Deficits, Differences, and Ceilings

Abstract

This article focuses on audience-related factors such as ability, motivation, and media use as well as "ceiling effects" that act as contingent conditions for understanding the "knowledge gap." Ability deficits, individual differences, and ceiling effects, true or imposed, are examined to attempt a clarification of how knowledge gaps are widened or narrowed.The knowledge gap hypothesis introduced into the mass communication literature in 1970 by Tichenor, Donohue, and Olien appears to have important implications for the use of the mass media as a constructive social tool. The hypothesis as originally formulated asserts that &dquo;as the infusion of mass media information into a social system increases, segments of the population with higher socioeconomic status (SES) tend to acquire this information at a faster rate than the lower status segments, so that the gap in knowledge between these segments tends to increase&dquo; (Tichenor, Donohue, and Olien, 1970: 159). The hypothesis thus implies that attempts to equalize the distribution of information within a social system which employ the mass media are bound not only to fail, but actually to increase the inequality.-This implication has been of interest to students of both developing and developed societies, and a body of literature at University of Manitoba Libraries on

Digital Distinction: Status‐Specific Types of Internet Usage*

“…The above basic approach of knowledge gap theory focused—in the tradition of democratic theory—on politically relevant knowledge and interpreted the lack thereof as a disadvantage. A rival hypothesis by Ettema and Kline (1977) attempted to break with this premise. It suggested that it is not status, but motivation (e.g., topic‐specific interest or degree of concern) that is the decisive factor for the development of knowledge gaps.…”

“…It suggested that it is not status, but motivation (e.g., topic‐specific interest or degree of concern) that is the decisive factor for the development of knowledge gaps. Ettema and Kline (1977) treated social status and motivation as independent factors in the process of acquiring media information and reformulated the original knowledge‐gap hypothesis as follows.…”

“…In sum, research on communication media over the years has found that different social strata vary in their enactment of media uses, whether due to differences in resources or interests (Bonfadelli, 1988; Cook et al, 1975; Ettema and Kline, 1977; Lenz and Zillien, 2005; Tichenor, Donohue, and Olien, 1970). This idea has also gained prominence among digital divide researchers and it is precisely this premise upon which we base our study as well.…”

Knowing about a public bicycle share program in Montreal, Canada: Are diffusion of innovation and proximity enough for equitable awareness?

“…For example, lack of awareness is associated with individual capacities (e.g. literacy), socio-economic status (Eveland, 2000;Pearson et al, 2012;Regan et al, 2013;Tichenor, 1970;Viswanath, 2006;Viswanath et al, 2006), and individual interests (Ettema et al, 1977;Oh et al, 2010). Geographic proximity (Massard and Mehier, 2009;O'Loughlin et al, 1995) and social networks (e.g.…”

Reaching Hard-to-Reach Populations: Interactive Computer Programs as Public Information Campaigns for Adolescents

“…Put another way, information campaign effects probably depend on individuals' habits, interest, and abilities in using mass communication, as well as their attitudes about their overall personal efficacy to accomplish any changes. More recent reviews of knowledge gaps have tended to downplay explanations based on lack of ability (receiver "deficits"), instead emphasizing explanations based on situational and motivational factors or "differences" ( 2 , 3, 5,7,21). This "differences" position offers solutions to the problems of knowledge gaps that are more workable than attempts to overcome ability "deficits."…”