traditions. doi
    19. (1987). Communications research since Lazarsfeld. doi
    20. (2003). Critical research at Columbia: Lazarsfeld's and Merton's "Mass Communication, Popular Taste, and Organized Social Action". In
    21. (1989). Culture Inc.: The Corporate Takeover of Public Expression. doi
    22. (1994). Defining Media Studies: Reflections on the Future of the Field.
    23. (1989). Democracy and American mass communication theory:
    24. (2003). Editors' introduction. In
    25. (1990). Five traditions in search of the audience. doi
    26. (1987). From reduction to linkage: the long view of the micromacro debate. In
    27. (2002). Gendering the internet: Claims, controversies and cultures. doi
    28. (1993). Getting the Message: News, Truth and Power. doi
    29. (1999). Globalization and Culture. doi
    30. (2005). Interface://Culture: The world wide web as political resources and aesthetic form. Frederiksberg, Denmark: Samfundslitteratur Press/Nordicom. doi
    31. (1956). Interpersonal Relations and Mass Communications: Studies in the Flow of Influence.
    32. (2006). Introduction. In doi
    33. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. doi
    34. (1986). Living with television: The dynamics of the cultivation process. In doi
    35. (1998). Making Sense of Television: doi
    36. (1959). Mass communications research and the study of popular culture: An editorial note on a possible future for this journal.
    37. (1992). Media Events: The Live Broadcasting of History. Cambridge: doi
    38. (1966). Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study. doi
    39. (1987). Natural Audiences: Qualitative Research on Media Uses and Effects.
    40. (1978). Of mutual interest. doi
    41. (1980). On conceptualising media effects.
    42. (1992). On parenting a paradigm: Gabriel Tarde's agenda for opinion and communication research.
    43. (1996). On the continuing problems of media effects research.
    44. (1973). On the use of the mass media for important things. doi
    45. (1955). Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communication. doi
    46. (1989). Progressive propaganda critics and the magic bullet myth. doi
    47. (1985). REACHING OUT: A future for gratifications research. In doi
    48. (1994). Reflections on the encoding/decoding model. In
    49. (1998). Relationships between media and audiences: Prospects for future research. In T. Liebes &
    50. (1988). Relocating the site of the audience. doi
    51. (1941). Remarks on administrative and critical communications research.
    52. (1992). Rereading Stuart Hall's encoding/decoding model. doi
    53. (2003). Researching Audiences.
    54. (1998). Rhetorics on the Web: Hyperreading and Critical Literacy. In I. Snyder (Ed.), Page to Screen: Taking Literacy Into the Electronic Era (pp. doi
    55. (1969). Scientific experiences of a European scholar in America. In doi
    56. (1994). Social theory and the media. In
    57. (1989). Socio-psychological construction and the mass communication effects dialectic. doi
    58. (1996). Studying Audiences: The shock of the real.
    59. (1981). Surrogates, institutes, and the search for convergences: The research style of Paul F. doi
    60. (2006). Taking audience research into the age of new media: Old problems and new challenges. doi
    61. (1992). Television, Audiences and Cultural Studies. doi
    62. (1983). The "new" rhetoric of mass communication research: A longer view. doi
    63. (2004). The challenge of changing audiences: Or, what is the audience researcher to do in the internet age? doi
    64. (2003). The changing nature of audiences: From the mass audience to the interactive media user. doi
    65. (1985). The concept of audience activity. In doi
    66. (1973). The Dialectical Imagination: doi
    67. (1990). The Export of Meaning: Cross-Cultural Readings of Dallas. doi
    68. (2000). The Internet: An Ethnographic Approach. doi
    69. (1980). The Nationwide Audience: Structure and Decoding. London: British Film Institute.
    70. (1944). The People's Choice. doi
    71. (1969). The Politics of Community Conflict: The Fluoridation Decision. doi
    72. (1991). The qualitative study of media audiences. doi
    73. (1983). The shaping of American social psychology: A personal perspective from the periphery. doi
    74. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. In
    75. (1989). The tasks of a critical theory of society. In doi
    76. (1957). The two-step flow of communication: An up-to-date report on an hypothesis. doi
    77. (1979). The uses of Becker, Blumler and Swanson. doi
    78. (1974). The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratification Research. doi
    79. (1997). The work of Elihu Katz: Conceptualizing media effects in context. In
    80. (1972). Traditional and critical theory. In M. Horkheimer (Ed.), Critical Theory: Selected Essays. doi
    81. (1974). Uses and gratifications research: a critique and a sociological alternative. In
    82. (1991). What middle-range theories are. doi

    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.