Does Perceived Realism Really Matter in Media Effects?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Memory, perceived realism, and emotional responses to documentary and fictional film excerpts were investigated experimentally using adult participants. Documen-tary stimuli were perceived as more factual than their fiction counterparts at both semantic and syntactic levels. However, contrary to expectations, memory for vi-sual and verbal information and the intensity of emotional reactions were greater overall for fiction films. Films whose content corresponded to well-known social themes and film genres also had a greater influence on memory and emotions. In general, it appears that perceived factuality does not have as compelling an influ-ence on adults as it does on younger viewers. Results are interpreted in terms of the differences between cinematic attributes of documentary and fiction films and between the cognitive processes activated by these two film genres and by different themes. The effects of audiovisual messages on audience members ’ emotional reactions and incidental or intentional learning are determined in part by the expectations and schemas they have developed during past viewing experiences with similar types of messages and by message attributes (Collins, 1981; Collins & Wiens, 1983; Huston & Wright, 1983; Salomon, 1983). Through exposure to documen-tary and fiction films, audiences acquire knowledge about the conventions of these genres, and develop a set of expectations about the reality status of the events, situ-ations and people that are depicted (Huston et al., 1995; Nichols, 1991; Wright, Huston, Reitz, & Piemyat, 1994). It appears from a number of studies that toward the age of seven, children can discriminate between the reality of persons, events, and situations in documenta-
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it