Third-Person Effect

Background and Theoretical Origins

What began as an eclectic litany of recollections and ruminations accumulated over nearly a lifetime of one scholar's experience—supplemented by little formal data or analysis—blossomed into a fertile site of rigorous interdisciplinary scholarship.

In his seminal work in the early 1980s, W. Phillips Davison relayed several anecdotes of how different people in different circumstances estimated different presumed impacts of the same messages. Davison later reported that he “didn't really want to write the article,” in part because he thought the phenomenon was of “minor theoretical significance” and his observations were based on sketchy data. Nevertheless, his observations were considered intriguing by many others who read and elaborated on his work, and in 2004 the third-person effect was named one of the most popular communication-theory frameworks of the early 21st century.

Davison explained the third-person effect in the following terms:

• People will tend to overestimate the influence that mass communications have on the attitudes and behaviors of others.
• People will expect the communication to have a greater effect on others than on themselves.
• Whether or not these individuals are among the ostensible audience for the message, the impact that they expect this communication to have on others may lead them to take some action.

Davison went on to explain that there are two ways in which the notion of a “third person” can be interpreted. First, individuals often believe that people like “me” or “you” will not be impacted by communications as much as “them,” that is, the third persons. Second, some individuals who themselves are not members of the ostensible (or intended) audience nonetheless are concerned about the presumed effects of messages on the ostensible audience. These third persons, especially if in positions of authority, are driven by this presumption of effects to make what could be characterized as paternalistic decisions about the fate of the messages and the rights of members of the ostensible audience to be exposed to the messages.

Research on the Third-Person Effect

Since Davison's original articulation of the third-person effect, considerable scholarly effort has been invested in attempts to provide a suitable theoretical context and explanation for Davison's observations and insights. Other efforts have focused on methodological issues relating to study and instrument design. For example, Richard Perloff has written several broad and cogent analyses of theoretical and methodological conundrums associated with formal empirical tests of Davison's propositions.

Over the past 25 years, the third-person effect has been explained by, and linked to, a variety of established social psychological theories and models, [Page 891]including attribution, social comparison, social desirability, social distance, unrealistic optimism, symbolic interactionism, and self-categorization, among others. The third-person effect has also been connected to the larger scholarly body of public opinion theory and research, including such phenomena as spiral of silence and pluralistic ignorance. Additional theoretical attention has been paid to the role that message variables may play in contributing to the third-person effect. Evidence is mixed across studies, but there is some indication that the desirability of a message, that is, whether it is pro- or anti-social, can influence the nature and magnitude of the third-person effect. In addition, some studies have found that certain messages can elicit a “reverse” third-person effect, that is, a situation in which individuals report a greater effect of the message on one's self than on others. Another key consideration in third-person research has to do with the nature of the “other” and his or her relation to, and psychological distance from, the self.

...