USES-AND-GRATIFICATIONS PERSPECTIVE ON MEDIA EFFECTS

By Alan M. Rubin. 2009

169 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Communication, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4c821c2f76aeff2ba139277feef81d12e6fed451

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Communication

In Literature and Literary Theory

Citations in the corpus

Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced task-switching while studying (2013, background): “For example, Uses and Gratifications Theory (see Rubin, 2009 for a recent review of this theory) proposes that we possess needs including those that are emotional, cognitive, social, and habitual and are driven to gratify and reduce those needs through media usage.”
Does brand-consumer social sharing matter? A relational framework of customer engagement to brand-hosted social media (2018, background): “…gap in the literature and provides a conceptual framework that integrates the psychosocial theory of close relationships (e.g., Knobloch & Solomon, 2002, 2003) and the media gratifications perspective (Rubin, 2009) to evaluate the benefits that consumers derive from brand-consumer social sharing.”
Social Media Effects on Young Women’s Body Image Concerns: Theoretical Perspectives and an Agenda for Research (2014, background): “We know that personal distress influences gratifications sought from media (Rubin 2009).”
Uses and Grats 2.0: New Gratifications for New Media (2013, methodology): “Accordingly, in U&G research, motives (often modeled as latent constructs) reflect the gratifications that people seek and potentially receive from media use (Rubin, 2009).”
The Addictive Potential of Television Binge Watching: Comparing Intentional and Unintentional Binges (2017, methodology): “Building off existing media effects theories—including social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), uses and gratifications theory (Rubin, 2009), and the general aggression model (Anderson & Bushman, 2002), to name a few— the model makes several propositions about media effects processes.”
Digital content marketing as a catalyst for e-WOM in food tourism (2020, background): “, 2016), and other researchers uphold that UGT can be used to stimulate content generation and for content interpretation (Rubin, 2009).”
Media Effects: Theory and Research. (2016, methodology): “…are that (a) people only attend to a limited number of messages out of the constellation of messages Media Effects 8 that can potentially attract their attention, and (b) only those messages they select have the potential to influence them (Klapper 1960, Knobloch-Westerwick 2015, Rubin 2009).”
Differential Susceptibility to Media Effects Model (2013, methodology): “These theories are Bandura’s (1986) Social Cognitive Theory; Berkowitz’ (1984) Neoassociationist Model and other accounts of Media Priming (Roskos-Ewoldson & Roskos-Ewoldson, 2009); Klapper’s (1960) Selective Exposure Theory; Lang’s (2009) Limited Capacity Model of Motivated Mediated Message Process”
#WorldSeries: An Empirical Examination of a Twitter Hashtag During a Major Sporting Event (2012, background): “Furthermore, as outlined by Rubin (2009), media use under this perspective is purposive and goal-directed, which indicated that users were using #WorldSeries for the purpose of broadcasting their affiliations with their respective teams and engaging in dialogue (i.e., interactivity) with MLB/league…”