People tend to perceive mass media as having a greater impact on others than on themselves. This phenomenon is known as the third-party effect, and it can lead people to exaggerate the perception of harmful content in media, especially when it comes to other people, leading them to support legal and institutional regulation.
During World War II, in a battle in the Pacific, the Japanese propagandized black American soldiers to surrender because they had no intention of going to war with people of color. When white officers saw this propaganda, they were concerned about the effect it would have on black soldiers and hastily withdrew their troops. While this incident may seem like a simple example of psychological warfare, sociologist Phillips Davison gained important insights from it. He used it to formulate a theory about the impact of mass media on audiences: the third person effect theory.
The core of this theory is that people perceive the influence of mass media differently. In other words, people tend to believe that the influence of mass media on the opinions and behavior of the receiver will be greater in other people than in themselves. For example, if you see a newspaper report that a candidate is suspected of tax evasion during an election, you believe that other readers will be more influenced than you are in choosing a candidate. “Phillips Davison calls this phenomenon the third-party effect.
The strength of the third-party effect varies depending on the nature of what the media is communicating. For example, when mass media communicates socially desirable content, such as health campaigns, people perceive a greater impact on others than on themselves when it communicates harmful content, such as violence or pornography. This perception also affects the specific behavior of the recipient, such that those who experience a greater third-party effect are more likely to support legal and institutional measures such as content review, censorship, and regulation.
This psychological phenomenon is not limited to simple differences in perception. For example, repeated negative coverage of a group in the media can lead people to believe that they will not be affected by such coverage, but that others will be. These beliefs in turn reinforce negative stereotypes about the group and can amplify social conflict. This is an example of how media plays a huge role in shaping social opinion, and it illustrates why the third-party effect is so important.
Traditionally, mass media research has examined the reactions of audiences to media exposure, i.e., changes in their attitudes or behaviors. In contrast, third person effect theory is valuable because it examines people’s differential perceptions of the media and their propensity to behave accordingly, rather than the media itself. In particular, it shows that concerns about the influence of socially harmful content may be overstated. It also provides insight into the thinking of those who support censorship and regulatory policies.
The theory has been expanded upon over time to recognize its importance in the process of public opinion formation. Third person effect theory has also been used to explain the process of public opinion formation, linking it to the theory that people can be influenced by what appears to be the majority opinion. According to this explanation, people may believe that they are not easily influenced by what the mass media conveys, but they determine their attitudes and behaviors by considering how others will be affected: fear of being alienated and isolated from others leads them to abandon their own opinions and follow what they believe to be the majority opinion.
This theory has also influenced discussions around media literacy in the modern world. Understanding how people perceive themselves and others’ attitudes toward media, and how these perceptions influence social discourse, is especially important today, when we live in a world of information overload. Thus, third person effect theory is not just a theory that explains a phenomenon of the past, but remains an important theoretical framework for the current and future media landscape.
