«О.А. ГУЛЕВИЧ ПСИХОЛОГИЯ КОММУНИКАЦИИ Рекомендовано Редакционно издательским советом Российской академии образования к использованию в качестве учебно методического ...»

273. Greene K., Banerjee S. TRA revisited: exploring antecedents of smoking attitudes and subjective norms // Conference Papers — International Communication Association, 2005 Annual Meeting.— New York. P. 1–44.

274. Green K., Krcmar M., Rubin D., Walters L.H., Hale J.L. Elaboration in processing adolescent health messages: the impact of egocentrism and sensation seeking on message processing // Journal of Communication. 2002. Vol. 52. P. 812–831.

275. Gregory Jr., S.W., Gallagher T.J. Spectral analysis of candidates’ nonverbal vocal communication: predicting U.S. presidential election outcomes // Social Psychology Quarterly. 2002. Vol. 65. P. 298–308.

276. Gregory S.W., Webster S. A nonverbal signal in voices of interview partners effectively predicts communication accommodation and social status perceptions // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996. Vol. 70. P. 1231–1240.

277. Griffiths M. Violent video games and aggression: a review of the literature // Aggression and Violent Behavior. 1999. Vol. 4. P. 203–212.

278. Groenendyk E.W., Valentino N.A. Of dark clouds and silver linings effects of exposure. To issue versus candidate advertising on persuasion, information retention, and issue salience // Communication Research. 2002. Vol. 29. P. 295–319.

279. Gross K., Aday S. The scary world in your living room and neighborhood: using local broadcast news, neighborhood crime rates and personal experience to test agenda setting and cultivation // Journal of Communication. 2003. Vol. 53. P. 411–426.

280. Grunwald M., Wesemann D. Individual use of online consulting for persons affected with eating disorders and their relatives — evaluation of an online consulting service // European Eating Disorders Review. 2006. Vol. 14. P. 218–225.

281. Gullberg M., Holmqvist K. What speakers do and what addressees look at visual attention to gestures in human interaction live and on video // Pragmatics & Cognition.

2006. Vol. 14. P. 53–82.

282. Gunter A.C., Schmitt K. Mapping boundaries of the hostile media effect // Journal of Communication. 2003. Vol. 53. P. 55–70.

283. Gustafson D.H., Hawkins R., Pingree S., McTavish F., Arora N.K., Mendenhall J., Cella D.F., Berlin R.C., Apantaku F.M., Stewart J., Salner A. Effect of computer support on younger women with breast cancer // Journal of General International Medicine.

2001. Vol. 16. P. 435–445.

284. Guzley R.M., Avanzino S., Bor A. Simulated computer mediated / video inter active distance learning: a test of motivation, interaction satisfaction, delivery, learning & perceived effectiveness // Journal of Computer Mediated Communication. 2001.

Vol. 6. № 3.

285. Haddock G., Rothman A.J., Reber R., Schwarz N. Forming judgments of attitude certainty, intensity, and importance: the role of subjective experiences // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1999. Vol. 25. P. 771–782.

286. Hall J.A., Friedman G.B. Status, gender, and nonverbal behavior: a study of structured interactions between employees of a company // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1999. Vol. 25. P. 1082–1091.

287. Hall S., Bishop A.J., Marteau T.M. Does changing the order of threat and efficacy information influence the persuasiveness of threat messages? // British Journal of Health Psychology. 2006. Vol. 11. P. 333–343.

288. Hampson S.E., Andrews J.A., Barckley M., Severson H.H. Personality predictors of the development of elementary school children’s intentions to drink alcohol: the mediating effects of attitudes and subjective norms // Psychology of Addictive Beha viors. 2006. Vol. 20. P. 288–297.

289. Han S. P., Shavitt S. Persuasion and culture: advertising appeals in individualistic and collectivistic societies // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1994. Vol. 30.

P. 326–350.

290. Hancock J.T., Dunham P.J. Impression formation in computer mediated com munication revisited. An analysis of the breadth and intensity of impressions // Communication Research. 2001. Vol. 28. P. 325–347.

291. Hanze M. Ambivalence, conflict, and decision making: attitudes and feelings in Germany towards NATO’s military intervention in the Kosovo war // European Journal of Social Psychology. 2001. Vol. 31. P. 693–706.

292. Hargreaves D., Tiggemann M. The impact of television advertising on adolescent body image: parallel processes for girls and boys? // Australian Journal of Psychology.

2003. Supplement. P. 45.

Литература 293. Harrigan J.A., Wilson K., Rosenthal R. Detecting state and trait anxiety from auditory and visual cues: a meta analysis // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.

2004. Vol. 30. P.56–66.

294. Harrison K. Television viewing, fat stereotyping, body shape standards, and eating disorder symptomatology in grade school children // Communication Research. 2000.

Vol. 27. P. 617–640.

295. Harrison K. The body electric: thin ideal media and eating disorders in ado lescents // Journal of Communication. 2000. Vol. 50. P. 119–143.

296. Harrison K., Cantor J. The relationship between media consumption and eating disorders // Journal of Communication. 1997. Vol. 47. P. 40–67.

297. Harrison K., Fredrickson B.L. Women’s sport media, self objectification and mental health in Black and White adolescent females // Journal of Communication.

2003. Vol. 53. P. 216–232.

298. Heckman R., Annabi H. A content analytic comparison of learning processes in online and face to face case study discussions // Journal of Computer Mediated Communication. 2005. Vol. 10. № 2.

299. Hellman C.M., Hoppes S., Ellison G.C. Factors associated with college student intent to engage in community service // The Journal of Psychology. 2006. Vol. 140.

P. 29–39.

300. Helweg Larsen M., Cunningham S.J., Carrico A., Pergram A.M. To nod or not to nod: an observational study of nonverbal communication and status in female and male college students // Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2004. Vol. 28. P. 358–361.

301. Henderson King D., Henderson King E., Hoffmann L. Media images and women’s self evaluations: social context and importance of attractiveness as moderators // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2001. Vol. 27. P. 1407–1416.

302. Henley N.M., Miller M., Beazley J.A., Nguyen D., Kaminsky D., Sanders R. Fre quency and specificity of referents to violence in news reports of anti gay attacks // Discourse & Society. 2002. Vol. 13. P. 75–104.

303. Hennings B., Vorderer P. Psychological escapism: predicting the amount of television viewing by need for cognition // Journal of Communication. 2001. Vol. 51.

P. 100–120.

304. Henriksen L., Flora J.A. Third person perception and children perceived impact of pro and anti smoking ads // Communication Research. 1999. Vol. 26. P. 643–665.

305. Hian L.B., Chuan S.L., Trevor T.M.K., Detenber B.H. Getting to know you:

exploring the development of relational intimacy in computer mediated commu nication // Journal of Computer Mediated Communication. 2004. Vol. 9. № 3.

306. Hill G.J., Shriver B.J., Arnett D.B. Examining intentions to use CoQIO amongst breast cancer patients // American Journal of Health Behavior. 2006. Vol. 30.

P. 313–321.

307. Hilmert C.J., Kulik J.A., Christenfeld N.J.S. Positive and negative opinion mo deling: the influence of another’s similarity and dissimilarity // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2006. Vol. 90. P. 440–452.

308. Hobman E.V., Bordia P., Irmer B., Chang A. The expression of conflict in comp uter mediated and face to face groups // Small Group Research. 2002. Vol. 33. P. 439–465.

309. Hodgins H.S., Belch C. Interparental violence and nonverbal abilities // Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 2000. Vol. 24. Spring. P. 3–24.

310. Hodson G., Maio G.R., Esses V.M. The role of attitudinal ambivalence in susceptibility to consensus information // Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 2001.

Vol. 23. P. 197–205.

311. Hodson G., Sorrentino R.M. Uncertainty orientation in the group context:

categorization effects on persuasive message processing // The Journal of Social Psychology. 2003. Vol. 143. P. 291–312.

312. Hofmann W., Gschwendner T., Nosek B.A., Schmitt M. What moderates impli cit explicit consistency? // European Review of Social Psychology. 2005. Vol. 16.

P. 335–390.

313. Hoffner C., Buchanan M., Anderson J.D., Hubbs L.A., Kamigaki S.K., Kowalczyk L., Pastorek A., Plotkin R.S., Silberg K.J. Support for censorship of television violence.

The role of the third person effect and news exposure // Communication Research.

1999. Vol. 26. P. 726–742.

314. Hoffner C., Plotkin R.S., Buchanan M., Anderson J.D., Kamigaki S.K., Hubbs L.A., Kowalczyk L., Silberg K., Pastorek A. The third person effect perceptions of the in fluence of television violence // Journal of Communication. 2001. Vol. 51. P. 283–299.

315. Hogben M. Factors moderating the effect of televised aggression on viewer behavior // Communication Research. 1998. Vol. 25. P. 220–247.

316. Holbert R.L. Debate viewing as mediator and partisan reinforcement in the relationship between news use and vote choice // Journal of Communication. 2005.

Vol. 55. P. 85–102.

317. Holbrook A.L., Krosnick J.A., Carson R.T., Mitchell R.C. Conversational con ventions disrupts cognitive processing of attitude questions // Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2000. Vol. 36. P. 465–494.

318. Holland R.W., Verplanken B., Van Knippenberg A. On the nature of attitude behavior relations: the strong guide, the weak follow // European Journal of Social Psychology. 2002. Vol. 32. P. 869–876.

319. Holtgraves T., Bailey C. Premise acceptability and message effectiveness // Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 1991. Vol. 12. P. 157–176.

320. Holtgraves T., Lasky B. Linguistic power and persuasion // Journal of Language and Social Psychology. 1999. Vol. 18. P. 196–205.

321. Honeycutt C. Hazing as a process of boundary maintenance in an online community // Journal of Computer Mediated Communication. 2005. Vol. 10. №2.

322. Hong W., Thong J.Y.L., Tam K.Y. Designing product listing pages on e commerce websites: an examination of presentation mode and information format // International Journal Human Computer Studies. 2004. Vol. 61. P. 481–503.

323. Hoorens V., Ruiter S. The optimal impact phenomenon: beyond the third person effect // European Journal of Social Psychology. 1996. Vol. 26. P. 599–610.

324. Hornik J. The effect of touch and gaze upon compliance and interest of interviewees // The Journal of Social Psychology. 1987. Vol. 127. P. 681–683.

325. Hornsey M.J., Oppes T., Svensson A. “It`s OK if we say it, but you can`t”: