17

Media-Related Fear

Short-Term and Enduring Consequences

Cynthia A. Hoffner and Elizabeth L. Cohen

Fear and Anxiety in the Context of Emotion Theory

Threats and danger are familiar features in the media landscape, and fear and anxiety are common emotional responses to these depictions. Several recent reviews have addressed responses to frightening media, most with a focus on children (e.g., Cantor, 2009). This chapter addresses fear in relation to media from a broader perspective by examining not only immediate and lingering fear responses to media, but also fear-related media influences on risk perceptions, and the role of media-related fear in intergroup relations. A framework grounded in emotion theory is presented first, as a way to integrate media research in these three related areas of scholarship.

Broadly defined, fear is an aversive emotional response to threat or danger (Ohman, 2008; Rosen & Schulkin, 1998). Many words in the English lexicon describe fear-related responses, reflecting subtle differences in emotional experience. Yet their usage also reveals a distinction between the core emotion of fear (e.g., fear, terror) and anxiety (e.g., anxiety, worry, dread). Ohman (2008, p. 710) contends that fear and anxiety differ somewhat as subjective experiences, but argues that they are “overlapping, aversive, activated states centered on threat.” Given the complexities of media offerings and the diverse issues explored in research, a variety of terms are used in the literature to describe fear-related responses. Because this chapter draws connections among different bodies of literature that have studied related phenomena, we consider the concept of fear broadly in our discussion.

Elicitation of Fear

Appraisal theories of emotion provide one way of thinking about the elicitation of fear in the media context. According to Ellsworth and Scherer (2003, p. 573), “the basic premise of appraisal theories is that the organism's evaluation of its circumstances (current or remembered or imagined) plays a crucial role in the elicitation and differentiation of its emotions.” Appraisals can range from rapid, automatic processing to more deliberate, effortful processing (Clore & Ortony, 2008; Lazarus, 1991). Most appraisal theories agree that a small set of appraisal dimensions combine to produce specific emotions such as fear, anger, or sadness. In appraisal terms, fear is defined as an anticipatory emotion that is evoked when an individual appraises a stimulus as a threat to personal well-being, including physical safety, goals, or plans. Fear is associated with appraisals of low power or minimal control over the situation. The appraised importance of what is threatened and the degree of disruption or harm posed by the threat influence the intensity of fear (Ellsworth & Scherer, 2003; Lazarus, 1991; Ohman, 2008). Appraisal theorists also acknowledge that memory can play a role in the elicitation of emotion (Clore & Ortony, 2008). For example, environmental stimuli can activate fear-related memories or trigger conditioned fear responses (LeDoux, 1996; Ohman, 2008).

Consequences of Fear

According to evolutionary approaches to emotion, fear evolved to maximize chances of survival by alerting organisms to danger and motivating self-protection (Tooby & Cosmides, 2008). Thus, fear is associated with increased environmental vigilance and a tendency to perceive stimuli as threatening, which can intensify fear through reciprocal influence (Ohman, 2008). In terms of behavioral responses, escape or avoidance is likely when an individual has little perceived ability to cope with a threat (Lazarus, 1991). But if the threat seems imminent and inescapable, fear may lead to attack – that is, fight rather than flight (Rosen & Schulkin, 1998). Yet behavioral responses to fear are determined by multiple factors. Ohman (1986) argued that the urge to escape from an attacking animal is relatively unproblematic, but that threatening social contexts can complicate behavioral motivations by introducing competing concerns, such as the need to avoid harm but also look brave in front of others. Moreover, protection from a threat sometimes requires more than simple escape, and the perceived efficacy of a protective action will influence whether it is taken (Witte, 1992). In addition, fear and other emotions (especially anger) sometimes co-occur in response to threat, leading to conflicting behavioral motivations (Lazarus, 1991; Lerner & Keltner, 2001). Finally, some scholars argue that the influence of emotion on behavior is largely indirect. Baumeister, Vohs, DeWall, and Zhang (2007) contend that emotion shapes behavior primarily through feedback, appraisal, and learning. Thus, in addition to directly motivating self-protective actions, fear may lead people to anticipate particular outcomes and alter future behavior.

Emotion Regulation Processes

The experience of fear also often motivates efforts to regulate emotion (Gross & Thompson, 2007; Lazarus, 1991). During media exposure, people may use cognitive or behavioral strategies to manage or reduce fear (Cantor, 2009), or may appraise their fear in a way that facilitates enjoyment (Bartsch, Vorderer, Mangold, & Viehoff, 2008). Media-related fear and anxiety can play a longer-term role in risk perceptions and intergroup relations, and the ways that people cope in these contexts – by actively addressing perceived threats versus regulating emotional responses – can have important individual and social implications (Kemper, 2000; Loewenstein, Weber, Hsee, & Welch, 2001).

Immediate and Lingering Fear Responses to Media

Threats such as crime, interpersonal conflict, and terrorism depicted in entertainment and news media often lead to fear, despite the fact that these portrayals usually pose no imminent threat to the audience (Cantor, 2009). Why do such messages evoke fear, and what are the consequences of fear during and after media use? This section examines these questions.

Factors Influencing Fear Responses

Responses to Direct Fear-Evoking Depictions

People often have direct fear responses to stimuli and situations depicted in the media. Angry, threatening faces, animals such as snakes and spiders, depictions of blood or injuries, and dark, isolated locations are all common elements of fear-evoking media portrayals. Evidence suggests that environmental cues like these can evoke fear automatically (LeDoux, 1996; Ohman, 2008). Scholars contend that humans are biologically prepared to develop fears of certain stimuli that posed a threat to our ancestors' survival. Ohman (2008) asserted that the four main types of fears – social fears (e.g., aggression, rejection), animals fears, fears related to death, blood and injury, and fear of wide open and closed spaces – are associated with adaptive behavioral systems shaped through evolution, and correspond to the most common types of phobias. Cantor (2009) argued that direct fear responses to specific media stimuli might be the result of stimulus generalization (a term derived from classical conditioning), in which depictions that resemble fear-evoking stimuli evoke a similar, but reduced, fear response. Thus, a spider shown onscreen may arouse fear, in part, because its perceptual features are similar to a real spider one might actually encounter. Less realistic-looking portrayals, or even verbal references, may evoke fear among people who are able to construct vivid mental images of fear objects (Sparks, Sparks, & Gray, 1995).

Sound also plays a role in evoking fear responses to media. People respond emotionally to vocal expressions of emotion and to a wide variety of environmental sounds, although context and past experience can modify responses (Bachorowski & Owren, 2008; Bradley & Lang, 2000). Vocalizations such as screams, as well as other sounds, can signify threat and function as warnings. Even when no threat is present, as when viewing media, automatic responses to sound cues can elicit fear. Music also can evoke a range of emotions, including fear and anxiety (A. J. Cohen, 2001).

Individuals differ in what frightens them based on personal history and patterns of appraisal (Ellsworth & Scherer, 2003). Preexisting fears can be evoked by media stimuli that resemble fear-evoking objects or remind people of frightening past experiences (LeDoux, 1996; Ohman, 2008). Neuendorf and Sparks (1988) found that prior fear of particular objects (e.g., dead bodies and cemeteries) was associated with more fear while viewing films that involved those cues. Similarly, people who have experienced trauma feel greater fear or anxiety in response to related events in the media (e.g., Long, Chamberlain, & Vincent, 1994).

Responses to Stories About Other People

Another factor in media-induced fear is responsiveness to other people. According to appraisal theory (Lazarus, 1991), fear arises from a perceived threat to personal well-being, which can include a threat to someone or something an individual values. Most entertainment and news media feature stories about people, and often show them in dangerous circumstances.

People respond more emotionally to the circumstances or experiences of people whom they like or care about. According to disposition theory (Zillmann, 2006), affective dispositions toward characters are based on moral evaluations, with approval of actions leading to more liking and caring for the characters, and greater emotional involvement in depicted events. When danger threatens a character, emotional responses are a function of both affect toward the character and the nature of the feared outcome, with more fear associated with severe threats to liked characters. Beyond affective dispositions, there are at least two ways people can be involved with media figures. Parasocial interaction entails responding to a media persona as a friend or interaction partner, which may develop into a long-term parasocial bond (Giles, 2002). Identification occurs when media users imagine themselves as a character, effectively taking on the character's identity while viewing a film or playing a videogame (J. Cohen, 2001; Klimmt, Hefner, & Vorderer, 2009). In general, studies show that involvement with endangered media persona enhances fear and suspense (e.g., Hartmann, Stuke, & Daschmann, 2008; Hoffner & Cantor, 1991).

Empathy is a key individual difference that moderates emotional responses to other people. There are many definitions of empathy in the literature, but most include empathic concern, or feeling for another person, and emotion-sharing, or feeling as another person (Batson, 1991; Davis, 1994). Empathy is enhanced when there is a close attachment to the other person, and may occur based on anticipated responses of that individual. Thus, fear during suspenseful scenes may be partially a function of empathy with expected responses of unsuspecting characters, especially those with whom the viewer has a close affective bond (Zillmann, 2006). Tamborini (1996) proposed that empathy should lead to greater negative emotion in response to horror films, primarily due to distress at witnessing the pain and suffering of other people. Several studies of responses to both entertainment and news have yielded findings consistent with this proposal (e.g., Harris et al., 2000; Hoekstra, Harris, & Helmick, 1999; Hoffner, Fujioka, Ye, & Ibrahim, 2009) demonstrating that empathy plays an important role in responding emotionally to the threat of harm to others.

The structure and format of threat-related stories also can influence appraisals and emotions (Lazarus, 1991; Mikos, 1996). In a narrative, cues that signal an impending threat can affect how viewers appraise subsequent seemingly-innocuous events, and can increase suspense and worry about endangered characters. Research with both children and adults has shown that fear and worry are intensified by forewarning of a threat in a scary program, and reduced by prior knowledge that the characters will escape harm (de Wied, Hoffman, & Roskos-Ewoldsen, 1997; Hoffner, 1997; Hoffner & Cantor, 1990). Music enhances foreboding in film narratives, and heightens emotional responses to scary episodes, such as the shower scene in Psycho (A. J. Cohen, 2001). To some extent, fear responses depend on an understanding of genre conventions that allow media users to recognize signals of impending danger, or understand when threats are not credible or are likely to be addressed effectively by the characters (Mikos, 1996; Zillmann, 2006). Absorption or transportation into a narrative enhances emotional involvement and should increase the potential for fear to develop in response to threat portrayals (Green & Brock, 2000). As such, the increasing use of mobile devices for content delivery may alter media users' emotional responses, due to differences in screen size, level of concentration, and other factors (cf. Spence, Lachlan, & Westerman, 2009).

“This Could Happen to Me”

Fear reactions to media are also related to the perception that portrayed events are a threat to personal well-being. Even if depicted events are fictional, people may believe or imagine that similar events could happen to them or people they care for. Media scholars (e.g., Sparks et al., 1995) have invoked Frijda's law of apparent reality when discussing how the reality status of media depictions may alter emotional responses. Frijda (2007) argued that information that is appraised as “real” has stronger emotional impact. By real he does not refer to objective reality status, but to meanings that are experienced as emotionally real. Factors that impact perceived realism include the extent to which a media depiction resembles reality, its plausibility, and its likelihood of occurrence in the real world. Children gradually come to understand these concepts, yet judging the reality status of media messages is complicated even for adults (Busselle & Greenberg, 2000; Cantor, 2009). Objectively unreal events may seem real because they are actually shown, especially when they resemble reality (Sparks et al., 1995). Both children and adults respond with greater fear to fictional violence that occurs in live-action programs than in cartoons or between puppets (e.g., Gunter & Furnham, 1984; Osborn & Endsley, 1971).

Judgments about plausibility, or whether fictional depictions could occur in real life, depend on personal beliefs and interpretations. Most older children and adults, for example, believe that vampires, werewolves, and zombies do not actually exist. Yet even seemingly impossible portrayals such as those on the television series True Blood, which features vampires and werewolves, share many features with real life, including interpersonal threats, violence, and death. These kinds of portrayals may remind viewers of threats that definitely do exist, and thus arouse fear that carries over into their lives (Cantor, 2009). From Frijda's (2007) perspective, the meanings of these depictions may be emotionally real. Moreover, the line between reality and fantasy is blurred, even for adults. Some people believe strongly in scientifically unsubstantiated supernatural or paranormal phenomena, and others are willing to consider that such phenomena may be real (Cantor, 2004; Sparks et al., 1995).

Real-world experience may influence estimates of probability or likelihood of depicted events, but aspects of media portrayals also play a role. For example, vivid and frequent depictions of rare dangers, such as shark attacks or kidnappings, can increase perceived probability of threats. Perceiving a threat as more likely should lead to a greater sense of vulnerability and fear, which may affect long-term risk perceptions (Loewenstein et al., 2001).

Finally, connections between media threat portrayals and people's own lives tend to increase perceptions of personal vulnerability. Geographical proximity influences perceived susceptibility to threatening events, such as crime or natural disasters (Wise, Eckler, Kononova, & Littau, 2009). News reports of threatening events that happened nearby, especially those that are random and unpredictable, have been shown to evoke more fear than those that happened at a distance (e.g., Heath, 1984; Schlenger, 2004; Smith & Wilson, 2000). Perceived proximity of fictional threats also affects emotional responses. In a study of reactions to a scary televised narrative, children who believed that the depicted threat existed locally were more frightened than those who did not (Cantor & Hoffner, 1990). Finally, perceived similarity to people in frightening media portrayals – such as children exposed to news stories about child victims – can increase fear (e.g., Becker-Blease, Finkelhor, & Turner, 2008; Cantor & Nathanson, 1996).

Consequences of Fear Responses to Media

Emotion Regulation During Media Use

Emotions experienced during media use can motivate efforts at emotion regulation (Gross & Thompson, 2007; Lazarus, 1991). Although fear in the context of media use may be appraised as a positive experience (cf. Bartsch et al., 2008), fear is often experienced as aversive, or appraised as situationally inappropriate, such as when viewing a scary film with peers. Efforts to reduce fear during media use include attentional deployment (e.g., distraction or looking away), cognitive change (e.g., reappraising a threat as unrealistic), response modulation (e.g., suppressing fear expressions), and situation modification (e.g., asking a friend to coview). When fear is overwhelming, people sometimes choose to end exposure (Hoffner, 1995). Paradoxically, witnessing frightened characters may lead some individuals to continue attending to a media offering. Research shows that observing other people express fear (indicating vulnerability rather than threat) can motivate approach behaviors and prosocial responses (Marsh & Ambady, 2007). Hoffner (1995) found that adolescents who were higher in other-focused empathic concern tended to manage fear from scary films through reappraisal, whereas those who were higher in self-focused personal distress tended to use distraction. She argued that “people who experience empathic concern (and who worry about the characters) presumably would not want to risk missing the outcome of suspenseful events by distracting themselves” (p. 341).

Media use often occurs in the company of others, and new forms of technology are increasing opportunities for shared media experiences (Ducheneaut, Moore, Oehlberg, Thornton, & Nickell, 2008). The presence and reactions of other people can alter emotional responses by influencing appraisals of threat and coping potential (Manstead & Fischer, 2001) and by providing comfort and support (Burleson & MacGeorge, 2002). Studies have shown that media-induced fear motivates both children and adults to seek physical contact, and leads coviewers to offer comfort to distressed companions (Harris et al., 2000; Hoffner, 1995; Hoffner & Haefner, 1997). Wilson and Weiss (1993) found that coviewing a scary program with an older sibling (compared to viewing alone) reduced preschoolers' self-reported fear, presumably because older siblings modeled minimal fear, made comments related to emotions, and offered nonverbal comfort. In contrast, in a study of children's past coviewing experiences, those who watched with older coviewers reported feeling more fear (Hoffner & Haefner, 1997). This finding is likely to reflect the selection of more frightening programs by older individuals. Together, these studies illustrate the complex ways that the social context of media use can influence fear.

Fear and Selective Media Exposure

Selective exposure to media may function, in part, as a means of regulating emotions initially elicited by media use (Bryant & Davies, 2006; Gross & Thompson, 2007). Media exposure has always been selective, but opportunities for information seeking and for using media to regulate emotions have increased exponentially with the advent of the Internet, the diffusion of digital video recorders, and the proliferation of mobile media.

Humans have a need to monitor their environment, especially during periods of crisis or danger. In threatening situations, information can reduce uncertainty, facilitate self-protection, and help reestablish a sense of control (Tooby & Cosmides, 2008). Thus, when faced with an external threat such as September 11, people may seek news exposure as a way of coping with stress or anxiety, even when those emotions were initially elicited by news coverage (Boyle et al., 2004; Hoffner et al., 2009). Information seeking is particularly likely among people who prefer to cope with anxiety by monitoring their environment, rather than by blunting emotion through avoidance or reappraisal. Sparks and Spirek (1988) found that, following the explosion of the space shuttle Challenger, individuals with a monitoring coping style were more likely to seek negative emotional news about the event, compared to those with a blunting coping style.

Messages that minimize danger or provide reassurance also can reduce fear and anxiety (Lazarus, 1991). Media-induced fear may motivate subsequent exposure to media content that is expected to provide relief or comfort, as well as avoidance of content with the potential to reinforce fear (Hoffner et al., 2009). For example, Wakshlag, Vial, and Tamborini (1983) found that people who felt apprehensive after watching a crime documentary were less likely to select films that featured high levels of victimization (based on synopses), and preferred films that showed the triumph of justice.

Finally, people might seek or continue exposure to frightening media if fear is seen as an optimal emotional state for achieving a future objective (Knobloch, 2003). Based on an instrumental approach to emotion regulation, Tamir and colleagues argued that people may be motivated to feel fear if they need to accomplish an avoidance goal (Tamir, Chui, & Gross, 2007; Tamir & Ford, 2009). For example, they found that people who were expecting to play a videogame that involved avoidance of threat (e.g., avoiding dangerous flying monsters), as compared to other goals, preferred to listen to fear-inducing music before playing the game (Tamir & Ford, 2009). Based on this reasoning, people who believe that fear of particular social or environmental threats (e.g., immigration, global warming) will help them effectively engage in protective actions may seek repeated exposure to fear-related media messages (Conway, Grabe, & Grieves, 2007; cf. Lavine, Lodge, & Freitas, 2005).

Lingering Fear and Anxiety

Despite efforts at emotion regulation, fear responses to media can have emotional consequences that linger for days, weeks, and even years. Numerous studies show that enduring emotional reactions – ranging from nervousness, nightmares, and sleep disturbances to more prolonged feelings of anxiety and depression – are prevalent among children and adults (Cantor, 2009). Sparks et al. (1995) found that people with more vivid mental imagery experienced more lingering fear, possibly due to their ability to imagine that depicted threats could happen to them personally. Behavioral changes are also common, such as avoidance of activities or locations associated with media-induced fears (e.g., avoiding the woods after watching The Blair Witch Project; Cantor, 2004).

Cantor (e.g., 2009) argued that fear conditioning, which has been implicated in development of anxiety disorders such as specific phobias (LeDoux, 1996), may underlie the formation of long-term media-related fears. For example, after viewing Jaws, about shark attacks, people reported experiencing fear in objectively shark-free bodies of water, such as ponds or swimming pools (Cantor, 2004). Studies also have shown that exposure to news about terrorism, mass shootings, and natural disasters is related to long-term fears, and to symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder among some individuals with no personal connection to the events (e.g., Fallahi & Lesik, 2009; Lau, Lau, Kim, & Tsui, 2006; Schlenger, 2004).

Fear and Risk Related to Real-World Threats

Media depictions that evoke fear may be linked to longer-term risk perceptions if they portray threats people expect to encounter later. Clearly the media depict a wide range of threats – related to health, crime, the environment, and many other domains – that are capable of generating fear and influencing risk perceptions. The concept of risk is defined in different ways by different scholars. But at its core, a risk refers to a threat that has some probability of occurrence. Risk perceptions are evaluations or appraisals of potential threats. Accordingly, risk perceptions are typically defined in cognitive terms, referring to estimates of the likelihood of encountering a threat (McComas, 2006). Greater perceived risk is associated with threats viewed as more likely to be personally experienced (susceptibility) and as having greater adverse consequences (severity) (Weinstein, 2000). A variety of other factors influence risk perceptions associated with a threat, including controllability and familiarity (Slovic, Fischhoff, & Lichtenstein, 1980).

Relatively little is known about the link between risk perceptions and emotion (Loewenstein et al., 2001), but there is ample reason to suspect that media-related risk perceptions are closely tied to feelings of fear and anxiety. Emotion theory indicates that perceptions of greater threat likelihood and severity lead to greater perceived personal vulnerability and more fear (Ellsworth & Scherer, 2003; Weinstein, 2000). Recent emotion-based approaches to risk argue that factors such as vivid, emotion-laden threat portrayals may influence both perceived risk and emotional responses (Loewenstein et al., 2001; Slovic, Finucane, Peters, & MacGregor, 2004). Moreover, consistent with evidence of a reciprocal relationship between appraisals and emotion (Lazarus, 1991; Scherer, 2003), media-based risk perceptions and fear may be mutually reinforcing. Before discussing the role of fear in risk perceptions, a brief review of media influence on risk perceptions is provided.

Media Influence on Risk Perceptions

The media often inform individuals about threats to which they may be susceptible. Social amplification theory proposes that risks are defined for people by “amplifier stations” in society such as social groups or the media, which determine which risks are important and diffuse information about these risks (Kasperson, Kasperson, Pidgeon, & Slovic, 2003). Depending on how much attention is given to different threats, media sources can produce amplified or attenuated risk perceptions. The risk amplification function of the media may be partially explained by the availability heuristic premise, which contends that events that can be brought to mind more easily are perceived as more likely to occur (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). Cognitive availability is associated with more frequent or recent activation (e.g., through media exposure) and with more vivid mental constructs. Moreover, the affect heuristic proposed by Slovic and colleagues (e.g., Slovic et al., 2004) suggests that emotions associated with risks may increase cognitive availability.

Studies show that people's estimates of health, safety, and social risks are associated with greater reported exposure to news coverage of those topics (e.g., Coleman, 1993; Slater, Goodall, & Hayes, 2009; Slater & Rasinski, 2005). Slater and colleagues demonstrated that both exposure and attention to risk-related content are important in influencing risk perceptions. Exposure to media entertainment is also related to risk perceptions. For example, in a large sample of adolescents, Beullens and Van den Bulck (2008) found that reported exposure to music videos was related to lower perceived risk of speeding and drunken driving, whereas news viewing was related to greater perceived risk of those activities. Some evidence suggests that even one-time exposures to fictional programs can affect risk perceptions, although persistence of effects is not known (e.g., Cantor & Omdahl, 1991; Leiserowitz, 2004).

Cultivation theory also has been applied to media and risk perceptions (Gerbner & Gross, 1976; Morgan & Shanahan, 2010). Basically the theory contends that repeated exposure to patterns of television messages shapes people's perceptions of reality, so that heavier television users tend to see the real world as more similar to the world portrayed on television (Chapter 2). Cognitive accessibility and heuristic processing have been shown to underlie cultivation effects (Morgan & Shanahan, 2010). Most risk-related cultivation research has focused on crime and violence, but other risks such as those related to the environment have also been examined (Dahlstrom & Scheufele, 2010). Cultivation research has frequently confirmed that heavy television exposure, especially to news and crime dramas, is associated with greater estimates of real-world crime and violence, and higher perceived likelihood of being a crime victim (Morgan & Shanahan, 2010).

The media also shape risk perceptions by affecting how people think about threats. According to framing theory, media can alter how risk is perceived and interpreted by selectively focusing on some aspects of a threat rather than others (Scheufele, 1999; Chapter 3, this volume). Differences in the way a threat is presented can shape risk perceptions as well. For example, news stories that provide statistical data concerning the probability or severity of a risk have less impact on judgments than vivid risk exemplars, such as a story about an individual with firsthand experience (Zillmann & Brosius, 2000). Similarly, threats portrayed in entertainment programs that facilitate transportation and involvement with characters have a strong influence on personal risk perceptions (Green & Brock, 2000; Moyer-Gusé & Nabi, 2010).

The Relationship between Risk Perception and Media-Induced Fear

Clearly threats elicit fear and other emotions (Ohman, 2008), but only recently has research begun to uncover how emotions affect the way people process risks. Prompted by observations that people often neglect evidence such as probabilities when making risk-related decisions, scholars developed the “risk as feelings” approach that emphasizes the importance of emotions for risk perceptions and risk-related behaviors (Loewenstein et al., 2001; Slovic et al., 2004). This approach proposes that risk perceptions are a product of both how individuals cognitively assess risks and how they feel about them. There are several ways that fear responses to media may be related to risk perceptions. First, during media use, fear may increase attention to and evaluation of threat cues, and depending on the portrayal, lead to greater perceived severity or susceptibility (Cantor, 2009; Ohman, 2008; Weinstein, 2000). Second, if fear becomes linked to a particular risk, memory of the fear response may influence later judgments or decisions. Finally, repeated encounters with emotion-laden risk messages could reinstate and possibly intensify earlier fear responses, reinforcing a connection in memory. Slovic et al. (2004, p. 317) suggested that cognitive availability “may work not only through ease of recall or imaginability, but because remembered and imagined images come tagged with affect.”

Research documents a link between fear or worry and reported long-term exposure to media coverage of specific risks (e.g., Dahlstrom & Scheufele, 2010; Van den Bulck & Custers, 2009). Lemal and Van den Bulck (2009), for example, found that women's exposure to news about breast cancer was associated with greater fear of the disease, after controlling for several factors, including perceived personal risk. This outcome suggests that news may have impacted fear based on factors other than perceived susceptibility, such as perceived severity or ability to cope with the disease. A handful of studies grounded in cultivation theory has documented that media exposure cultivates fear of crime (e.g., Chiricos, Padgett, & Gertz., 2000; Eschholz, Chiricos, & Gertz, 2003; Holbert, Shah, & Kwak, 2004). For example, Eschholz et al. (2003) found that exposure to local news, reality TV, and crime drama was related to more fear of becoming a crime victim, especially among people who perceived that their neighborhoods had a high proportion of African American residents. Unfortunately, many studies that have claimed to study “fear of crime” have not measured any emotion-related responses (Morgan & Shanahan, 2010). Thus, relationships among media exposure, cultivated risk perceptions, and fear responses remain unclear. Nonetheless, evidence suggests that the media's ability to cultivate risk perceptions is closely related to its ability to cultivate fear.

Studies have suggested that media influence on fear may occur, in part, through an influence on risk perceptions (e.g., Chiricos et al., 2000; Ferraro, 1995). The interpretation that perceived risk can lead to fear is consistent with the functional view of fear as a response to threat (Ohman, 2008). From this perspective, individual differences in threat perceptions and associated risk should play a role in evoking fear. For example, people vary in their perceptions of the severity of particular crimes and other threats, and their level of fear is partially a function of perceived severity (Warr, 1987). This illustrates the importance of appraisal processes in responding emotionally to mediated risks (Ellsworth & Scherer, 2003).

Emotions such as fear also exert a powerful influence on perceptions and judgments (Loewenstein et al., 2001; Scherer, 2003). Whereas positive emotions such as happiness can lower perceptions of risk, feelings of fear and dread have been shown to increase risk perceptions (e.g., Cantor & Omdahl, 1991; Dunlop, Wakefield, & Kashima, 2008; Lerner & Keltner, 2001). Media offerings that elicit self-referent emotions, such as fear for self, are particularly likely to affect perceived risk. For example, Cantor and Omdahl (1991) found that children who viewed frightening fictional portrayals of a house fire or a drowning subsequently were more worried about similar events happening to them, and also judged those events to be more likely, compared to dangers unrelated to those depicted.

If fear partially mediates the effect of media exposure on risk perceptions, this may help explain why more vivid, compelling media experiences – those capable of evoking the most emotion – have such a strong impact on individuals' perceptions of those threats. Recent efforts to explain the influence of media narratives on risk perceptions have provided striking insight into the underlying processes, but have relied primarily on cognitive explanations such as reduced counterarguing or lowered beliefs in personal invulnerability (e.g., Moyer-Gusé & Nabi, 2010; Slater & Rouner, 2002). Yet emotion is infused in the authors' descriptions of the narrative experience and the persuasive outcomes. Moyer-Gusé and Nabi (2010) argued that vicarious emotional experience is an important factor in facilitating the persuasive effects of narratives. Although they did not measure viewers' emotions beyond their involvement with the characters, who were dealing with an unplanned pregnancy, their framework strongly suggests that sharing the characters' emotions, such as fear or regret, may have contributed to a sense of personal vulnerability to unplanned pregnancy.

Behavioral Consequences of Risk Perceptions

People make risk-related choices every day when deciding where to go, what form of transportation to use, what food to buy, and so on. Many of these decisions are implicitly based on risk information conveyed by the media (Kasperson et al., 2003). Slovic et al. (2004) contend that people may give little thought to risks when making behavioral choices, unless risk perceptions are tinged with emotion, as they often are. Heightened risk perceptions, especially when accompanied by fear, can lead individuals to adopt behaviors to protect themselves or their loved ones from threat (Ohman, 2008; Tooby & Cosmides, 2008). A handful of studies have examined how media-cultivated crime perceptions lead to protective behaviors, and have implied (but not directly assessed) an important role for emotional response (e.g., Busselle, 2003; Nabi & Sullivan, 2001). For example, Nabi and Sullivan (2001) found a causal pattern in which TV exposure led to higher estimates of societal crime and violence, which resulted in greater intentions to take protective actions such as locking one's car door while driving or carrying a weapon. Of course, even when risk perceptions are accompanied by fear, individuals may still decide not to combat the perceived threat. Behavioral responses to threats are determined by other factors, such as the perceived efficacy of the response in addressing the threat and perceived self-efficacy (Lazarus, 1991; Witte, 1992). Thus, media messages that inform people about effective ways of coping may be more likely to prompt protective action.

Although fear that is relevant and appropriate can aid behavioral choices, Loewenstein et al. (2001) note that fear also can lead to disregard of objective risks, and to more risky (but less fear-inducing) choices, such as driving rather than flying to a distant destination. From the perspective of media influence, if media messages convey inaccurate information about risks, or contribute to heightened (excessive) fear through vivid and dramatic risk portrayals, then behavioral motivations may not correspond to actual dangers. A recent example is the drop in Measles–Mumps–Rubella (MMR) vaccinations in Britain (and subsequent increase in measles outbreaks) after extensive media coverage of a controversial study linking the MMR vaccine with autism. The media gave relatively little attention to scientific evidence of the vaccine's safety, apparently stoking parental fear of a miniscule or nonexistent risk (Lewis & Speers, 2003).

An additional way of responding to risk is through information seeking, to obtain additional knowledge or reassuring information, as previously discussed. The Internet and mobile media have expanded up the possibilities for finding information related to risks, as illustrated by a study that explored Internet use during the anthrax scare in the United States in 2001 (Hobbs, Kittler, Fox, Middleton, & Bates, 2004).

Finally, perceived risk is an important factor in support for regulations or restrictions intended to contain or eliminate a threat. The psychometric paradigm developed by Slovic and colleagues (e.g., Slovic, 1987; Slovic et al., 1980) models how people subjectively define risk, and how their risk perceptions are related to their protective or regulatory actions. The paradigm includes two primary continuums related to how people define risk: dread (e.g., severe consequences, uncontrollability, catastrophic potential) and unfamiliarity (e.g., unknown, little scientific knowledge, delayed effect). Threats that are high on these continuums are more likely to prompt protective actions, which Slovic (1987) attributed to the deep anxieties people harbor about unknown and potentially catastrophic risks, such as nuclear power.

Media-Related Fear and Intergroup Relations

According to Kemper (2000, p. 46), “a very large class of human emotions results from real, anticipated, imagined, or recollected outcomes of social relations.” Ohman (1986, 2008) contends that social threats are a major determinant of fear and anxiety in humans. One source of information about social relations is the media, which can influence how media users appraise others by varying the way various social groups and interactions are portrayed. When media portrayals frame different groups as threats, they can produce fear and anxiety in two ways: (1) they can lead people to fear members of groups portrayed as a threat; and (2) they can lead members of a group portrayed as a threat to feel fearful about responses from others. This section focuses on media-related fear or anxiety in the context of social perceptions and interactions.

Social identity theory focuses on how individuals define themselves as social group members, and examines evaluations or affect attached to those shared identities (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). To further explain social identity, Turner and colleagues developed self-categorization theory, which contends that when individuals perceive themselves as part of a social group, a process of depersonalization occurs and they cognitively redefine themselves in terms of that social group (Turner, 1999; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987). Different social identities become more cognitively accessible depending upon the context, or as relevant stimuli for self-categorization change. People magnify their similarities to members of their own social groups, and perceive greater differences between themselves and out-group members (Turner, 1999).

Grounded in social identity/self-categorization theory, intergroup emotions theory (Smith & Mackie, 2008) proposes that when people define themselves in terms of group membership, they appraise events from a group perspective rather than a personal perspective, which in turn affects their emotional experiences. Believing that another group poses a threat may lead to fear or other emotions, most notably anger. This is important, because fear and anger have distinct effects on subsequent appraisals, judgments, and behaviors. Fear leads to pessimistic judgments and risk-averse decisions, and is associated with desire to create distance from or avoid the out-group. Anger leads to optimistic judgments and willingness to take risks, and is associated with desire to confront or attack the out-group (e.g., Lerner & Keltner, 2001; Mackie, Devos, & Smith, 2000). In general, media depictions that portray various social groups as threats should impact emotions and behaviors of media users differently, depending on their group identifications.

Media and Fear of Other People and Groups

In addition to emphasizing violence and victimization, media offerings present a distorted view of who is likely to pose a threat to others or to society (e.g., Chiricos et al., 2000; Dixon, 2008). In their integrated threat theory, Stephan and Stephan (2000) argue that negative attitudes towards out-groups are largely a function of perceived threats associated with out-group members. According to the theory, these threats include (1) realistic threat to the well-being of the in-group (e.g., threats to physical safety or economic resources), (2) symbolic threat to the in-group's values or world views, (3) intergroup anxiety, related to awkwardness or uneasiness about interacting with out-group members, and (4) negative stereotypes, leading to negative expectations about the behavior of out-group members. Following the logic of integrated threat theory, the media have the potential to create fear by depicting particular groups as threats (Vergeer, Lubbers, & Scheepers, 2000).

Sometimes media messages explicitly indicate that particular groups pose a threat. Conway et al. (2007) found that television host Bill O'Reilly regularly uses fear frames in his commentary. Their analysis showed, for example, that O'Reilly positions groups such as “illegal aliens” and “foreigners” as a physical threat to US citizens, in part by framing them as villains and discussing how they outnumber US citizens. But media indicators of who poses a threat are often less direct, and require that media consumers draw inferences based on patterns of media content. The news media disproportionately focus on crimes committed by people in particular social groups, such as African Americans, Latinos, and Muslims, and entertainment media suggest that members of these groups are typically violent criminals or terrorists (Chapters 12, 13; Dixon, 2008; Nacos & Torres-Reyna, 2007; Oliver, 2003). Immigrants to the United States are often portrayed in a negative light, and are framed as posing economic and cultural threats (Brader, Valentino, & Suhay, 2008). Members of other social groups have also been painted as a threat by the media. For example, news and entertainment media often show people with mental illness as dangerous, violent, or unpredictable (Stout, Villegas, & Jennings, 2004; Wahl, 2006).

Media portrayals that depict particular social groups as threatening can lead people to experience fear or anxiety associated with members of those groups (Nacos & Torres-Reyna, 2007; Oliver, 2003; Vergeer et al., 2000; Wahl, 2006). Fear motivates self-protection (Ohman, 2008), and can impact behavior even if people “know” their emotional response is not based on rational evidence (Slovic et al., 2004). Media-induced fear of particular social groups may lead to consideration of how the threat from those groups can be eliminated or avoided in the future (cf. Baumeister et al., 2007). One possible outcome is that individuals may try to reduce or avoid contact with members of groups portrayed as threatening (Lee, Weil, & Shihadeh, 2007; Wahl, 2006). Media portrayals may also promote biased and discriminatory behavior towards members of these groups. Individuals who feel at risk may support public actions they perceive as protective, for example by endorsing public policies related to crime or immigration (Davis & Gandy, 1999; Fujioka, 2005). Importantly, fear of out-groups appears to be a motivating force driving these behaviors. For example, in a study with White participants, Brader et al. (2008) found that exposure to news coverage of Latino immigrants, but not European immigrants, was associated with greater support for anti-immigration policy and related behaviors (e.g., information requests and emails to Congress), in part due to anxiety responses to the news depictions. Their evidence suggested that this outcome depended not on the threat of immigration, per se, but on who the immigrants were; anxiety related to Latino immigrants directly influenced behavior.

As already noted, intergroup threats may elicit both fear and anger, depending on the circumstances. News coverage of September 11 highlighted the threat of terrorism, and also identified the perpetrators of the attacks as Arab Muslim individuals. In a survey soon after the events, Skitka, Bauman, Aramovich, and Morgan (2006) found that both fear and anger were common responses among US citizens, but that these emotions were differentially related to response preferences. Fear was associated with greater support for deporting Arab Americans, Muslims, and first generation immigrants from the United States, whereas anger was associated with greater support for war.

Despite the media's role in reinforcing fears of out-groups, some evidence suggests that media offerings can also reduce fear and anxiety by offering positive mediated intergroup contact (Schiappa, Gregg, & Hewes, 2005). For example, Muller (2009) found that watching a drama in which people from different cultural backgrounds interacted and resolved differences led people to see out-group members as less threatening. However, this outcome was observed primarily for individuals who identified with out-group characters while viewing.

Threat and Anxiety Related to Expected Influence of Media on Others

Media depictions can also elicit fear and anxiety in people whose groups are stereotyped as threats by the media. When people see media representations of similar others, this can “cue” their social identity, making them more responsive to messages that are relevant to their activated identity. For example, when African Americans are exposed to mediated images of their ethnic group, their awareness and sensitivity to other media portrayals of their group increases (Davis & Gandy, 1999; Fujioka, 2005). This heightened consciousness can translate to anxiety if individuals believe media depictions of their group are negative. Fujioka (2005), drawing from integrated threat theory, argued that perception of negative media portrayals of one's own group fit the criteria for a perceived threat that needs to be combated. In addition to integrated threat theory (Stephan & Stephan, 2000), several theoretical approaches are relevant to understanding people's responses to negative media depictions of their own group – for example, being portrayed as a threat to others – and expectations about how other people will be influenced by these depictions. These approaches include stereotype threat theory (Steele & Aronson, 1995), the related concept of collective threat (G. L. Cohen & Garcia, 2005), and the influence of presumed media influence model (Gunther & Storey, 2003; Chapter 5, this volume).

Stereotype threat theory contends that individuals are often aware of negative stereotypes about their group and are fearful of behaving in ways that support the stereotypes. A prerequisite for experiencing stereotype threat is believing that others are likely to apply a stereotype in their interpersonal actions or attributions about one's group. Thus, stereotype threat is thought to be laden with anxiety, which can influence performance (Shmader, Johns, & Forbes, 2008). Studies have shown that television gender stereotypes can activate stereotype threat for women in relation to their math and science ability (e.g., Davies, Spencer, Quinn, & Gerhardstein, 2002). G. L. Cohen and Garcia (2005) introduced the concept of collective threat, defined as the fear that stereotype-conforming actions of in-group members will adversely influence how they are viewed by others. Media exposure to stereotype-consistent depictions of in-group members can remind people of group stereotypes, and has the potential to activate collective threat (Fujioka, 2005; Richeson & Pollydore, 2002; Stuart, 2006). Research on the impact of stereotype threat, and the newer concept of collective threat, has focused on consequences for academic and intellectual performance, but the effects are not limited to these domains. Recent studies have found that intergroup interactions are affected by stereotype threat related to race (Goff, Steele, & Davies, 2008) and mental illness (Henry, von Hippel, & Shapiro, 2010). It seems likely that media portrayals can make threat-related group stereotypes more salient for members of stereotyped groups, leading to expectations that others will rely on those stereotypes in personal and social contexts (Fujioka, 2005). Such responses may contribute to anxiety, anticipated rejection, and even avoidance of intergroup contact (cf. Shelton & Richeson, 2005).

Stereotype threat and collective threat related to media portrayals may be particularly strong because people tend to believe others will be swayed by stereotypic media depictions of their group. Much research documents that people believe media messages have a greater influence on others than on themselves, and that these perceptions have behavioral implications (Perloff, 2009). Gunther and Storey (2003) contended that indirect effects of media operate via a process they called the influence of presumed influence. They stated: “People perceive some influence of a message on others and then react to that perception of influence” (p. 201). In other words, people's responses to media depend, in part, on how they perceive others are affected, independent of any perceived effect on themselves. In a study in Nepal, Gunther and Storey found that that the presumed influence of a radio drama on healthcare providers affected clients' perceptions of and interactions with the health workers.

Perception of negative and misleading media images of one's own group can make people feel vulnerable because they believe that others are less capable of critically evaluating those images. As a result, they tend to be fearful that others will be swayed by these media messages, and will develop stereotypes of their group (Hoffner, Fujioka, Cohen, & Atwell-Seate, 2008; Tsfati, 2007; Tsfati & Cohen, 2003). For example, Tsfati (2007) found that feelings of alienation experienced by Arab individuals in Israel were related to perceived negative media coverage of their group and the presumed influence of that coverage on out-group audiences.

Presumed media influence can translate into behavioral responses. Gunther, Perloff, and Tsfati (2008) classify behavioral consequences of presumed media influence into two types, prevention and accommodation. Prevention is exemplified by support for media restrictions to protect others from perceived harmful effects, and has been well documented (Perloff, 2009). Of several types of accommodation, fear and anxiety about the media's influence on others seem most likely to motivate withdrawal responses, such as not doing something that is expected to lead to social rejection or isolation. For example, in a study of residents of “development towns” in Israel, Tsfati and Cohen (2003) found that the more residents believed that media coverage had led to negative public attitudes toward the towns, the more likely they were to consider moving elsewhere. Using the influence of presumed influence framework, and considering the role of emotion in behavioral responses, should lead to a more complete understanding of the consequences of mediated group stereotypes.

Conclusions and Interpretations

This chapter has argued that media-related fear can exert a powerful influence over perceptions, expectations, and behavior. Applying the concept of mediated threat and associated fear responses to three contexts – immediate responses to media, risk perceptions, and intergroup relations – has yielded a more comprehensive understanding of the role of fear in media uses and effects. Yet although much theory and research supports the arguments presented, the review has also uncovered gaps in our knowledge. Scholars need to give greater attention to emotion in the study of media, considering the role of specific emotions as well as general indicators of emotional involvement (cf. Nabi, 2010). As others have argued, much research related to risk perceptions and intergroup relations reflects a bias toward cognitive explanations, which provides an incomplete picture of media influence (Brader et al., 2008; Loewenstein et al., 2001; Slovic et al., 2004). Another issue is that fear or risk perceptions are often measured shortly after media exposure, leaving open the possibility that these responses decrease over time if not reinforced. Likewise, fears attached to identity (e.g., stereotype threat) may lie dormant until activated by later events or situations. The role of individual differences such as group identity in responses to mediated threats also needs to be explored in greater depth. A more general challenge for media scholars is to develop models that consider the likely reciprocal relationship between threat perceptions and fear, as well as how these responses lead to complex behaviors.

There is also a need to understand how fear responses to media depictions are affected by and interact with other emotions (cf. Lerner & Keltner, 2001). Theories of emotion have begun to account for the possibility that different emotions – even those of opposite valence – can occur simultaneously (Ellsworth & Scherer, 2003). Future research should study media-related fear in the context of other emotions, which should reveal a more complete picture of how individuals respond to mediated threats.

Although individuals are becoming increasingly reliant on the Internet and mobile media, surprisingly little is known about the unique abilities of these technologies to convey threat information and evoke fear responses (McComas, 2006). Mobile technologies are making it easier for individuals to stay connected to news and other information sources, and to share information with others. But increased access to social networks could potentially enhance fear and anxiety by increasing the speed at which partially accurate or inaccurate information spreads (Ma, 2008). Newer forms of media such as social networking sites and Internet forums extend offline relationships and facilitate the development of new contacts, but also provide alternative contexts for social threats and fears related to interpersonal and intergroup communication (Douglas, 2008). In summary, a great deal is known about the role of fear in response to mediated threats, but there is still much to be learned, and rapid changes in media technologies offer challenges and possibilities for media scholars.

REFERENCES

Bachorowski, J.-A., & Owren, M. J. (2008). Vocal expression of emotion. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed., pp. 196–210). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Bartsch, A., Vorderer, P., Mangold, R., & Viehoff, R. (2008). Appraisal of emotions in media use: Toward a process model of meta-emotion and emotion regulation. Media Psychology, 11, 7–27.

Batson, C. D. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., DeWall, C. N., & Zhang, L. (2007). How emotion shapes behavior: Feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 167–203.

Becker-Blease, K., Finkelhor, D., & Turner, H. (2008). Media exposure predicts children's reactions to crime and terrorism. Journal of Trauma and Dissociation, 9, 225–248.

Beullens, K., & Van den Bulck, J. (2008). News, music videos and action movie exposure and adolescents' intentions to take risks in traffic. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 40, 349–356.

Boyle, M. P., Schmierbach, M., Armstrong, C. L., McLeod, D. M., Shah, D. V., & Pan, Z. (2004). Information seeking and emotional reactions to the September 11 terrorist attacks. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 81, 155–167.

Brader, T., Valentino, N. A., & Suhay, E. (2008). What triggers public opposition to immigration? Anxiety, group cues, and immigration. American Journal of Political Science, 52, 959–978.

Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (2000). Affective reactions to acoustic stimuli. Psychophysiology, 37, 204–215.

Bryant, J., & Davies, J. (2006). Selective exposure processes. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment (pp. 19–33). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Burleson, B. R., & MacGeorge, E. L. (2002). Supportive communication. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 374–424). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Busselle, R. W. (2003). Television exposure, parents' precautionary warnings, and young adults' perceptions of crime. Communication Research, 30, 530–556.

Busselle, R. W., & Greenberg, B. S. (2000). The nature of television realism judgments: A reevaluation of their conceptualization and measurement. Mass Communication and Society, 3, 249–268.

Cantor, J. (2004). “I'll never have a clown in my house” – Why movie horror lives on. Poetics Today, 25, 283–304.

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.

Cantor, J., & Hoffner, C. (1990). Children's fear reactions to a televised film as a function of perceived immediacy of depicted threat. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 34, 421–442.

Cantor, J., & Nathanson, A. (1996). Children's fright reactions to television news. Journal of Communication, 46(4), 139–152.

Cantor, J., & Omdahl, B. (1991). Effects of fictional media depictions of realistic threats on children's emotional responses, expectations, worries, and liking for related activities. Communication Monographs, 58, 384–401.

Chiricos, T., Padgett, K., & Gertz, M. (2000). Fear, TV news, and the reality of crime. Criminology, 38, 755–785.

Clore, G. L., & Ortony, A. (2008). Appraisal theories: How cognition shapes affect into emotion. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed., pp. 628–642). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Cohen, A. J. (2001). Music as a source of emotion in film. In P. N. Juslin & J. A. Sloboda (Eds.), Music and emotion: Theory and research (pp. 249–272). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Cohen, G. L., & Garcia, J. (2005). “I am us”: Negative stereotypes as collective threats. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 566–582.

Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication and Society, 4, 245–264.

Coleman, C.-L. (1993). The influence of mass media and interpersonal channels on societal and personal risk judgments. Communication Research, 20, 611–628.

Conway, M., Grabe, M. E., & Grieves, K. (2007). Villains, victims and the virtuous in Bill O'Reilly's “No Spin Zone.” Journalism Studies, 8, 197–223.

Dahlstrom, M. F., & Scheufele, D. A. (2010). Diversity of television exposure and its association with the cultivation of concern for environmental risks. Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture, 4, 54–65.

Davies, P. G., Spencer, S. J., Quinn, D. M., & Gerhardstein, R. (2002). Consuming images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1615–1628.

Davis, J. L., & Gandy, O., Jr. (1999). Racial identity and media orientation. Journal of Black Studies, 29, 367–397.

Davis, M. H. (1994). Empathy: A social psychological approach. Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark. de Wied, M. de, Hoffman, K., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. (1997). Forewarning of graphic portrayal of violence and the experience of suspenseful drama. Cognition and Emotion, 11, 481–494.

Dixon, T. L. (2008). Crime news and racialized beliefs: Understanding the relationship between local news viewing and perceptions of African Americans and crime. Journal of Communication, 58, 106–125.

Douglas, K. M. (2008). Antisocial communication on electronic mail and the Internet. In E. A. Konijn, S. Utz, M. Tanis, & S. B. Barnes (Eds.), Mediated interpersonal communication (pp. 200–214). New York, NY: Routledge.

Ducheneaut, N., Moore, R. J., Oehlberg, L., Thornton, J. D., & Nickell, E. (2008). Social TV: Designing for distributed, sociable television viewing. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24, 136–154.

Dunlop, S. M., Wakefield, M., & Kashima, Y. (2008). Can you feel it? Negative emotion, risk, and narrative in health communication. Media Psychology, 11, 52–75.

Ellsworth, P. C., & Scherer, K. R. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 572–595). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Eschholz, S., Chiricos, T., & Gertz, M. (2003). Television and fear of crime: Program types, audience traits, and the mediating effect of perceived neighborhood racial composition. Social Problems, 50, 395–415.

Fallahi, C. R., & Lesik, S. A. (2009). The effects of vicarious exposure to the recent massacre at Virginia Tech. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 1, 220–230.

Ferraro, K. F. (1995). Fear of crime: Interpreting victimization risk. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Frijda, N. H. (2007). The laws of emotion. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Fujioka, Y. (2005). Black media images as a perceived threat to African American ethnic identity: Coping responses, perceived public perception, and attitudes towards affirmative action. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 49, 450–467.

Gerbner, G., & Gross, L. (1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal of Communication, 26(2), 173–199.

Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychology, 4, 279–305.

Goff, P. A., Steele, C. M., & Davies, P. G. (2008). The space between us: Stereotype threat and distance in interracial contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 91–107.

Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 701–721.

Gross, J. J., & Thompson, R. A. (2007). Emotion regulation: Conceptual foundations. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 3–24). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Gunter, B., & Furnham, A. (1984). Perceptions of television violence: Effects of programme genre and type of violence on viewers' judgements of violent portrayals. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 155–164.

Gunther, A. C., Perloff, R. M., & Tsfati, Y. (2008). Public opinion and the third-person effect. In W. Donsbach & M. W. Traugott (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of public opinion research (pp. 184–191). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gunther, A. C., & Storey, J. D. (2003). The influence of presumed influence. Journal of Communication, 53, 199–215.

Harris, R. J., Hoekstra, S. J., Scott, C. L., Sanborn, F. W., Karafa, J. A., & Brandenburg, J. D. (2000). Young men's and women's different autobiographical memories of the experience of seeing frightening movies on a date. Media Psychology, 2, 245–268.

Hartmann, T., Stuke, D., & Daschmann, G. (2008). Positive parasocial relationships with drivers affect suspense in racing sport spectators. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 20, 24–34.

Heath, L. (1984). Impacts of newspaper crime reports on fear of crime: Multimethodological investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 263–276.

Henry, J. D., von Hippel, C., & Shapiro, L. (2010). Stereotype threat contributes to social difficulties in people with schizophrenia. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 49, 31–41.

Hobbs, J., Kittler, A., Fox, S., Middleton, B., & Bates, D. W. (2004). Communicating health information to an alarmed public facing a threat such as a bioterrorist attack. Journal of Health Communication, 9, 67–75.

Hoekstra, S. J., Harris, R. J., & Helmick, A. L. (1999). Autobiographical memories about the experience of seeing frightening movies in childhood. Media Psychology, 1, 117–140.

Hoffner, C. (1995). Adolescents' coping with frightening mass media. Communication Research, 22, 325–346.

Hoffner, C. (1997). Children's emotional reactions to a scary film: The role of prior outcome information and coping style. Human Communication Research, 23, 323–341.

Hoffner, C., & Cantor, J. (1990). Forewarning of a threat and prior knowledge of outcome: Effects on children's emotional responses to a film sequence. Human Communication Research, 16, 323–354.

Hoffner, C., & Cantor, J. (1991). Factors affecting children's enjoyment of a frightening film sequence. Communication Monographs, 58, 41–62.

Hoffner, C., Fujioka, Y., Cohen, E., & Atwell-Seate, A. (2008, May). Third-person effect, mental illness stereotyping, and responses to news coverage of the Virginia Tech shootings. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Hoffner, C., Fujioka, Y., Ye, J., & Ibrahim, A. (2009). Why we watch: Factors affecting exposure to tragic television news. Mass Communication and Society, 12, 193–216.

Hoffner, C., & Haefner, M.J. (1997). Children's comforting of frightened coviewers: Real and hypothetical TV-viewing situations. Communication Research, 24, 136–152.

Holbert, R. L., Shah, D. V., & Kwak, N. (2004). Fear, authority, and justice: Crime-related TV viewing and endorsements of capital punishment and gun ownership. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 81, 343–363.

Kasperson, J. X., Kasperson, R. E., Pidgeon, N., & Slovic, P. (2003). The social amplification of risk: Assessing fifteen years of research and theory. In N. Pidgeon, R. E. Kasperson, & P. Slovic (Eds.), The social amplification of risk (pp. 13–46). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kemper, T. D. (2000). Social models in the explanations of emotions. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp. 45–58). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Klimmt, C., Hefner, D., & Vorderer, P. (2009). The video game experience as “true” identification: A theory of enjoyable alterations of players' self-perception. Communication Theory, 19, 351–373.

Knobloch, S. (2003). Mood adjustment via mass communication. Journal of Communication, 53, 233–250.

Lau, J. T. F., Lau, M., Kim, J. H., & Tsui, H. Y. (2006). Impacts of media coverage on the community stress level in Hong Kong after the tsunami on 26 December 2004. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60, 675–682.

Lavine, H., Lodge, M., & Freitas, K. (2005). Threat, authoritarianism, and selective exposure to information. Political Psychology, 26, 219–244.

Lazarus, R.S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

LeDoux, J. (1996). The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings of emotional life. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Lee, M. R., Weil, F. D., & Shihadeh, E. S. (2007). The FEMA trailer parks: Negative perceptions and the social structure of avoidance. Sociological Spectrum, 27, 741–766.

Leiserowitz, A. (2004). Before and after The Day After Tomorrow: A US study of climate change risk perceptions. Environment, 46, 22–37.

Lemal, M., & Van den Bulck, J. (2009). Television news exposure is related to fear of breast cancer. Preventive Medicine, 48, 189–192.

Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 146–159.

Lewis, J., & Speers, T. (2003). Misleading media reporting? The MMR story. Nature Reviews. Immunology, 3, 913–918.

Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 267–286.

Long, N., Chamberlain, K., & Vincent, C. (1994). Effect of the Gulf War on reactivation of adverse combat-related memories in Vietnam veterans. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 50, 138–144.

Ma, R. (2008). Spread of SARS and war-related rumors through new media in China. Communication Quarterly, 56, 376–391.

Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000). Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 602–616.

Manstead, A. S. R., & Fischer, A. H. (2001). Social appraisal: The social world as object of and influence on appraisal processes. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr, & T. Johnstone (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research (pp. 221–232). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Marsh, A. A., & Ambady, N. (2007). The influence of the fear facial expression on prosocial responding. Cognition and Emotion, 21, 225–247.

McComas, K. A. (2006). Defining moments in risk communication research: 1996–2005. Journal of Health Communication, 11, 75–91.

Mikos, L. (1996). The experience of suspense: Between fear and pleasure. In P. Vorderer, H. J. Wulff, & M. Friedrichsen (Eds.), Suspense: Conceptualizations, theoretical analyses, and empirical explorations (pp. 37–49). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Morgan, M., & Shanahan, J. (2010). The state of cultivation. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 54, 337–355.

Moyer-Gusé, E., & Nabi, R. L. (2010). Explaining the effects of narrative in an entertainment television program: Overcoming resistance to persuasion. Human Communication Research, 36, 26–52.

Muller, F. (2009). Entertaining anti-racism: Multicultural television drama, identification and perceptions of ethnic threat. Communications, 34, 239–256.

Nabi, R. L. (2010). The case for emphasizing discrete emotions in communication research. Communication Monographs, 77, 153–159.

Nabi, R. L., & Sullivan, J. L. (2001). Does television viewing relate to engagement in protective action against crime? A cultivation analysis from a theory of reasoned action perspective. Communication Research, 28, 802–825.

Nacos, B. L., & Torres-Reyna, O. (2007). Fueling our fears: Stereotyping, media coverage, and public opinion of Muslim Americans. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Neuendorf, K. A., & Sparks, G. G. (1988). Predicting emotional responses to horror films from cue-specific affect. Communication Quarterly, 36, 16–27.

Ohman, A. (1986). Face the beast and fear the face: Animal and social fears as prototypes for evolutionary analyses of emotion. Psychophysiology, 23, 123–145.

Ohman, A. (2008). Fear and anxiety: Overlaps and dissociations. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed., pp. 709–729). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Oliver, M. B. (2003). African American men as “criminal and dangerous”: Implications of media portrayals of crime on the “criminalization” of African American men. Journal of African American Studies, 7, 3–18.

Osborn, D. K., & Endsley, R. C. (1971). Emotional reactions of young children to TV violence. Child Development, 42, 321–331.

Perloff, R. M. (2009). Mass media, social perception, and the third-person effect. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 252–268). New York, NY: Routledge.

Richeson, J. A., & Pollydore, C.-A. (2002). Affective reactions of African American students to stereotypical and counterstereotypical images of Blacks in the media. Journal of Black Psychology, 28, 261–275.

Rosen, J. B., & Schulkin, J. (1998). From normal fear to pathological anxiety. Psychological Review, 105, 325–350.

Scherer, K. R. (2003). Introduction: Cognitive components of emotion. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 563–571). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103–122.

Schiappa, E., Gregg, P. B., & Hewes, D. E. (2005). The parasocial contact hypothesis. Communication Theory, 72, 92–115.

Schlenger, W. E. (2004). Psychological impact of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks: Summary of empirical findings in adults. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma, 9, 97–108.

Shelton, J. N., & Richeson, J. A. (2005). Intergroup contact and pluralistic ignorance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 91–107.

Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., Aramovich, N. P., & Morgan, G. S. (2006). Confrontational and preventative policy responses to terrorism: Anger wants a fight and fear wants “them” to go away. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28, 375–384.

Slater, M. D., Goodall, C. E., & Hayes, A. F. (2009). Self-reported news attention does assess differential processing of media content: An experiment on risk perceptions utilizing a random sample of US local crime and accident news. Journal of Communication, 59, 117–134.

Slater, M. D., & Rasinski, K. A. (2005). Media exposure and attention as mediating variables influencing social risk judgments. Journal of Communication, 55, 810–827.

Slater, M. D., & Rouner, D. (2002). Entertainment-education and elaboration likelihood: Understanding the processing of narrative persuasion. Communication Theory, 12, 173–191.

Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280–285.

Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2004). Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Analysis, 24, 311–322.

Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1980). Facts and fears: Understanding perceived risk. In R. C. Schwing & W. A. Albers, Jr. (Eds.), Societal risk assessment: How safe is safe enough? (pp. 181–216). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

Smith, E. R., & Mackie, D. R. (2008). Intergroup emotions. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.). Handbook of emotions (3rd ed., pp. 428–439). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Smith, S. L., & Wilson, B. (2000). Children's reactions to a television news story: The impact of video footage and proximity of the crime. Communication Research, 27, 641–673.

Sparks, G. G., Sparks, C. W., & Gray, K. (1995). Media impact on fright reactions and belief in UFOs: The potential role of mental imagery. Communication Research, 22, 3–23.

Sparks, G. G., & Spirek, M. M. (1988). Individual differences in coping with stressful mass media: An activation arousal view. Human Communication Research, 15, 195–216.

Spence, P. R., Lachlan, K. A., & Westerman, D. (2009). Presence, sex, and bad news: Exploring the responses of men and women to tragic news stories in varying media. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 37, 339–356.

Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797–811.

Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 23–46). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Stout, P. A., Villegas, J., & Jennings, N. A. (2004). Images of mental illness in the media: Identifying gaps in the research. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 30, 543–561.

Stuart, H. (2006). Media portrayal of mental illness and its treatments: What effect does it have on people with mental illness? CNS Drugs, 20, 99–106.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup relations. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson Hall.

Tamborini, R. (1996). A model of empathy and emotional reactions to horror. In J. B. Weaver & R. Tamborini (Eds.), Horror films: Current research on audience preferences and reactions (pp. 103–123). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Tamir, M., Chui, C.-Y., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Business or pleasure? Utilitarian versus hedonic considerations in emotion regulation. Emotion, 7, 546–554.

Tamir, M., & Ford, B. Q. (2009). Choosing to be afraid: Preferences for fear as a function of goal pursuit. Emotion, 9, 488–497.

Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2008). Evolutionary psychology of the emotions and their relationship to internal regulatory variables. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed., pp. 114–137). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Tsfati, Y. (2007). Hostile media perceptions, presumed media influence, and minority alienation: The case of Arabs in Israel. Journal of Communication, 57, 632–651.

Tsfati, Y., & Cohen, J. (2003). On the effect of the “third person effect”: Perceived influence of media coverage and residential mobility intentions. Journal of Communication, 53, 711–727.

Turner, J. C. (1999). Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorization theories. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 6–34). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.

Van den Bulck, J., & Custers, K. (2009). Television exposure is related to fear of avian flu, an ecological study across 23 member states of the European Union. European Journal of Public Health, 19, 370–374.

Vergeer, M., Lubbers, M., & Scheepers, P. (2000). Exposure to newspapers and attitudes toward ethnic minorities: A longitudinal analysis. Howard Journal of Communications, 11, 127–143.

Wahl, O. F. (2006). Media madness: Public image of mental illness. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Wakshlag, J., Vial, V., & Tamborini, R. (1983). Selecting crime drama and apprehension about crime. Human Communication Research, 10, 227–242.

Warr, M. (1987). Fear of victimization and sensitivity to risk. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3, 29–46.

Weinstein, N. D. (2000). Perceived probability, perceived severity, and health-protective behavior. Health Psychology, 19, 65–74.

Wilson, B. J., & Weiss, A. J. (1993). The effects of sibling coviewing on preschoolers' reactions to a suspenseful movie scene. Communication Research, 20, 214–248.

Wise, K., Eckler, P., Kononova, A., & Littau, J. (2009). Exploring the hardwired for news hypothesis: How threat proximity affects the cognitive and emotional processing of health-related print news. Communication Studies, 60, 268–287.

Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communication Monographs, 59, 329–349.

Zillmann, D. (2006). Dramaturgy for emotions from fictional narratives. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment (pp. 215–238). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Zillmann, D., & Brosius, H.-B. (2000). Exemplification in communication: The influence of case reports on the perception of issues. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

FURTHER READING

Cantor, J. (2001). The media and children's fears, anxieties, and perceptions of danger. In D.G. Singer & J L. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of children and the media (pp. 207–221). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cantor, J. (2006). Why horror doesn't die: The enduring and paradoxical effects of frightening entertainment. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment (pp. 315–327). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cohen, J. (2009). Mediated relationships and media effects: Parasocial interaction and identification. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and effects (pp. 223–236). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Frijda, N. H. (2004). Emotions and action. In A. S. R. Manstead, N. Frijda, & A. Fischer (Eds.), Feelings and emotions: The Amsterdam symposium (pp. 158–173). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Green, M. C., Garst, J., & Brock, T. C. (2004). The power of fiction: Persuasion via imagination and narrative. In L. J. Shrum (Ed.), The psychology of entertainment media: Blurring the lines between entertainment and persuasion (pp. 161–176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. New York, NY: Springer.

Lerner, J. S., Gonzalez, R. M., Small, D. A., & Fischhoff, B. (2003). Effects of fear and anger on perceived risks of terrorism: A national field experiment. Psychological Science, 14, 144–150.

Loewenstein, G., & Lerner, J. S. (2003). The role of affect in decision-making. In R. Davidson, H. Goldsmith, & K. Scherer (Eds.), Handbook of affective science (pp. 619–642). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Mastro, D. E. (2009). Racial/ethnic stereotyping and the media. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and effects (pp. 377–391). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Moyer-Gusé, E. (2008). Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages. Communication Theory, 18, 407–425.

Nabi, R. L. (2009). Emotion and media effects. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and effects (pp. 205–221). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ohman., A., & Wiens, S. (2004). The concept of an evolved fear module and cognitive theories of anxiety. In A. S. R. Manstead, N. Frijda, & A. Fischer (Eds.), Feelings and emotions: The Amsterdam symposium (pp. 58–80). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Scherer, K. R. (1999). Appraisal theories. In T. Dalgleish, & M. Power (Eds.), Handbook of cognition and emotion (pp. 637–663). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A., & Johnstone, T. (Eds.) (2001). Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002). The affect heuristic. In T. Gilovich, D. W. Griffin, & D. Kahneman, (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 397–420). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Smith, E. R. (1993). Social identity and social emotions: Toward new conceptualizations of prejudice. In D. M. Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 297–315). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Tal-Or, N., Tsfati, Y., & Gunther, A. (2009). The influence of presumed media influence: Origins and implications of the third-person perception. In R. L. Nabi & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and effects (pp. 99–112). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Valkenburg, P. M., & Buijzen, M. (2008). Fear responses to media entertainment. In S. L. Calvert, & B. J. Wilson (Eds.), The handbook of children, media and development (pp. 334–352). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Zillmann, D. (1991). The logic of suspense and mystery. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Responding to the screen: Reception and reaction processes (pp. 281–3030). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Zillmann, D. (2002). Empathy: Affective reactivity to others' emotional experiences. In J. Bryant & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of entertainment (pp. 151–181). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.