Extending the Cognitive Mediation Model: Examining Factors Associated With Perceived Familiarity and Factual Knowledge of Nanotechnology

Learning from the news about the consequences of climate change: an amendment of the cognitive mediation model

“…Research on the CMM consistently found that elaborative information processing mediates the acquisition of knowledge [Eveland, 2001;Ho, Yang et al, 2017;Yang, Chuah et al, 2017]. As well, previous studies in political communication confirm the amount of individually used news media information as an important variable that determines the acquisition of knowledge [Kahlor and Rosenthal, 2009;Shehata and Strömbäck, 2018;Taddicken, 2013;Van Aelst et al, 2017].…”

“…These theoretical assumptions have been confirmed in various fields of communication research such as political communication [Eveland, 2001], health communication [Ho, Peh and Soh, 2013;Lee et al, 2016], and science communication [Ho, Yang et al, 2017;Yang, Chuah et al, 2017]. However, the model received various amendments of the initial learning motivation, the mediating processes as well as the considered outcomes [Ho, Yang et al, 2017;Lee et al, 2016;Wei and Lo, 2008;Yang, Chuah et al, 2017;Zhao et al, 2011]. The most profound suggestions for modifications address the mediating processes.…”

“…In addition, as has been proposed above, surveillance gratification seeking should as well predict the amount of individually used news media information. The CMM considers news attention as antecedent to elaborative processing as content cannot be processed without being received in the first place [Eveland, 2001;Jensen, 2011;Yang, Chuah et al, 2017]. This argument also applies to our amended model as we replace the attention to news with the amount of individually used news media content.…”

“…The most profound suggestions for modifications address the mediating processes. While elaborative processing is broadly confirmed as relevant mediator of the acquisition of knowledge [Eveland, 2001;Fleming and Thorson, 2008;Lee et al, 2016;, news attention is discussed critically, because it is not consistently confirmed as a mediator [Jensen, 2011;Wei and Lo, 2008;Yang, Chuah et al, 2017;Zhao et al, 2011]. For example, Zhao and co-authors [2011] argue that news attention has to be measured more precisely, as attention to political news causes different effects than attention to environmental news.…”

Operationalizing science literacy: an experimental analysis of measurement

“…For example, the National Science Board (NSB) conducts a biennial survey which contains a set of items to test American's science understanding using a 5-point true/false scale (Definitely True, Likely True, Likely False, Definitely False, or Don't Know) [National Science Board, 2018] that can be found in many public opinion studies [e.g. Allum, Sibley et al, 2014;Yang et al, 2017]. Similarly, the General Social Survey (GSS), conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago, asks respondents similar questions using a 3-point true/false scale (True, False, or Don't Know) [Smith et al, 2019].…”