Third Person Effect

To me, TTP relates to the Just-World Hypothesis in that we tend to, in general, attribute to others the susceptibility of being vulnerable rather than to ourselves. We tend to think that others are more vulnerable to media effects than we are. I think both phenomena stem from our need for self-control (which can be narrowed down to our perceived self-control). 

It's been shown that we tend to have a need for high self-control - we want to be in control of our own actions, not being controlled or influenced by others. Not only are we not-so-good at introspection, but we tend to make the assumption that, as all four articles state, we are invulnerable. Consequently, the belief that others are more susceptible is likely to be in part what fuels our own perceived self-control.  

After reading The Influence of Presumed Media Influence book chapter, I took special note of the coordination characteristic of the behavior component of TPP. The coordination characteristic states that we will react in anticipation to other's reactions. I think this was evident during the "gas shortage" in North Texas after Hurricane Harvey. Certainly, there was truth to what the media were saying about a gas shortage, but I can see how drivers in North Texas may have been reacting in anticipation to other drivers' reactions. Some drivers who were filling up may have been doing so simply because of the perception that other drivers in the area were going to deplete the inventory. Then, we were no longer filling up with gas only because of the gas shortage from Hurricane Harvey, but also because of the perceived reaction of all the other drivers going to the gas station after hearing the news. It seems as though our coordination intensified the shortage and made it worse. 

In regards to the actor/observer effect, I think this may also relate to our need for self-control. We tend to attribute internal factors to others susceptibility of being influenced by the media (i.e. they are vulnerable because that's who they are - personality, immaturity, etc.) while we tend to attribute our own susceptibility of being influenced by the media to external factors (i.e. I was vulnerable because I was distracted - someone was talking to me or trying to multitask). Thus, confirming our perception of our own self-control. 

The author of the final article, The "Other Side" is not Dumb, placed the onus on the audience to take responsibility during public discourse. In our current state of discordance, this article appears to be relevant. It can be argued that our atmosphere has since intensified since the article was written in January 2016. From personal experience (experienced mainly through television news as of late), news media will mock the opposing side. In being treated as a two-party system, I often see one side alienating the other.  I believe I can explain this as the in-group versus out-group bias phenomenon. In line with this observation, we would expect polarization - the views on each side become increasingly extreme. In our current state, it appears as though we are battling each other instead of working alongside each other. It seems as though we are losing our common ground, or at least losing sight of the common ground that exists. As the author mentions, it's important for viewers and readers to evaluate the other side with more than just a dismissal of their claim. Not that everyone has to agree, but recognizing how and why differences exist may help us understand how and why the other side upholds their position - or at least help reduce the act of prematurely dismissing the other side. Them again, is that human nature?