Does a Perceptual Discrepancy Lead to Action? A Meta-analysis of the Behavioral Component of the Third-Person Effect

Abstract

The third-person effect consists of two hypotheses. The perceptual hypothesis states that people assume that communications influence others more than themselves. The behavioral component suggests that people's overestimation of media impact on others lead them to take action or to have some relevant behavioral intentions, perhaps in the hopes to thwart the predicted effects (Peiser & Peter, 2000). The major point of the behavioral component is that the magnitude of third-person perception is a salient, if not the best, predictor of behavioral outcomes. What energizes practitioners and intrigues researchers is the behavioral hypothesis, which suggests that perceptions can hypothetically influence behavior intentions or even actual behavior. To a certain degree, the hypothesis is vague and simplistic in that it ignores the underlying mechanisms that mediate the perception-behavior relationship. Nonetheless, when considering the practical implication, we can appreciate the possibility that perceptions of effects (especially harmful consequences) on third persons propel people to act. The behavioral component of the third-person effect hypothesis has stimulated considerable research in recent years; a majority of which has looked into the possibility that third-person perceptions push people toward censoring content deemed undesirable. Research for the behavioral component, as applied to domains other than censorship, is very much underexplored and the support is largely mixed.