1
Mytton G, Diem P, Dam PH van. Media audience research: a guide for professionals. Third edition. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Incorporated 2016.
2
Lacey N. Media institutions and audiences: key concepts in media studies. Basingstoke: Palgrave 2002.
3
McKee A. Textual analysis: a beginner’s guide. London: Sage Publications 2003.
4
Sconce J. Haunted media: electronic presence from telegraphy to television. Durham, NC: Duke University Press 2000.
5
Radway JA. Reading the romance: women, patriarchy, and popular literature. 2nd ed. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press 1991.
6
Kavka M. Reality television, affect and intimacy: reality matters. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2008.
7
Duffy BE. Remake, remodel: women’s magazines in the digital age. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press 2013.
8
Alasuutari P. Rethinking the media audience: the new agenda. London: Sage 1999.
9
Ross K, Nightingale V. Media and audiences: new perspectives. Maidenhead, Berkshire, England: Open University Press 2003.
10
Long P, Wall T. Media studies: texts, production, context. 2nd ed. Harlow: Pearson 2012.
11
Eagleton T. Ideology. London: Longman 1994.
12
Gorton K. Media audiences: television, meaning and emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press 2009.
13
Cantril H, Gaudet H, Herzog H, et al. The invasion from Mars: a study in the psychology of panic : with the complete script of the famous Orson Welles broadcast. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press 1982.
14
Williams K. Effects What Effects chapter 7. Understanding Media Theory. Arnold 2003.
15
McLeod D, Wise D, Perryman M. Thinking about the media: A review of theory and research on media perceptions, media effects perception and their consequences. Review of Communication REsearch. 2017;Volume 5.
16
Abercrombie N, Longhurst B. Changing audiences, changing paradigms of research Chapter one. Audiences: a sociological theory of performance and imagination. London: Sage 1998.
17
Webster, James G. Audience, The. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 1998;42.
18
Abercrombie N, Longhurst B. Audiences: a sociological theory of performance and imagination. London: Sage 1998.
19
Schrøder KC. Convergence of Antagonistic Traditions? The Case of Audience Research. European journal of communication. 1987;2:7–31.
20
Barker M, Petley J. Introduction: from bad research to good. Ill effects: the media violence debate. London: Routledge 2001.
21
Livingstone SM. Making sense of television: the psychology of audience interpretation. 2nd ed. London: Routledge 1998.
22
Gauntlett D. Ten things wrong with the "effects model.”. Approaches to audiences: a reader. London: Arnold 1998.
23
Redman P, Open University. Attachment: sociology and social worlds. Manchester: Manchester University Press in association with the Open University 2008.
24
Nightingale V. Studying the television audience: the shock of the real. London: Routledge 1996.
25
Tulloch J. The implied audience in soap opera production: Everyday Rhetorical Strategies among television professionals. Rethinking the media audience: the new agenda. London: Sage 1999:151–78.
26
Gerbner et al G. Growing up with television: The Cultivation Perspective. Media effects: advances in theory and research. New York: Routledge 2009.
27
Blackman L, Walkerdine V. Mass hysteria: critical psychology and media studies. Basingstoke: Macmillan 2000.
28
Barker M, Petley J. Ill effects: the media violence debate. 2nd ed. London: Routledge 2001.
29
Michael O’Shaughnessy. Promoting ‘emotion’: Feelings, film studies and teaching or understanding films; understanding ourselves. Metro Media and Education. 1994;97:44–8.
30
Mayer V. The Places Where Audience Studies and Production Studies Meet. Television & New Media. 2016;17:706–18. doi: 10.1177/1527476416652482
31
Gray J. Reviving audience studies. Critical Studies in Media Communication. 2017;34:79–83. doi: 10.1080/15295036.2016.1266680
32
Hermes J, van den Berg A, Mol M. Sleeping with the enemy: Audience studies and critical literacy. International Journal of Cultural Studies. 2013;16:457–73. doi: 10.1177/1367877912474547
33
Behrenshausen BG. The active audience, again: Player-centric game studies and the problem of binarism. New Media & Society. 2013;15:872–89. doi: 10.1177/1461444812462843
34
Athique A. The dynamics and potentials of big data for audience research. Media, Culture & Society. 2018;40:59–74. doi: 10.1177/0163443717693681
35
Das R. Audiences: a decade of transformations – reflections from the CEDAR network on emerging directions in audience analysis. Media, Culture & Society. 2017;39:1257–67. doi: 10.1177/0163443717717632
36
Ross K, Playdon P. Black marks: minority ethnic audiences and media. Aldershot: Ashgate 2001.
37
Social comparison, social media, and self-esteem. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. Published Online First: 2014.
38
Sconce J. The Voice from the Void. International Journal of Cultural Studies. 1998;1:211–32. doi: 10.1177/13678779980010020401
39
Kavka M. Reality television, affect and intimacy: reality matters. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2008.
40
Jackson RL, Sage reference on-line. Encyclopedia of identity. London: SAGE 2010.
41
Rosengren k. E. Uses and Gratifications: A Paradigm Outlined. The uses of mass communications: current perspectives on gratifications research. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications 1974:269–86.
42
Shanahan J, Morgan M. Television and its viewers: cultivation research and theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 1999.
43
Michael O’Shaughnessy. Promoting ‘emotion’: Feelings, film studies and teaching or understanding films; understanding ourselves. Metro Media and Education. 1994;97:44–8.
44
Elliott P. Uses and gratifications research: A critique and a sociological alternative. The uses of mass communications: current perspectives on gratifications research. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications 1974:249–68.
45
Seiter ellen. Making distinctions in TV audience research: Case study of a troubling interview. Cultural Studies. 1990;4.
46
Palmgreen p, Wenner LA, Rosengren KE. Uses and gratifications research: the past ten years. Media gratifications research: current perspectives. Beverly Hills: Sage 1985:xx–xxx.
47
Ruggiero TE. Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century. Mass Communication and Society. 2000;3:3–37. doi: 10.1207/S15327825MCS0301_02
48
Redman P, Open University. Attachment: sociology and social worlds. Manchester: Manchester University Press in association with the Open University 2008.
49
Whitehouse-Hart J. Psychosocial explorations of film and television viewing: ordinary audience. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2014.
50
Bainbridge C, Ward I, Yates C. Television and psychoanalysis: psycho-cultural perspectives. London: Karnac 2014.
51
Seiter ellen. Making distinctions in TV audience research: Case study of a troubling interview. Cultural Studies. 1990;4.
52
Rosengren K. Chapter 2 - Combinations, comparisons and confrontations: towards a comprehensive theory of audience research. The audience and its landscape. Boulder, Colo: Westview Press 1996:23–51.
53
Seiter E. Remote control: television, audiences and cultural power. London: Routledge 1989.
54
Brooker W, Jermyn D. The audience studies reader. London: Routledge 2003.
55
Modleski T. Loving with a vengeance: mass-produced fantasies for women. New York: Methuen 1984.
56
Hall S. Encoding/ decoding. Culture, media, language: working papers in cultural studies, 1972-79. London: Hutchinson in association with the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, University of Birmingham 1980:117–28.
57
Ang I. On the politics of empirical audience research. Media and cultural studies: keyworks. Malden, MA: Blackwell 2006.
58
Hall S. Reflections upon the Encoding/Decoding Model: An Interview with Stuart Hall. Viewing, reading, listening: audiences and cultural reception. Boulder, Colo: Westview Press 1994:253–74.
59
Ang I. Watching Dallas: soap opera and the melodramatic imagination. London: Methuen 1985.
60
Radway JA. Reading the romance: women, patriarchy and popular literature. Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press 1991.
61
Ginsburg FD, Abu-Lughod L, Larkin B. Media worlds: anthropology on new terrain. 1st ed. Berkeley: University of California Press 2002.
62
Hobson D. Crossroads: the drama of a soap opera. London: Methuen 1982.
63
Gillespie M. Television, ethnicity and cultural change. London: Routledge 1995.
64
Liebes T, Katz E. The export of meaning: cross-cultural readings of Dallas. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press 1993.
65
Helen Wood. The mediated conversational floor: an interactive approach to audience reception analysis. Media, Culture & Society,. ;29:75–103. doi: 10.1177/0163443706072000
66
Martin J. Barker. The Lord of the Rings and ‘Identification’: A Critical Encounter. European Journal of Communication,. ;20:353–78.
67
Tincknell E, Raghuram P. Big Brother: Reconfiguring the `active’ audience of cultural studies? European Journal of Cultural Studies. 2002;5:199–215. doi: 10.1177/1364942002005002159
68
Victor Costello. Cultural Outlaws: An Examination of Audience Activity and Online Television Fandom. Television & New Media,. ;8:124–43. doi: 10.1177/1527476406299112
69
Elizabeth Jane Evans. Character, audience agency and transmedia drama. Media, Culture & Society,. ;30:197–213. doi: 10.1177/0163443707086861
70
Skeggs B, Wood H. The labour of transformation and circuits of value ‘around’ reality television. Continuum. 2008;22:559–72. doi: 10.1080/10304310801983664
71
Brand New You: Makeover Television and the American Dream | Kanopy.
72
Skeggs B, Thumim N, Wood H. ‘Oh goodness, I am watching reality TV’. European Journal of Cultural Studies. 2008;11:5–24. doi: 10.1177/1367549407084961
73
Jin D. New Korean Wave: Transnational Cultural Power in the Age of Social Media. Baltimore: University of Illinois Press 2016.
74
Livingstone S, Das R. The End of Audiences? Theoretical echoes of reception amidst the uncertainties of use. A companion to new media dynamics. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons 2013:104–22.
75
Cavalcante A, Press A, Sender K. Feminist reception studies in a post-audience age: returning to audiences and everyday life. Feminist Media Studies. 2017;17:1–13. doi: 10.1080/14680777.2017.1261822
76
Kavka M. Reality television, affect and intimacy: reality matters. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2008.
77
Wasko J. Reality TV: Performance, Authenticity, and Television Audiences. A companion to television. Malden, Mass: Blackwell 2005:A-Hill.
78
Paddy Scannell. Big Brother as a Television Event. Television & New Media,. ;3:271–82. doi: 10.1177/152747640200300303
79
Piper H. Understanding Reality Television * Reality TV - Audiences and Popular Factual Television * Reality TV - Realism and Revelation. Screen. 2006;47:133–8. doi: 10.1093/screen/hjl012
80
Dovey J. Freakshow: first person media and factual television. London: Pluto Press 2000.
81
Skeggs B, Wood H. Reality television and class. London: BFI 2011.
82
Skeggs B, Wood H. Reacting to reality television: performance, audience and value. New York: Routledge 2012.
83
Couldry N. The Extended Audience: Scanning the Horizon’. Media audiences. Maidenhead: Open University Press 2005.
84
Gillespie M. Television, ethnicity and cultural change. London: Routledge 1995.
85
Wood H. What Reading the Romance Did for Us. European Journal of Cultural Studies. 2004;7:147–54. doi: 10.1177/1367549404042487
86
Ong JC. Watching the Nation, Singing the Nation: London-Based Filipino Migrants’ Identity Constructions in News and Karaoke Practices. Communication, Culture & Critique. 2009;2:160–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-9137.2009.01033.x
87
Skeggs B, Thumim N, Wood H. ‘Oh goodness, I am watching reality TV’. European Journal of Cultural Studies. 2008;11:5–24. doi: 10.1177/1367549407084961
88
Skeggs B, Wood H. Turning it on is a class act: immediated object relations with television. Media, Culture & Society. 2011;33:941–51. doi: 10.1177/0163443711412298
89
Skeggs B, Wood H. Reacting to Reality Television: Performance, Audience and Value. Florence: Taylor & Francis Group 2014.
90
Skeggs B, Wood H. Reality television and class. London: BFI 2011.
91
Sender K, Sullivan M. Epidemics of will, failures of self-esteem: Responding to fat bodies in and. Continuum. 2008;22:573–84. doi: 10.1080/10304310802190046
92
Sender K. Reconsidering Reflexivity: Audience Research and Reality Television. The Communication Review. 2015;18:37–52. doi: 10.1080/10714421.2015.996414
93
Readdy T, Ebbeck V. Weighing in on NBC’s The Biggest Loser. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2012;83:579–86. doi: 10.1080/02701367.2012.10599255
94
Sender K. The makeover: reality television and reflexive audiences. New York: New York University Press 2012.
95
Sender K. Queens for a Day: and the Neoliberal Project. Critical Studies in Media Communication. 2006;23:131–51. doi: 10.1080/07393180600714505
96
Redman P, Maples W, Open University. Good essay writing: a social sciences guide. Fifth edition. Los Angeles: SAGE 2017.
97
Bonnett A. How to argue: a student’s guide. Harlow: Pearson Education 2001.
98
Pears R, Shields GJ. Cite them right: the essential referencing guide. 12th edition. New York: Bloomsbury Academic 2022.
99
Lowes R, Peters H, Turner MC. The international student’s guide: studying in English at university. London: Sage 2004.
100
Ferrucci P, Painter C. Print Versus Digital. Journal of Communication Inquiry. 2017;41:124–39. doi: 10.1177/0196859917690533
101
Madianou M, Miller D. Polymedia: Towards a new theory of digital media in interpersonal communication. International Journal of Cultural Studies. 2013;16:169–87. doi: 10.1177/1367877912452486
102
Madianou M. Smartphones as Polymedia. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2014;19:667–80. doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12069
103
Ytre-Arne B. ‘I want to hold it in my hands’: readers’ experiences of the phenomenological differences between women’s magazines online and in print. Media, Culture & Society. 2011;33:467–77. doi: 10.1177/0163443711398766
104
Das R, Sonia L. The End of Audiences? Theoretical echoes of reception amidst the uncertainties of use. A companion to new media dynamics. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons 2013.
105
Hartley J, Burgess J, Bruns A. A companion to new media dynamics. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons 2013.
106
Mirca Madianou. Polymedia: Towards a new theory of digital media in interpersonal communication. International Journal of Cultural Studies,. ;16:169–87.
107
Mediatization and the ‘molding force’ of the media. http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/commun.2012.37.1.issue-1/commun-2012-0001/commun-2012-0001.xml
108
Hepp A. Cultures of mediatization. Cambridge: Polity 2012.
109
Ian Hutchby. Technologies, Texts and Affordances. Sociology. 2001;35:441–56.
110
Miller D. Tales from Facebook. Cambridge: Polity 2011.
111
Jenkins H. Convergence culture: where old and new media collide. Updated and with a new afterword. New York, N.Y.: New York University Press 2008.
112
Dallas S. On the Audience Commodity and its work. Approaches to media: a reader. London: Arnold 1995.
113
Toynbee J. The Media’s View of the Audience. Media Production. Maidenhead: Open University Press 2006:91–133.
114
Long P, Wall T. Media studies: texts, production, context. 2nd ed. Harlow: Pearson 2012.
115
Lee McGuigan. Consumers: The Commodity Product of Interactive Commercial Television, or, Is Dallas Smythe’s Thesis More Germane Than Ever? The Journal of Communication Inquiry. 2012;36. doi: 10.1177/0196859912459756
116
Ang, Ien. Desperately Seeking the Audience. Routledge 1991.
117
Webster JG, Phalen PF, Lichty LW. Ratings analysis: the theory and practice of audience research. 3rd ed. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates 2006.
118
Gitlin T. Inside prime time. Rev. ed. Berkeley, Calif: University of California Press 2000.
119
Greene, Kira. TV’s test pilots. Broadcasting & Cable. 2000;130.
120
Hayes, Dade dhayes@nbmedia.com. Inside TV’s Secret Lab. (cover story). Broadcasting & Cable. 2015;145:4–6.
121
P M. Made to Order and Standardized Audiences: forms of reality in audience measurements. Audience making: how the media create the audience. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage 1994:57–74.
122
Serials Solutions Article Linker -. http://gl9sn3dh2u.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=book&rft.title=Audience+Economics&rft.au=PHILIP+M.+NAPOLI&rft.date=2003-09-25&rft.pub=Columbia+University+Press&rft_id=info:doi/10.7312%2Fnapo12652&rft.externalDocID=napo12652¶mdict=en-US
123
Twitter to drive TV Ratings beyond an ‘assumption’ of engagement. B and T Weekly. 7 AD. http://www.bandt.com.au/media/twitter-to-drive-tv-ratings-beyond-an-assumption-o
124
Neilsen Launches ‘Neilsen Twitter TV Ratings’. http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=1&sid=263c30ed-675a-4554-859f-e35ae5e4887b%40sessionmgr120&hid=110&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=bwh&AN=bizwire.c51050908
125
Radway JA. Reading the romance: women, patriarchy, and popular literature. 2nd ed. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press 1991.
126
Livingstone sonia. Relationships between media and audiences: Prospects for future audience reception studies. Media, ritual, and identity. London: Routledge 1998.
127
Morley D. Unanswered Questions in Audience Research. The Communication Review. 2006;9:101–21. doi: 10.1080/10714420600663286
128
Barker M. I Have Seen the Future and It Is Not Here Yet ...; or, On Being Ambitious for Audience Research. The Communication Review. 2006;9:123–41. doi: 10.1080/10714420600663310
129
Seiter E. Remote control: television, audiences and cultural power. London: Routledge 1989.
130
Birgitta Höijer. Ontological Assumptions and Generalizations in Qualitative (Audience) Research. European Journal of Communication,. ;23:275–94.
131
Arild Fetveit. Anti-essentialism and reception studies: In defense of the text. International Journal of Cultural Studies,. ;4:173–99. doi: 10.1177/136787790100400203
132
David Buckingham. `Creative’ visual methods in media research: possibilities, problems and proposals. Media, Culture & Society,. ;31:633–52. doi: 10.1177/0163443709335280
133
Cavalcante A, Press A, Sender K. Feminist reception studies in a post-audience age: returning to audiences and everyday life. Feminist Media Studies. 2017;17:1–13. doi: 10.1080/14680777.2017.1261822
134
Tse T. Reconceptualising prosumption beyond the cultural turn : passive fashion consumption in Korea and China. journal of Consumer Culture. 2018;o (o) 1. doi: 10.1177/1469540518804300
135
Bird SE. ARE WE ALL PRODUSERS NOW? Cultural Studies. 2011;25:502–16. doi: 10.1080/09502386.2011.600532
136
Sonia Livingstone. The Challenge of Changing Audiences: Or, What is the Audience Researcher to Do in the Age of the Internet? European Journal of Communication,. ;19:75–86.
137
Nancy Thumin. Self-Representation and Digital Culture. European Journal of Communication,. 2013;28:729–30. doi: 10.1177/0267323113505802c
138
Thumim N. Self-representation and digital culture. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2012.
139
Henry Jenkins. The Cultural Logic of Media Convergence. International Journal of Cultural Studies,. ;7:33–43. doi: 10.1177/1367877904040603
140
Morley D. Unanswered Questions in Audience Research. The Communication Review. 2006;9:101–21. doi: 10.1080/10714420600663286
141
Jermyn D, Holmes S. The Audience is Dead; Long Live the Audience!: Interactivity, ‘Telephilia’ and the Contemporary Television Audience. Critical Studies in Television: The International Journal of Television Studies. 2006;1:49–57. doi: 10.7227/CST.1.1.8
142
Hartley J, Burgess J, Bruns A, editors. The End of Audiences? A Companion to New Media Dynamics. Chichester, [England]: Wiley-Blackwell 2013.
143
Press AL. Audience Research in the Post-Audience Age: An Introduction to Barker and Morley. The Communication Review. 2006;9:93–100. doi: 10.1080/10714420600663278
144
Ranjana Das. Converging perspectives in audience studies and digital literacies: Youthful interpretations of an online genre. European Journal of Communication,. ;26:343–60.
145
The communication review (Yverdon, Switzerland). 2006;9:123–41.
146
José van Dijck. Users like you? Theorizing agency in user-generated content. Media, Culture & Society,. ;31:41–58. doi: 10.1177/0163443708098245
147
Hartley J, Burgess J, Bruns A. A companion to new media dynamics. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons 2013.
148
Lapsley R. Psychoanalytic Criticism. The Routledge companion to critical theory. London: Routledge 2006.
149
O’Shaughnessy M. Promoting ‘emotion’: Feelings, film studies and teaching or understanding films; understanding ourselves. Metro Media and Education. 1994;97.
150
Mansfield N. Lacan : The Subject is Language. Subjectivity: Theories of the self from Freud to Haraway. Sydney: Allen & Unwin 2000.
151
Whitehouse-Hart J, SpringerLink (Online service). Psychosocial Explorations of Film and Television Viewing: Ordinary Audience. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK 2014.
152
Kavka M. Reality television, affect and intimacy: reality matters. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2008.
153
Manley J, Crociani-Windland L. Social dreaming, associative thinking and intensities of affect. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan 2018.
154
Rose G. Visual methodologies: an introduction to researching with visual materials. 3rd ed. London: SAGE 2012.
155
Meissner, W W. Notes on identification. I. Origins in Freud. The Psychoanalytic quarterly. ;39:563–89.
156
Sandler J, Sigmund Freud Center for Study and Research in Psychoanalysis (Universiṭah haʻIvrit bi-Yerushalayim). Projection, identification, projective identification. London: Karnac Books 1988.
157
Pink S. Doing visual ethnography: images, media and representation in research. 2nd ed. London: SAGE 2007.
158
Claydon E, Whitehouse-Hart J. Overcoming’ the ‘Battlefield of the Mind’: A Psycho-linguistic Examination of the Discourse of Digital-Televangelists Self-Help Texts’. Language and Psychoanalysis. 2018;7 (2) 2-28. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7565/landp.v7i21587
159
Campbell HA, La Pastina AC. How the iPhone became divine: new media, religion and the intertextual circulation of meaning. New Media & Society. 2010;12:1191–207. doi: 10.1177/1461444810362204
160
Campbell H. Digital religion: understanding religious practice in new media worlds. London: Routledge 2013.
161
Campbell H, Garner S. Networked theology: negotiating faith in digital culture. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic 2016.
162
Campbell H, Grieve GP, editors. Playing with religion in digital games. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press 2014.
163
Tsuria R, Yadlin-Segal A, Vitullo A, et al. Approaches to digital methods in studies of digital religion. The Communication Review. 2017;20:73–97. doi: 10.1080/10714421.2017.1304137
164
Xu S, Campbell HA. Surveying digital religion in China: Characteristics of religion on the Internet in Mainland China. The Communication Review. 2018;21:253–76. doi: 10.1080/10714421.2018.1535729
165
Morgan D. Religion and media: A critical review of recent developments. Critical Research on Religion. 2013;1:347–56. doi: 10.1177/2050303213506476
166
Lundby K. PATTERNS OF BELONGING IN ONLINE/OFFLINE INTERFACES OF RELIGION. Information, Communication & Society. 2011;14:1219–35. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2011.594077
167
Rippen A. Internet: Implications and Future Possibilities’. Muslims And The New Information And Communication Technologies Notes From An Emerging And Infinite Field. Springer 2014.
168
Hoover SM, Clark LS. Practicing religion in the age of the media: explorations in media, religion, and culture. New York: Columbia University Press 2002.
169
Bolongaro KAM. Pauline Hope Cheong, Peter Fischer-Nielsen, Stefan Gelfgren & Charles Ess (Eds.): Digital Religion, Social Media and Culture: Perspectives, Practices and Futures. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc. 2012. MedieKultur: Journal of media and communication research. 2013;29. doi: 10.7146/mediekultur.v29i55.9716
170
Cheong PH. Digital religion, social media, and culture: perspectives, practices, and futures. New York: Peter Lang 2012.
171
Lofton K. Religion and the American Celebrity. Social Compass. 2011;58:346–52. doi: 10.1177/0037768611412143
172
Nikolas Coupland. The Handbook of Language and Globalization (Blackwell Handbooks in Linguistics). Wiley-Blackwell 10 AD.
173
Stephen Parker. Winnicott’s object relations theory and the work of the Holy Spirit. Journal of Psychology and Theology.
174
Harris J, Watson E. The Oprah phenomenon. Updated edition. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky 2007.
175
Glad B, Beradt C. The Third Reich of Dreams. The American Political Science Review. 1969;63. doi: 10.2307/1954716
176
Glad B, Beradt C. The Third Reich of Dreams. The American Political Science Review. 1969;63. doi: 10.2307/1954716
177
Whitehouse-Hart J, SpringerLink (Online service). Psychosocial Explorations of Film and Television Viewing: Ordinary Audience. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK 2014.
178
O’Shaughnessy M. Promoting ‘emotion’: Feelings, film studies and teaching or understanding films; understanding ourselves. Metro Media and Education. 1994;97.
179
Hills M. Michael Jackson Fans on Trial? "Documenting” Emotivism and Fandom in. Social Semiotics. 2007;17:459–77. doi: 10.1080/10350330701637056
180
Melissa A. ClickSuzanne Scott. The Routledge Companion to Media Fandom (Routledge Media and Cultural Studies Companions). Routledge; 1 edition 9 AD.
181
Gorton K. Media audiences: television, meaning and emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press 2009.
