Methods, Metaphors, and Media Research

The purpose in this article is threefold: to make explicit the implicit metaphors underlying mainstream public-opinion research and their relationships to the methodologies employed, to offer an alternative “conversational” metaphor for the relationship between television and public opinion, and to present some findings form the authors' initial attempts to investigate empirically this relationship. First the authors argue that most public-opinion research results from, and reinforces, an implicit metaphor of citizens as “political consumers” and media messages as “hypodermic injections.” The authors then present an alternative metaphor that emphasizes the role of discourse in the formation of public opinions and that conceptualizes television and viewers as participants in an ongoing “conversation.” The third section discusses focus groups as a means of observing this conversation. The authors describe their own focus group project and present some initial findings that support the usefulness both of focus groups as a method of inquiry and of their conversational metaphor.

[1]  Elihu Katz,et al.  COMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH SINCE LAZARSFELD , 1987 .

[2]  W. B. Gallie Essentially Contested Concepts , 1994, The Importance of Language.

[3]  John N. Cray On the Contestability of Social and Political Concepts , 1977 .

[4]  M. D. Carpini,et al.  ‘Fictional’ and ‘Non-fictional’ television celebrates earth day: Or, politics is comedy plus pretense , 1994 .

[5]  Ivan Illich,et al.  ABC: The Alphabetization of the Popular Mind , 1988 .

[6]  Daniel C. Hallin,et al.  The uncensored war , 1993 .

[7]  Michael Morgan,et al.  Political Correlates of Television Viewing , 1984 .

[8]  Robert K. Merton,et al.  The Focused Interview , 1956 .

[9]  J. Dewey Democracy and education : an introduction to philosophy of education / John Dewey , 1916 .

[10]  Seymour Sudman,et al.  Numbered Voices: How Opinion Polling Has Shaped American Politics. , 1993 .

[11]  Jennings Bryant,et al.  Perspectives on Media Effects , 1986 .

[12]  Kathleen M. McGraw,et al.  An Impression-Driven Model of Candidate Evaluation , 1989, American Political Science Review.

[13]  W. B. Gallie IX.—Essentially Contested Concepts , 1956 .

[14]  J. Zaller,et al.  The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. , 1992 .

[15]  W. Bennett,et al.  Public opinion in American politics , 1980 .

[16]  T. Clark,et al.  Gabriel Tarde on Communication and Social Influence. , 1970 .

[17]  E. Noelle-Neumann The Spiral of Silence A Theory of Public Opinion , 1974 .

[18]  Richard A. Krueger,et al.  Focus groups : a practical guide for applied research / by Richard A. Krueger , 1989 .

[19]  Robert K. Merton,et al.  The Focused Interview , 1946, American Journal of Sociology.

[20]  Patrick J. Stroh,et al.  Black-box models of candidate evaluation , 1990 .

[21]  W. Connolly The terms of political discourse , 1974 .

[22]  E. Noelle-Neumann The spiral of silence , 1984 .

[23]  D. Morgan Focus groups for qualitative research. , 1988, Hospital guest relations report.

[24]  Patrick J. Stroh,et al.  On-line processing in candidate evaluation: The effects of issue order, issue importance, and sophistication , 1990 .

[25]  R. Merton THE FOCUSSED INTERVIEW AND FOCUS GROUPS CONTINUITIES AND DISCONTINUITIES , 1987 .

[26]  D. Morley The Nationwide Audience , 1980 .

[27]  J. Zaller Political awareness, elite opinion leadership, and the mass survey response , 1990 .

[28]  C. Brunsdon Women Watching Television , 1986 .