International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews Vol.5 No.2, June, 2015; p.

115 – 122,
(ISSN: 2276-8645)

UNDERSTANDING MEDIA EFFECT: A STUDY OF HOW STUDIES IN PERCEPTION NAILED

THE COFFIN ON MAGIC BULLET THEORY

Stephen Kenechukwu
Department of Mass Communication
Madonna University, Okija
Anambra State
08037780267
[email protected]

Abstract
The paper focuses on the magic bullet theory with particular emphasis on the discourse on how studies in
perception nailed the coffin on the theory. The powerful effects theory emphasizes on persuasion as the main
effect of the mass communication situation. One predominant theory under the all-powerful effect studies is
the magic bullet theory which hinges on the assumption that the media are all-powerful that explains that
the flow of information from the mass media is always direct and immediate thereby making individuals
cognitively passive and helpless in the face of a strong communication. This paper, therefore argues that
contrary to the all-powerful hypothesis, media audiences are really active and filter media messages they
receive from different media sources. This paper equally identifies relevant theories that contradict the all-
powerful such as the individual difference theory, perception studies, social categories theory, two-step flow
hypothesis and consonance/dissonance theory. The findings of the discourse are that actually media
audiences are indeed, active and react differently to media message. The media only provide subjects for
discussion while the audience interprets differently based on demographics.

Keywords: Media effects, Powerful effect, Magic bullet theory, Media audience, Perception study,
Individual difference etc.

Introduction
The rise of effect studies gave birth to different approaches to media study by identifying four prominent
eras in the development of media effects and theories of mass communication. According to Baran
(2006,p.415), the eras include (a) normative theories (b) mass society theory (c) social-scientific theory (d)
era of cultural theory. The era of powerful effects and limited effects formed the fulcrum of this study.

Magic bullet theory assumed the media had more influence over audience behavior than was later proved.
The magic bullet theory, otherwise known as the "hypodermic needle theory" implied mass media had
a direct, immediate and powerful effect on its audiences. The mass media in the 1940s and 1950s were
perceived as a powerful influence on behavior change.

According to Baran and Davis (2006,p.12), the theory suggests that the mass media could influence a very
large group of people directly and uniformly by ‘shooting’ or ‘injecting’ them with appropriate messages
designed to trigger a desired response. Both images used to express this theory (a bullet and a needle) suggest
a powerful and direct flow of information from the sender to the receiver. The bullet theory graphically
suggests that the message is a bullet, fired from the "media gun" into the viewer's "head". With similarly
emotive imagery, the hypodermic needle model suggests that media messages are injected straight into a
passive audience which is immediately influenced by the message. They express the view that the media is
a dangerous means of communicating an idea because the receiver or audience is powerless to resist the
impact of the message. There is no escape from the effect of the message in these models.

Understanding Media Effects

The possibility of media effects is often seen to challenge individual respect and autonomy, as if a pro-effects
view presumes the public to be a gullible mass, cultural dopes, vulnerable to an ideological hypodermic
needle, and as if television was being proposed as the sole cause of a range of social behaviours. Such a
stereotyped view of research tends to pose an equally stereotyped alternative view.

115
International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews Vol.5 No.2, June, 2015; p.115 – 122,
(ISSN: 2276-8645)

The Effect Debate

No matter the issue involved; televised violence, absence of minority characters in movies, the topic of the
effects of mass communication are and have always been hotly debated. To the early theorists, the media
have all powerful effect as held by the mass society theory. According to McQuail (2005,p.5), the theory
stresses the important as well as negative roles of the media by shaping audiences’ perception of the social
and manipulation of actions in subtle but highly effective ways. It emphasizes the interdependence of
institutions that exercise power and thus the integration of the media into the sources of social power and
authority. Certain media theories are studied under mass society theory. The result is that this theory stresses
that media are a malignant, cancerous force within society and must be purged or totally restructured. In the
discourse on the effect debate, Baran (2009, p.212) remarks that as long as debate on effects of media are
individual-based, we risk remaining blind to what many believe is media’s more powerful influence (both
positive and negative) on the way we live.

The debate on all powerful effect emphasizes on persuasion as the main effect of the mass communication
situation. Powerful effects theory derived its source from idea of the first generation scholars in mass
communication that saw the mass media as having a profound, direct effect on people. This theory gained
massive support after the war as a result of series of studies conducted between 1929 and 1932 that examined
the impact of movies on children. Walter Lippmann in his book ‘Public Opinion’ published in 1922 argues
that we see the world not as it really is but as ‘pictures in our heads.’ Such ‘pictures’ according to Lippmann
‘are shaped by the mass media.’

On the other hand, contrary to the powerful effect theory that argues that the media exert tremendous
influence, the limited-effect theory holds the idea that the media have minimal or limited effects. The
underlying fact here is that this perspective holds that the media rarely directly influence individuals and
even if the effects do occur, they will be modest and isolated. For Folkerts and Lacy (2004,p.765), the media
have limited effects on individuals. However, interpersonal impact is more important in influencing attitude
and creating changes. Baran (2009,pp. 409-11) recognizes these areas of limited effect paradigm viz:
 Media content has limited impact on audiences because it is only make-believe; people know it isn’t
real.
 Media content has limited impact on audiences because it is only play or just entertainment.
 If media have any effects at all, they are not the media’s fault; media simply hold a mirror to society
and reflects the status quo, showing us and our world as they already are.
 If media have any effect at all, it is only to reinforce preexisting values and beliefs. Family, church,
school and other socializing agents have must more influence.
 If media have any effects at all, they are only on the unimportant things in our lives such as fads and
fashions.

Interestingly, the growth and development of empirical social science techniques enabled researchers to have
something with which to study media effects. The studies they conducted gave credence to beliefs that the
media were really very powerful in influencing passive, trusting and vulnerable consumers. However, there
have been some changes in the view of scholars on media effects. For over several decades, research
evidence indicates that the relationships between the media and their users are not that simple or direct. This
is inspite of a lingering belief today in the powerful, uniform, direct effects of the media (Konkwo
2007,p.160). In conclusion, the effect-debate study has remained a continuous one. This is because of the
nature of human beings and different perspective based on prevailing situation and society.

The Magic Bullet Theory: A Definition

Different communication and political scholars have defined the magic bullet theory. Baran and Davis
(2006.p.24) define magic bullet theory, otherwise known as hypodermic needle or stimulus-response theory
as the theory that explains that the flow of information from the mass media source to the receiver is always
direct and immediate thereby making individuals cognitively passive and helpless in the face of a strong
communication stimulus. Under this theory, the media are perceived as all powerful and believe that it exerts
tremendous influences on the reception of media messages. The media also hold the idea that they penetrate
people’s minds and instantly create effects.

Folkerts and Lacy (2004, p.234) observe that propaganda efforts of World War II suggested that media were
all-powerful. Propagandists believed that you can simply hit individuals with information, as though it was

116
International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews Vol.5 No.2, June, 2015; p.115 – 122,
(ISSN: 2276-8645)

a bullet and it would have powerful and immediate effects. The result is that in magic bullet theory, the
rational is a mere façade, incapable of resisting powerful messages. People have no ability to screen out or
criticize these messages. The messages penetrate to their subconscious minds and transform how they think
and feel (Baran and Davis, 2006,p.34).

Konkwo (2007,p.169) explains that empirical studies associated with the powerful effect paradigm suggested
that propaganda and advertising campaigns in newspapers were very effective in shaping the attitudes,
beliefs and consumer behavior of their audiences. The messages only needed to be loaded, directed to the
audience and fired like a bullet. If they hit their target, then the expected response would be obtained. This
was the notion of the ‘bullet theory’ of media effects.

A usual target of powerful effects critics is television. This medium of mass communication has been roundly
accused of singlehandedly inciting riots, promoting crime and violence, encouraging illicit sex, promoting
alcohol and drug abuse etc. However, it has to be noted that whereas television may have some influence on
some people some of the time, it (including other media) does not affect all people in like manner all of the
time. While a particular TV or radio programme appeals to a person, it may be distasteful to another. The
vagaries of the complex social stratification in a multi-ethnic and multi-lingua Nigeria makes this situation
even more glaring.

A glaring example of the application of magic bullet theory was the birth of Nigeria’s former Head of State,
Gen. Sani Abacha. Immediately people picked the news from the media, they instantaneously took to the
streets jubilating or rejoicing (Popoola, 2012,p.223).

Criticisms of the Magic Bullet Theory

The magic bullet theory is considered too cumbersome to test and offers inaccurate results. Modern
researchers wanted more empirical explanations for the relationship between media and audience. Since
media obviously did not turn the audience into unthinking drones, those studying the field sought a more
definable reaction.

The magic bullet theory is based on assumption of human nature and it was not based on any empirical
findings from research. Few media scholars do not accept this model because it’s based on assumption rather
than any scientific evidence. In 1938, Lazarsfeld and Herta Herzog testified the hypodermic needle theory
in a radio broadcast “The War of the Worlds” (a famous comic program) by inserting a news bulletin which
made a widespread reaction and panic among the American Mass audience. Through this investigation he
found the media messages may affect or may not affect audience. Again, “People’s Choice” was a study
conducted by Lazarsfeld in 1940 about Franklin D. Roosevelt election campaign and the effects of media
messages. Through this study Lazarsfeld disproved the Magic Bullet theory and added audience are more
influential in interpersonal than a media messages.

The Hypodermic Needle Theory otherwise known as the ‘Magic Bullet’ theory originated in the 1920’s and
was the first major theory concerning the effects of the mass media in society.’ Magic Bullet’ theorists
believed that the media could shape public towards a defined point of view. In this way messages are
“injected” into all members of the audience causing a uniform thinking among them. A prominent theorist
of the Magic Bullet or Hypodermic Needle theory was Harold Lasswell who said that the new mass media
could directly influence and sway public opinion. The under-discussed gives a picture of a critical look at
the theory (Folkerts and Lacy 2004).

The theory was deterministic and this did not allow for freedom of choice. The audiences were ‘injected’
with a one way propaganda. From this light, one can confidently say that the theory undermines the right of
individuals to freely choose what media material they consume. The theory is also noted for its passitivity
and evidenced by the fact that audience were not allowed to contribute. This undermines the core aim of
media studies which is the audience. From the latter, one can argue that the audience could not use their
experience, intelligence and opinion to analyze messages. It will be very difficult to operate this theory in
this new world where the audiences have become sophisticated.

Furthermore, the Magic Bullet or Hypodermic Needle theory was not based on empirical findings. It rather
employed assumptions of the time about human nature. People were assumed to be uniformly controlled by

117
International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews Vol.5 No.2, June, 2015; p.115 – 122,
(ISSN: 2276-8645)

their biological instincts and that they react more or less uniformly to whatever ‘stimuli’ came along (Baran
and Davis, 2006). Contrary to its shortcomings, the theory had the following outlined points to give it a
positive look:
 It was seen as an asset in mobilizing people especially through radio
 It also paved the way for researches to be conducted on its merits and pitfalls.
The media effects are the consequences or results that humans experience to varieties of media content
(media content-what a media product is made up of) and it is important to note that much research are
particularly driven towards the negative effects. They come in the form of psychological, behaviour,
physiological and cognitive effects and all of these can be positive or negative:

1) Positive Effects:
 Exposure to educative media content is of great importance. For example the education we receive
on talk-shows and distance learning,
 Exposure to informative media content such as news and
 Exposure to entertaining media content that serves as an escape from the stress of everyday life.
2) Negative Effects:
 Exposure to violence and sex on some media content
 Exposure to hate journalism and
 Exposure to false or sensational information

It is important to note that the positive and negative effects cut across the content, timing, direct/indirect and
the explanatory mechanism dimensions. Finally, the assumptions at the basis of the Hypodermic Needle
Theory are nowadays obsolete. The theory has been widely overcome by the Two Step Flow Model and
Roger’s Innovation Curve (Multi Step Flow Model)as well as many latter mass communication theories.

Strengths of Magic Bullet Theory

Although media scholars have argued against the magic bullet theory assumption on powerful effects of the
media, it however, has strengths. First, it provided the platform for subsequent improvements in the study of
media effects. Prior to the all-powerful effect studies, the prevalent media theories were associated with the
political environment operating in a given environment. For instance, the normative theories of the press
spell out the place of the mass media in a political system prevalent in a given society. However, the
introduction of media study on all-powerful media effect provided the first paradigm shift in understanding
media effect outside the realm of political environment.

Paradigm Shift in the Media Effects: From All-Powerful Effects to Limited Effects
A paradigm is an organized theoretical perspective that involves the various stages of theory formulation
where hypotheses are put forth, tested and proven or rejected. Kuhn cited in Baran (2009) sees a paradigm
shift as a fundamental, even radical rethinking of what we believe to be true. It means a transformation from
one organizing theoretical perspective to another.

McQuail (2005,p.77) identifies two paradigms in relation to the study of media effects: the dominant
paradigm and alternative paradigm. The dominant paradigm therefore combines a view of powerful mass
media (all-powerful media effect) in a mass society with the typical research practices of the merging social
sciences especially social surveys, socio-psychological experiments and statistical analysis. Major theories
under the dominant paradigm may include magic bullet theory and Lasswell’s propaganda theory On the
other hand, the alternative paradigm (limited media effects) is based on a more complete view of
communication as sharing and ritual rather than as just ‘transmission.’ Major theories under the limited
effects may include two-step flow theory, attitude-change theory, individual differences theory, cognitive
consistency/dissonance theory, selective perceptions etc.

How Studies in Perception Nailed the Coffin on Magic Bullet Theory

The rise of perception studies has finally nailed the coffin on magic bullet theory. Mass communicators want
audiences to pay attention to their messages, learn the contents of the messages, and make appropriate
changes in attitudes or beliefs or make desired behavioral responses. Perceptual theory tells us that the
process of interpreting messages is complex and that these communicator goals may be difficult to achieve.

Perception has been defined as the process by which we interpret sensory data (Lahlry, 1991). Selective

118
International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews Vol.5 No.2, June, 2015; p.115 – 122,
(ISSN: 2276-8645)

perception is the term applied to the tendency for people’s perception to be influenced by wants, needs,
attitudes, and other psychological factors. Selective perception plays an important role in communication of
any sort. Selective perception means that different people can react to the same message in very different
ways. No communicator can assume that a message will have the intended meaning for all receivers or even
that it will have the same meaning for all receivers. This complicates our models of mass communication.
Perhaps mass communication is not just a matter of hitting a target with an arrow, as some models suggest.
The message can reach the receiver (hit the target) and still fail to accomplish its purpose because it is subject
to the interpretation of the receiver.

The case of nailing a coffin on the magic bullet theory was as a result of the emergence of limited effects
theory and selective perception paradigms. The realization that the media do not affect all people in the same
manner all the time prompted the perception studies. Soon, it became clear that audience members were not
passive recipients of information but active.

Various intervening variables were known to affect audience members’ use of and reactions to media
messages in rather dramatic ways. Although media messages are still believed to influence individuals, their
effects were no longer perceived as all-too-powerful, indiscriminate and predictable as was once thought.
Moreover, studies in human perception showed that an individual’s values, needs, beliefs and attitudes are
instrumental in determining how stimuli are selected from a complex media environment and the way
meaning is derived from these stimuli within an individual’s frame of reference (DeFleur, 1970,pp. 63-73).
The postulation of individual difference theory and perception studies finally contributed to the nailing a
coffin on the magic bullet theory.

The Individual Differences Perspective

From expositions and laboratory experiments on behaviourism, classical conditioning, learning differences,
and attitude formation in the late 1950s and early 1960s, it became increasingly clear that individuals differ
in their personal psychological organization, just as studies in the natural sciences had also revealed
differential biological endowments in people. It was discovered that attitudes, values and beliefs were learnt
in the context of experience and this resulted in differences in cognition and perception. The principle of
selective attention and perception, which holds that people pay attention to messages and interpret them in
line with their own interests, beliefs, values and experiences dealt the final blow to the Instinctive S-R
perspective, although the mass society aspect has tended to die hard.

Perception Studies
Studies in perception helped to nail the coffin on the “magic bullet” theory. Perception is a large subject. But
we shall confine ourselves to the area most relevant to our concern: the ways in which people perceive media
messages targeted at them.

The selective processes can be thought of as four rings of defenses, with selective exposure as the outermost
ring, followed by selective attention, then selective perception, and finally selective retention. Undesirable
information can sometimes be headed off at the outermost ring. A person can avoid those publications or
programs that might contain contrary information.

If one expects a mix of information in a message, a person can pay selective attention to only the parts of the
message that are agreeable. If this fails, the person can then exercise selective perception in decoding the
message. If this fails, the person can then exercise selective retention by simply failing to retain the contrary
information.

Sometimes one of these selective mechanisms will be more appropriate or more possible to use than the
others. For instance, in watching a televised debate between two presidential candidates, you might not want
to practice selective exposure, avoiding the message entirely. If you want to see and hear the candidate you
agree with, you may watch only that candidate, practicing selective attention. If you do see and hear the
opposition candidate and are exposed to contrary material, you can always fall back on selective perception
and hear only what is agreeable, or on selective retention and forget all but the points that reinforce your
original point of view. In particular, we shall be looking at selective perception along with other related
selectivities viz:
Selective Exposure: This is the tendency of audience members to expose themselves to messages that are

119
International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews Vol.5 No.2, June, 2015; p.115 – 122,
(ISSN: 2276-8645)

consistent with their pre-existing attitudes and beliefs. People choose media messages that support their
interest and avoid media messages that are contrary to their already-held dispositions. This option of media
choice accounts for the reason why audience members prefer to expose themselves to any of the mass media
such as radio, television, newspaper or magazine.
Selective Attention: This is the tendency of audience members to pay particular attention to messages that
we feel are in consonant with our pre-existing attitude and then, filtering out messages that do not support
our attitude.
Selective Perception: This involves the mental or psychological recasting of a message to make sure the
messages align with pre-existing attitudes. It is simply an attempt to make media message fit into the
preferences of audience members.
Selective Retention: Here, you retain only the portion of media messages that you have selectively
perceived and exposed to. Selective retention, therefore, is the idea that people tend to remember (recall)
best and longest those messages that are most meaningful to them.
Other Theories that Equally Countered the All-Powerful Media Effects
Apart from the abovementioned theories that nailed the coffin on the magic bullet theory, other theories that
emerged during the experimentation on media effects include:

The Social Categories Perspectives

The basic assumption here (predicated on empirical evidence) is that members of a given social category
(determined by age, sex, location, socio-economic status, etc.) will seek out similar communication
messages, which they will also respond to more or less similarly, other things being equal. This means that
people with similar background will have more or less similar reaction to the media messages (Kenechukwu,
2014,p.178). Thus the kinds of movies, music and broadcast programmes sought after by teenagers and
adolescents are certain to be different from those preferred by their parents while different election
candidates and campaigns may appeal to different social categories. It has also been shown that men and
women may differ widely in their TV programme preferences. While the Individual Differences perspective
derived from general psychology, social categories perspective derived, as we have seen, from research in
general sociology.

Whereas these studies of selectivity of the media came largely from psychology, a group of sociologists
began to look at the various characteristics shared by people within social groups. The sociologists assumed
that people in various positions in the social structure shared similar demographic characteristics and
therefore would exhibit similar reactions to media messages (Konkwo, 2007,p.175).

Two-Step Flow Hypothesis

This theory hinges on the premise that whatever effect the media have on the majority of the population is
through opinion leaders. Ezeukwu (1997,p.170) points out that these opinion leaders crystallize their views
on the media messages into their consistent stance. They later retransmit and amplify the received
information or news within the framework of face-to-face communication. Baran (2008,p.418) identifies
two types of opinion influences: opinion leaders, who consume media messages initially, interpret it in the
light of their own values and beliefs and pass it on to opinion followers who depend on the opinion leaders
for media message because they have less frequent contact with the media.

The two-step flow theory identifies the importance of opinion leaders in formation of public opinion and it
effectively challenges simplistic notions of direct effects. This theory is based on inductive rather than
deductive reasoning and focuses attention on the environment in which effects can and cannot occur.
Criticisms against this theory emanate from its uses of reported behavior as only test of media effects and
downplay reinforcement as an important media effect.

Cognitive Consistency/Dissonance Theory

Cognitive consistency theory holds the idea that people consciously and unconsciously work to preserve
their existing views. The result is that individuals strive to attain a state of cognitive balance in an attempt to
understand media influences. Vivian (2003,p.372) asserts that the consistency theory raised serious questions
about how well the media can meet the democratic ideal that forms a forum for the robust exchange of
divergent ideas. The media cannot fulfill their role as a forum if people hear only what they want to hear.

Sometimes, an individual may stick to two ideas that are psychologically inconsistent thereby creating an

120
International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews Vol.5 No.2, June, 2015; p.115 – 122,
(ISSN: 2276-8645)

unpleasant tension in attitude and comprehension. The result is known as cognitive dissonance. Cognitive
dissonance therefore refers to messages that are inconsistent with a person’s already-held attitudes thus
creating psychological discomfort or dissonance. A postulation of Festinger Leon (1957), he suggested that
an individual should try to make all areas of psychological inconsistencies to be consistent in a variety of
ways broadly known as selective processes: selective exposure, selection attention, selective perception and
selection retention.

Conclusion
The emergence of the “Limited Effects Perspective” was inevitable. People were bound to realize sooner or
later that the mass media could not exercise in peacetime the same degree of influence which they were
supposed to have exercised during the war.” The subtle advent of empirical research, and other advances on
the intellectual horizon, simply accelerated that realization. Perhaps the effects of war on media effects
deserve more serious studies than may have been undertaken so far.

References
Agbanu, V. (2013). Mass Communication: Introduction, Techniques and Issues. Enugu: Rhyce Kerex
Publishers.

Baran, S. and Davis, D. (2006). Mass Communication Theories: Foundations, Ferment and Future. New
Delhi: Wads-Worth Cengage Learning India Private Limited.

Baran, S. (2009) Introduction to Mass Communication: Media Literacy and Culture, Updated Edition.
Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

DeFleur, M. (2002). Understanding Mass Communication. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

DeFleur, M. (1970). Theories of Mass Communication. New York: David McKay.

Ekeanyanwu, N. (2015). COM 675: Advanced Communication Theory. Unpublished Lecture Note,
Department of Communication Arts, University of Uyo.

Ezeukwu, G. (1997). ‘The Effects of Televised Violence’ in Ibe, G.(ed) Mass Communication: A Functional
Approach. Awka: Christon Press.

Folarin, B. (2006) Theories of Mass Communication: An Introductory Text (3rd edition). Ibadan: Bakinfol
Publications, in association with E-Watch Print Media.

Folkerts, J. and Lacy, S. (2004). The Media in Your Life. India: Dorling Kindersley Pvt Licensed by Pearson
Educational Inc.

Griffin, E. (2006). Communication: A First Look at Communication Theory. Boston: McGrew-Hill Inc.

Kenechukwu, S. (2014). Mass Communication: An Introduction to Sociology of Mass Media. Nnewi:

CathCom Press.

Konkwo, D. (2007). Concepts, Principles, Theories and Practice of Mass Communication, 2nd Edition.
Okigwe: Supreme Publishers.

Lahlry, S. (1991). ‘A Blueprint for Perception Training’ Journal of Training and Development 45 (no. 8):
21-25.

Lazersfeld, P.I., B. Berelson, and H. Gaudet (1994) The People’s Choice: How the Voter Makes Up His
Mind in a Presidential Campaign. New York: Duell, Sloan & Pearce.

121
International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews Vol.5 No.2, June, 2015; p.115 – 122,
(ISSN: 2276-8645)

McQuail, D. (2005). Mass Communication Theory, 5th Edition. London: Sage Publications.

Pavlik, J. & McIntosh, S.(2011). Converging Media: A New Introduction to Mass Communication 2nd
Edition. New York: Oxford University Press.

Popoola, I.S. (2012). ‘The Bullet Theory: A Critique of Lazarsfeld and Colleagues’ in Ekeanyanwu, N.,
Ngoa, S. & Sobowale, I. (eds). Critique and Application of Communication Theories. Ota: Covenant
University Press.

Vivian, J. (2003). The Media of Mass Communication 6th Edition. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.

122