Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Society for Journalism & Communication (KSJCS)
[ Article ]
Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies - Vol. 66, No. 3, pp.58-91
ISSN: 2586-7369 (Online)
Print publication date 30 Jun 2022
Received 03 Apr 2022 Revised 01 Jun 2022 Accepted 12 Jun 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2022.66.3.002

코로나19 뉴스의 국내외 위기대응 책임 프레임이 타국민에 대한 처벌 정책 지지에 미치는 영향 : 집단 나르시시즘의 매개효과 중심

임인재** ; 심민선*** ; 이철주****
**성균관대학교 글로벌융복합콘텐츠연구소 선임연구원 mimohhh@naver.com
***인하대학교 미디어커뮤니케이션학과 교수 mshim@inha.ac.kr
****서울대학교 언론정보학과 교수 chales96@snu.ac.kr
The Effects of Responsibility Frames for Domestic and Foreign Countries in COVID-19 News on Support for Punitive Policies toward Foreigners : The Mediating Role of Collective Narcissism
In-jae Lim** ; Minsun Shim*** ; Chul-joo Lee****
**Senior Researcher, Global Convergence Contents Research Center, Sungkyunkwan University, first author mimohhh@naver.com
***Professor, Department of Media and Communication, Inha University, corresponding author mshim@inha.ac.kr
****Professor, Department of Communication, Seoul National University chales96@snu.ac.kr

초록

본 연구는 코로나19에 대한 대응이 국가별로 다르게 진행되고 있다는 점을 바탕으로, 코로나19 뉴스의 국내외 위기대응 책임 프레임이 사람들의 태도 및 정책 지지에 미치는 영향을 탐구하였다. 구체적으로 자국(한국)의 위기대응 책임 프레임 2(자국 고양 국민 vs. 자국 고양 정부), 타국의 위기대응 책임 프레임 2(타국 비판 국민 vs. 타국 비판 정부)로 구분해 이 기사들이 집단 나르시시즘에 미치는 영향을 검증했으며, 이와 함께 코로나19 대응 기사가 처벌 정책 지지에 영향을 미치는 과정에 집단 나르시시즘이 매개효과를 보이는지 탐구하였다. 연구문제를 검증하기 위해 실험설계를 구성하였다. 실험 참여자(N=400)를 네 개 집단으로 나누었으며, 참여자들은 ‘자국 고양 국민 프레임 × 타국 비판 국민 프레임’, ‘자국 고양 국민 프레임 × 타국 비판 정부 프레임’, ‘자국 고양 정부 프레임 × 타국 비판 국민 프레임’, ‘자국 고양 정부 프레임 × 타국 비판 정부 프레임’ 등 조건별 실험 자극물을 본 후 주요 변인에 응답했다. 분석결과, 집단 나르시시즘에 대해 자국의 위기대응 책임 프레임과 타국의 위기대응 책임 프레임의 주효과는 유의미하지 않았으며 이들 프레임 간 상호작용 효과는 유의미하였다. 구체적으로 타국 비판 국민 조건에서 자국 고양 정부 프레임의 집단 나르시시즘 평균이 자국 고양 국민 프레임의 평균보다 유의미하게 높았다. 그리고 코로나19 국내외 위기대응 책임 프레임이 처벌 정책 지지에 영향을 미치는 과정을 검증한 결과, 책임 프레임은 처벌 정책 지지에 직접적으로 유의미한 영향을 미치지 않았다. 그러나 코로나19 책임 프레임은 집단 나르시시즘을 매개로 처벌 정책 지지에 유의미한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 구체적으로 타국 비판 국민 조건에서 자국 고양 정부 프레임은 집단 나르시시즘을 유의미하게 증가시켰으며, 이 과정을 통해 유발된 집단 나르시시즘은 타국민에 대한 처벌 정책 지지에 정적(+)으로 유의미한 영향을 미쳤다. 이러한 분석결과를 토대로 본 연구는 코로나19 대응 관련 뉴스에 대한 실무적 방향성을 제시하였다.

Abstract

Despite the important role of news media in assisting people in coping with the COVID-19 pandemic at both national and global levels, the observed trends of news coverage are not always appropriate for serving the role. In the early phase of COVID-19, news coverage in Korea often criticized the way in which foreign countries responded to COVID-19, compared with how well our own country handled pandemic response. For example, it was often reported in a negative light that European and North American countries were reluctant to adopt collective response strategies or strict measures(e.g., mask wearing, social distancing, and tracking of confirmed patients’ trajectories), as opposed to Korea and Asian countries, to reduce the spread of the virus. These news trends of criticizing foreign countries might be effective in enhancing national esteem for a short period; however, such news may have undesirable effects causing conflicts among domestic and foreign people and eventually interfering with global collaboration to implement regulations or policies in combating the pandemic. In view of this, the objective of this study was to examine how news reports on COVID-19 responses in domestic and foreign countries influence people’s attitude and support for governmental punitive policies toward foreigners. In particular, this study examined the role of responsibility frames (people versus government) in news that praise Korea’s successful response to COVID-19 while criticizing foreign countries’ response. Specifically, we examined the effects of 2 responsibility frames praising Korea’s response (people versus government) and 2 responsibility frames criticizing foreign countries’ response (people versus government) on collective narcissism and support for punitive policies toward foreigners in Korea. The mediating role of collective narcissism in the effects of news on punitive policy support was also examined. We conducted an online experiment, using a 2×2 factorial design. Study participants (N=400) were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions: Korean people × foreign people, Korean people × foreign government, Korean government × foreign people, and Korean government × foreign government responsibility frame conditions. The results showed that neither the responsibility frames on Korea’s response nor the responsibility frames on foreign countries’ response had significant main effects on collective narcissism and punitive policy support. However, their interaction effect on collective narcissism was significant. Specifically, among those who read news with the foreign people responsibility frame, the Korean government responsibility frame increased collective narcissism significantly more than the Korean people responsibility frame. With respect to the mediating role of collective narcissism, the effect of the Korean government (as opposed to people) responsibility frame on increasing support for punitive policy was significantly mediated via collective narcissism in the condition of the foreign people responsibility frame; by contrast, such mediation effect was not significant in the condition of the foreign government responsibility frame. Theoretical and social implications based on the results are discussed, and future research is also suggested.

Keywords:

COVID-19 Response Coverage, Responsibility Frame, Collective Narcissism, Punitive Policy Support

키워드:

코로나19, 국내외 대응 기사, 위기대응 주체, 책임 프레임, 집단 나르시시즘, 처벌 정책 지지

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Res earch Foundation of Korea(NRF-2021S1A5C2A02088387) and the Institute of Communication Research at Seoul National University Research Grant(이 논문은 2021년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원(NRF-2021S1A5C2A02088387)과 서울대학교 언론정보연구소의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임).

References

  • Baumeister, R. F., Bushman, B. J., & Campbell, W. K. (2000). Self-esteem, narcissism, and aggression: Does violence result from low self-esteem or from threatened egotism? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(1), 26-29. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00053]
  • Bizman, A., & Yinon, Y. (2004). Social self-discrepancies from own andother standpoints and collective self-esteem. Journal of Social Psychology, 144(2), 101–113. [https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.144.2.101-114]
  • Borah, P., Hwang, J., & Hsu, Y. C. (2021). COVID-19 vaccination attitudes and intention: Message framing and the moderating role of perceived vaccine Benefits. Journal of Health communication, 26(8), 523-533. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2021.1966687]
  • Bushman, B. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Threatened egotism, narcissism, self-esteem, and direct and displaced aggression: Does self-love or self-hate lead to violence? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 219-229. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.219]
  • Choi, H., Kwon, Y., & Kim, M. (2019). A study of the moderating effect of legal and institutional system on the relationship between disaster response competency and disaster management performance. Korean Policy Sciences Review, 23(2), 25-48. [https://doi.org/10.31553/kpsr.2019.6.23.2.2]
  • Choi, J., & So, J. (2021). The effects of COVID-19 news frames on support for punishment policy in individuals : The mediating effects of responsibility perception and anger. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 65(4), 70-105. [https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2021.65.4.002]
  • Chong, Y. Y., Chien, W. T., Cheng, H. Y., Chow, K. M., Kassianos, A. P., Karekla, M., & Gloster, A. (2020). The role of illness perceptions, coping, and self-efficacy on adherence to precautionary measures for COVID-19. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 6540. [https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186540]
  • Cichocka, A. (2016). Understanding defensive and secure in-group positivity: The role of collective narcissism. European Review of Social Psychology, 27(1), 283-317. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2016.1252530]
  • Devakumar, D., Shannon, G., Bhopal, S. S., & Abubakar, I. (2020). Racism and discrimination in COVID-19 responses. The Lancet, 395(10231), 1194. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30792-3]
  • Devlin, K., & Connaughton, A. (2020). Most approve of national response to COVID-19 in 14 advanced economies. Pew Research Center.
  • Dhanani, L. Y., & Franz, B. (2021). Why public health framing matters: An experimental study of the effects of COVID-19 framing on prejudice and xenophobia in the United States, Social Science & Medicine, 269, 113572. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113572]
  • Exline, J. J., Baumeister, R. F., Bushman, B. J., Campbell, W. K., & Finkel, E. J. (2004). Too proud to let go: Narcissistic entitlement as a barrier to forgiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), 894-912. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.6.894]
  • Federico, C. M., & Golec de Zavala, A. G. (2018). Collective narcissism and the 2016 US presidential vote. Public Opinion Quarterly, 82(1), 110-121. [https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfx048]
  • Feng, E., & Cheng, A. (2020). Critics say china has suppressed and censored information in coronavirus outbreak. National public radio, February, 8.
  • Gamson, W., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95, 1-37. [https://doi.org/10.1086/229213]
  • Golec de Zavala, A., & Cichocka, A. (2012). Collective narcissism and anti-Semitism in Poland. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 15(2), 213-229. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430211420891]
  • Golec de Zavala, A., Cichocka, A., & Bilewicz, M. (2013). The paradox of in‐group love: Differentiating collective narcissism advances understanding of the relationship between in group and out group attitudes. Journal of Personality, 81(1), 16-28. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00779.x]
  • Golec de Zavala, A. G., Cichocka, A., Eidelson, R., & Jayawickreme, N. (2009). Collective narcissism and its social consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 1074–1096. [https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016904]
  • Golec de Zavala, A., Cichocka, A., & Iskra-Golec, I. (2013). Collective narcissism moderates the effect of in-group image threat on intergroup hostility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(6), 1019-1039. [https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032215]
  • Golec de Zavala, A., & Lantos, D. (2020). Collective narcissism and its social consequences: The bad and the ugly. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(3), 273-278. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420917703]
  • Gollust, S. E., Fowler, E. F., & Nagler, R. H. (2021). Prevalence and potential consequences of exposure to conflicting information about mammography: Results from nationally-representative survey of US adults. Health Communication, 1-14. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1951958]
  • Hart, P. S., Chinn, S., & Soroka, S. (2020). Politicization and polarization in COVID-19 news coverage. Science Communication, 42(5), 679–697. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547020950735]
  • Hayes, A. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process anaysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford.
  • Hong, J., & Cha, H. (2018). Government’s crisis communication based on the main theme, source, crisis responsibility, frame analysis and the network analysis on the side effects of drug of the press. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 18(4), 575-585.
  • Hornik, R., Kikut, A., Jesch, E., Woko, C., Siegel, L., & Kim, K. (2021). Association of COVID-19 misinformation with face mask wearing and social distancing in a nationally representative US sample. Health communication, 36(1), 6-14. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1847437]
  • Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. [https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226388533.001.0001]
  • Jang, H. (2022, May 15). Half of the people "do not trust the government quarantine measures...COVID-19 will last 1-2 more years”. Hankyoreh. Retrieved 3/17/22 from https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/society/health/1034877.html
  • Jordan, C. H., Spencer, S. J., & Zanna, M. P. (2005). Types of high self-esteem and prejudice: How implicit self-esteem relates to ethnic discrimination among high explicit self-esteem individuals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(5), 693-702. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271580]
  • Jung, S., & Seo, D. (2016). Assessing mediated moderation and moderated mediation: Guidelines and empirical illustration. Korean Journal of Psychology: General, 35(1), 257-282. [https://doi.org/10.22257/kjp.2016.03.35.1.257]
  • Kim, S. (2021). Analysis of impact factors of trust in government under the crisis of COVID-19: Focusing on the change in determinant structure of trust in government by the difference from trusted objects and aggregation. The Korea Association for Policy Studies, 30(4), 33-65. [https://doi.org/10.33900/KAPS.2021.30.4.2]
  • Kim, S. H. (2015). Who is responsible for a social problem? News framing and attribution of responsibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly , 92 (3), 554-558. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015591956]
  • Kim, S., & Cha, H. (2016). The effect of responsibility attribution message and emotion on the policy support and health behavior in obesity circumstance: An application of attribution theory and theory of planned behavior. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 60(2), 369-398. [https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2016.60.2.013]
  • Ko, D. (2020, April 3). The end of Western supremacy?. The Joongang Ilbo. Retrieved 2/1/21 from https://www.joongang.co.kr/article/23746270#home
  • Korea Press Foundation (2020). Changes in the everyday life after COVID-19 in Korea. Retrieved 3/17/22 from https://www.kpf.or.kr/synap/skin/doc.html?fn=1616717455105.pdf&rs=/synap/result/research/
  • Kraus, B., & Kitayama, S. (2019). Interdependent self-construal predicts emotion suppression in Asian Americans: An electro-cortical investigation. Biological Psychology, 146, 107733. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2019.107733]
  • Kühne, R., & Schemer, C. (2015). The emotional effects of news frames on information processing and opinion formation. Communication Research, 42(3), 387-407. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650213514599]
  • Kühne, R., Weber, P., & Sommer, K. (2015). Beyond cognitive framing processes: Anger mediates the effects of responsibility framing on the preference for punitive measures. Journal of Communication, 65 (2), 259-279. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12151]
  • Lim, I. -J., Shim, M., Lee, C. -J., Jeong. S. -H., & Lee, H. (2022, May). Who is responsible for the Covid-19 spread? The effects of responsibility frames and headline types in news on responsibility attribution, emotions, and policy support. Paper presented at the annual conference of International Communication Association for Health Communication Division, Paris.
  • Marchlewska, M., Cichocka, A., Panayiotou, O., Castellanos, K., & Batayneh, J. (2018). Populism as identity politics: Perceived in-group disadvantage, collective narcissism, and support for populism. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(2), 151-162. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617732393]
  • Martikainen, J., & Sakki, I. (2021). How newspaper images position different groups of people in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic: A social representations approach. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 31(4), 465-494. [https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2515]
  • Nan, A., Iles, I. A., Yang, B., & Ma, Z. (2022) Public health messaging during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond: Lessons from communication science, Health Communication, 37(1), 1-19. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1994910]
  • Nan, X., & Thompson, T. (2020). Introduction to the special forum on “Public Health Communication in an Age of COVID-19.” Health Communication, 35(14), 1705–1706. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1840754]
  • Nan, X., & Thompson, T. (2021). Introduction to the special issue on “Public Health Communication in an Age of COVID-19.” Health Communication, 36(1), 1–5. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1853330]
  • Nkengasong, J. N. (2021). COVID-19: unprecedented but expected. Nature Medicine, 27(3), 364. [https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01269-x]
  • Niederdeppe, J., Shapiro, M. A., & Porticella, N. (2011). Attributions of responsibility for obesity: Narrative communication reduces reactive counterarguing among liberals. Human Communication Research, 37(3), 295-323. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2011.01409.x]
  • O'Keefe, D. J. (2003). Message properties, mediating states, and manipulation checks: Claims, evidence, and data analysis in experimental persuasive message effects research. Communication theory, 13(3), 251-274. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2003.tb00292.x]
  • Park, K. (2013). How do the people evaluate crisis response message of government public service? The effect of crisis communication strategy, emotional appeal, issue involvement and crisis responsibility of government on acceptance of crisis communication and evaluation of government credibility by the people. Journal of Public Relations, 17(3), 414-468. [https://doi.org/10.15814/jpr.2013.17.3.414]
  • Pyo, S., & Jeong, J. (2021). Media self-portraits during a pandemic outbreak of infectious diseases and hate The impact of ‘Hate-promoting expression' in COVID-19-related news coverage on users. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 65(2), 286-329. [https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2021.65.2.008]
  • Roberto, K. J., Johnson, A. F., & Rauhaus, B. M. (2020). Stigmatization and prejudice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 42(3), 364-378. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2020.1782128]
  • Shin, S. (2021, January 13). [COVID-19 1 year] K-quarantine shining in crisis, shaken by the 3rd pandemic…How to finish successfully. Yonhap News. Retrieved 2/1/21 from https://www.yna.co.kr/view/AKR20210112073600530?input=1195m
  • The Korean Society of Infectious Diseases (2022. 2. 22). Pan-Academic COVID-19 Response Committee, National Recommendation to the Government.
  • Van Bavel, J. J., Baicker, K., Boggio, P. S., Capraro, V., Cichocka, A., Cikara, M., et al. (2020). Using social and behavioral science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nature Human Behavior, 4, 460–471. [https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/y38m9]
  • Weiner, B. (2006). Social motivation, justice, and the moral emotions: An attributional approach. New York: Psychology Press. [https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410615749]
  • Yang, J., Sohn, A., & Cho, B. (2021). Effects of pride in K-quarantine on COVID-19 preventive behaviors. Health and Social Science, 58(1), 25-52. [https://doi.org/10.37243/kahms.2021.58.25]
  • Yeo, S., & Cha, H. (2021). The effects of positive foreign media framing on homeland reputation and foreign policy support intention: Focused on the mediating effect of public’s perception (recognition of national role identity and collective self-esteem). The Korean Journal of Advertising, 32(3), 177-215, [https://doi.org/10.14377/KJA.2021.4.15.177]
  • Zhao, X., Strasser, A., Cappella, J. N., Lerman, C., & Fishbein, M. (2011). A measure of perceived argument strength: Reliability and validity. Communication Methods & Measures, 5(1), 48–75. [https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2010.547822]

Appendix

부록 Ⅰ

  • 고대훈 (2020, 4, 3). 서양 우월주의의 종언?. <중앙일보>. Retrieved 2/1/21 from https://www.joongang.co.kr/article/23746270#home
  • 김서용 (2021). COVID-19 위기상황과 정부신뢰-신뢰대상 차이와 집계 여부에 따른 정부신뢰 결정구조 변화를 중심으로. <한국정책학회보>, 30권 4호, 33-65.
  • 김수진·차희원 (2016). 비만의 책임귀인 메시지와 감정이 정책지지와 건강행동의도에 미치는 영향: 귀인이론과 계획된 행동이론을 중심으로. <한국언론학보>, 60권 2호, 369-398.
  • 대한감염학회 (2022, 2, 22). <코로나바이러스감염증-19 지역사회 확산 대비 대응: 범학계 코로나바이러스감염증-19 대책위원회 대정부 국민 권고안>.
  • 박경희 (2013). 정부의 공공서비스 위기대응에 대한 국민의 평가: 위기 커뮤니케이션 전략과 감성적 소구, 쟁점 관여도, 정부 책임성이 국민의 커뮤니케이션 수용과 정부신뢰에 미치는 영향. <홍보학연구>, 17권 3호, 414-468.
  • 신선미 (2021, 1, 13) [코로나 1년] 위기에 빛난 K방역, 3차 대유행에 흔들…성공적 마무리 어떻게. <연합뉴스>. Retrieved 2/1/21 from https://www.yna.co.kr/view/AKR20210112073600530?input=1195m
  • 양준용·손애리·조병희 (2021). K-방역 자부심이 코로나19 예방행위에 미치는 영향. <보건과 사회과학>, 58권 1호, 25-52.
  • 여선하·차희원 (2021). 해외언론의 긍정적인 보도프레임이 자국명성 및 외교정책 지지의도에 미치는 영향: 공중 인식(국민 자존감 및 국가 역할정체성)의 매개효과 중심. <광고학연구>, 32권 3호, 177-215.
  • 장현은 (2022, 3, 15). 국민 절반 “정부 방역조치 신뢰 못해…코로나 1-2년 더 갈 것”. <한겨레>. Retrieved 3/17/22 from https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/society/health/1034877.html
  • 정선호·서동기 (2016). 회귀분석을 이용한 매개된 조절효과와 조절된 매개효과 검증 방법. <한국심리학회지: 일반>, 35권 1호, 257-282.
  • 최종혁·소지연 (2021). 코로나 19 뉴스 프레임이 개인에 대한 처벌 정책 지지에 미치는 영향: 책임 인식과 분노의 매개효과. <한국언론학보>, 65권 4호, 70-105.
  • 최호철·권용수·김미선 (2019). 재난대응역량과 재난관리성과의 관계성에 법· 제도 체계성이 미치는 조절효과 연구. <한국정책과학학회보>, 23권 2호, 25-48.
  • 표시영·정지영 (2021). 감염병과 혐오의 팬데믹 속 언론의 자화상: 코로나 19 감염병 전파에 대한 언론보도에서 나타나는 ‘혐오 조장 표현’이 이용자에게 미치는 영향 분석. <한국언론학보>, 65권 2호, 286-329.
  • 한국언론진흥재단 (2020). <코로나19 이후 국민의 일상변화>. Retrieved 3/17/22 from https://www.kpf.or.kr/synap/skin/doc.html?fn=1616717455105.pdf&rs=/synap/result/research/
  • 홍주현·차희원 (2018). 정부의 위기 커뮤니케이션 연구. <한국콘텐츠학회논문지>, 18권 4호, 575-585.
  • Hayes, A. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process anaysis: A regression-based approach, New York: Guilford. 이형권 (역) (2015). Process macro를 이용한 매개분석, 조절분석 및 조절된 매개분석. 신영사.