Toward a theory of media priming

Hoewe · Annals of the International Communication Association · 2020 · media-and-communication-studies · 10.1080/23808985.2020.1815232 · record Hoewe2020-toward-a-theory-of-media-priming
tag layer · index · concepts · authors · עברית

Where this record's text came from. faceted 2026-08 by reading the locally held text (pdftext); every evidence string verified as an exact substring of that text before merging. Claim type could defensibly be 'critique': a large part of the article is the case against the field's current use of the term ('The use of ‘priming’ to describe multiple phenomena within media research presents conceptual and methodological problems for the field.'). 'mechanism' was chosen because the positive contribution is a claim about how media priming works (System 1, associative memory, outside awareness). The article is labelled a REVIEW ARTICLE and builds theory from literature; no new data are collected, so method is 'review'. Only one self-stated limitation exists in the text — the paper is prescriptive and largely does not bound its own claims — so the limitations array is short rather than padded. 2026-08-17 schema-0.3 pass: every quote verified as an exact substring of the staged text and anchored at merge time; concept terms verified present; every edge endpoint an existing node.

This record’s own method is review, and the tags below follow from that. A review’s findings, quantities and statistics are things stated IN this paper, and some of them report results obtained elsewhere. No tag on this page names a different author. Measured across every review in this corpus, 81% of a review’s tags carry no citation at all — most of them are the review speaking. The corpus does not adjudicate the rest: read an unmarked tag as a claim this paper makes, not necessarily one it made first.

How to read this page. The article itself is not reproduced here — this paper is not cleared for redistribution, so what follows is the tag layer alone. The evidence sentences are withheld with the article. The table at the foot lists every tag the record carries; each row names the facet it belongs to, and the whose words column says whether the tag records the paper's own wording or the tagger's sentence about the paper. Every tag links to each other paper in the corpus carrying it. The machine-readable edition of the same thing is the TEI file beside this one, where the tags live in standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.

Other fields define these differently the same word, defined another way in another discipline
learning 7 fields · awareness 3 fields · priming 2 fields

Tags on this paper

Every tag the record carries, each linking to every other paper in the corpus that carries it. A tag appears here whether or not its words occur in the article — the spans below are only the ones a sentence in this paper licenses. Of the 8 concept tags on this paper, all 8 are grounded in a quoted sentence. All carry the tagger's gloss of what the term means in this paper, which is not something the article can license.

media priming political priming System 1 System 2 agenda setting prime awareness learning A prime spreads activation through an associative memory network, and because only a few activated nodes reach conscious awareness the resulting judgment cannot be traced back to its source. Media priming works by activating nodes or networks of nodes in associative memory outside the media consumer's immediate awareness. Awareness cancels the effect: once people notice the prime or deliberate about the source of their decision they correct for it, which is why the effect requires unawareness. A gap between desired and actual confidence in a political judgment motivates a switch from System 1 to System 2, which is why evaluations of political actors can be made within awareness. priming law of least effort sufficiency principle review

Legend

relation to other work	`claim_relations`	how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies
claim type	`claim_type`	the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null
concept edge	`concept_edges`	an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it
concept	`concepts`	an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it
content tag	`content_tags`	a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper
limitation	`limitations`	what the paper says its evidence cannot support
mechanism	`mechanisms`	how the reported effect is said to come about
method	`method`	how the paper produced its evidence
phenomenon	`phenomenon`	the effect or regularity under study
sense	`senses`	a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it
transfer	`transfers`	a method or concept carried in from another field

The paper

The full text is not reproduced here. This article is not cleared for redistribution, so the page carries the tag layer only. Its evidence sentences are withheld; the grounding status remains with each tag, and the article itself is at https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2020.1815232. The reading view exists for the papers whose licence permits it.

Every tag on this page

claim_relations 4 · claim_type 1 · concept_edges 5 · concepts 8 · content_tags 14 · limitations 1 · mechanisms 4 · method 1 · phenomenon 1 · senses 6 · transfers 2

Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 5 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.

This record holds no controls. A layer is empty when the tagger recorded nothing in it — which is not the same as the paper having nothing to record.

facet	tag	field	conf.	whose words
claim_type	mechanism Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_type`		the paper's words
phenomenon	media priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`phenomenon`		the paper's words
method	review Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: review	`method`		the paper's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: A prime spreads activation through an associative memory network, and because only a few activated nodes reach conscious awareness the resulting judgment cannot be traced back to its source.	`mechanisms[0]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Media priming works by activating nodes or networks of nodes in associative memory outside the media consumer's immediate awareness.	`mechanisms[1]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Awareness cancels the effect: once people notice the prime or deliberate about the source of their decision they correct for it, which is why the effect requires unawareness.	`mechanisms[2]`		the tagger's words
mechanisms	mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: A gap between desired and actual confidence in a political judgment motivates a switch from System 1 to System 2, which is why evaluations of political actors can be made within awareness.	`mechanisms[3]`		the tagger's words
limitations	The paper sets aside the argument that System 1 / System 2 dichotomisation is itself inadequate, treating it as out of scope. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`limitations[0]`		the tagger's words
transfers	The paper imports the dual-process account of cognition wholesale and uses it as the machinery for distinguishing media priming from political priming in communication research. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`transfers[0]`		the tagger's words
transfers	Chooses Kahneman's and Stanovich and West's System 1 / System 2 vocabulary, in preference to the communication field's own ELM and HSM, as the framework for the new theory. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`transfers[1]`		the tagger's words
concepts	media priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: media priming	`concepts[0]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	political priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: political priming	`concepts[1]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	System 1 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: System 1	`concepts[2]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	System 2 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: System 2	`concepts[3]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	agenda setting Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: agenda setting	`concepts[4]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	prime Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: prime	`concepts[5]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	awareness Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: awareness	`concepts[6]`	0.95	the paper's words
concepts	learning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: learning	`concepts[7]`	0.95	the paper's words
senses	priming, at its most basic - the presentation of a stimulus and the effects it causes, with the PRIME separated out as the portion of the stimulus responsible. The paper starts from the least contested version and then shows it does not survive contact with the field Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[0]`	0.95	the tagger's words
senses	priming per Bargh 2016, quoted at length as the best available clarification - PASSIVE, UNINTENDED, and not accurately reportable. The definition works by exclusion: an explicit instruction is not priming because the person intends it, and presenting new information is LEARNING rather than passive activation of what is already in the head Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[1]`	0.95	the tagger's words
senses	media priming, the paper's own sense - restricted to System 1 and defined by the consumer's INABILITY TO TRACE the influence. A sense drawn as a limit on an existing word rather than a new mechanism Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[2]`	0.95	the tagger's words
senses	political priming, the sense inherited from agenda setting - media coverage makes an issue salient and the consumer then weighs it when judging a politician. The paper's point is that this can be a CONSCIOUS application, which is what puts it outside media priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[3]`	0.95	the tagger's words
senses	awareness, as the paper narrows it - NOT awareness of the stimulus but awareness of the INFLUENCE of the prime within it. The narrowing is what makes the boundary testable, because a consumer can watch an advertisement knowingly and still be primed by it Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[4]`	0.95	the tagger's words
senses	the operational test for the boundary, which is the part most definitional papers omit: ask whether the participant can identify the prime, and if they can, the study is not studying media priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`senses[5]`	0.95	the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → Bargh (2016) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[0]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → Kahneman (2011) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[1]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → Roskos-Ewoldsen et al. (2007, 2009) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[2]`		the tagger's words
claim_relations	builds-on → Lenz (2009) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`claim_relations[3]`		the tagger's words
concept_edges	media priming —part-of→ System 1 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: The core proposal, and it is stated as a restriction - 'can only occur within System 1' - so the edge is a containment rather than a cause. also in: media priming · System 1	`concept_edges[0]`	0.95	the tagger's words
concept_edges	political priming —part-of→ System 2 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.6 — the record marks this weak · note: WEIGHTED FOR ITS OWN HEDGING. The paper says 'entirely plausible', not demonstrated, and immediately concedes System 1 remains possible. What it does assert is the consequence: only one of the two routes fits the theory. Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but political priming 'COULD occur' through System 2; part-of is hedged. also in: political priming · System 2	`concept_edges[1]`	0.95	the tagger's words
concept_edges	political priming —distinct-from→ media priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: WHETHER THE PROCESSING HAPPENS INSIDE THE CONSUMER'S AWARENESS - both may run on accessibility, and that shared mechanism is exactly why the two have been treated as one thing · strength of the relation: 0.9 · note: The paper's central separation, and it grants the similarity before drawing the line: same accessibility mechanism, different awareness. also in: political priming · media priming	`concept_edges[2]`	0.95	the tagger's words
concept_edges	political priming —part-of→ agenda setting Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.7 · note: Attributed to a long list of media-effects scholars rather than argued here, and hedged with 'can act as' - hence 0.7. It is the genealogy that explains why one field has two incompatible senses of one word. also in: political priming · agenda setting	`concept_edges[3]`	0.95	the tagger's words
concept_edges	learning —distinct-from→ political priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.85 · note: Lenz's charge, reported by this paper: the political-priming findings were consumers LEARNING which issues the media covered. If that is right the effect leaves the priming category altogether rather than moving to the other side of this paper's boundary - a third option the System 1 / System 2 split does not provide for. also in: learning · political priming	`concept_edges[4]`	0.85	the tagger's words
content_tags	The paper proposes that media priming, properly defined, occurs only within System 1 processing, when a media stimulus produces a reaction whose source the consumer cannot trace. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Media priming and political priming are separated by awareness rather than by accessibility: the first works outside awareness, the second may work inside it. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Political priming could occur through System 1, but it could just as plausibly occur through System 2 processing. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	The review identifies two divergent research camps using the same word 'priming' with different operationalizations and different effect patterns. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	If the consumer can identify the prime that influenced their response, the effect is not counted as media priming. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	Applying the criterion to an existing study of terrorism news framing shows it does not qualify as media priming because participants demonstrably noticed the manipulated phrase. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above.	`content_tags.findings[5]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	media priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: media priming	`content_tags.definitions[0]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: priming	`content_tags.definitions[1]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	prime Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: prime	`content_tags.definitions[2]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	political priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: political priming	`content_tags.definitions[3]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	System 1 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: System 1	`content_tags.definitions[4]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	System 2 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: System 2	`content_tags.definitions[5]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	law of least effort Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: law of least effort	`content_tags.definitions[6]`		the tagger's words
content_tags	sufficiency principle Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: sufficiency principle	`content_tags.definitions[7]`		the tagger's words

Interpretive choices

Tags that could not be placed in the text:

none — every tag was located in the text

What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.