Selective Exposure in the Age of Social Media

Much of the literature on polarization and selective exposure presumes that the internet exacerbates the fragmentation of the media and the citizenry. Yet this ignores how the widespread use of social media changes news consumption. Social media provide readers a choice of stories from different sources that come recommended from politically heterogeneous individuals, in a context that emphasizes social value over partisan affiliation. Building on existing models of news selectivity to emphasize information utility, we hypothesize that social media’s distinctive feature, social endorsements, trigger several decision heuristics that suggest utility. In two experiments, we demonstrate that stronger social endorsements increase the probability that people select content and that their presence reduces partisan selective exposure to levels indistinguishable from chance.

[1]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Prominence-interpretation theory: explaining how people assess credibility online , 2003, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[2]  J. Freedman,et al.  SELECTIVE EXPOSURE TO INFORMATION: A CRITICAL REVIEW , 1967 .

[3]  R. Selten,et al.  Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox , 2000 .

[4]  Morris P. Fiorina,et al.  Southern Political Science Association Polarization in the American Public : Misconceptions and Misreadings , 2011 .

[5]  R. Nelson,et al.  American economic association (k1). , 1966, Science.

[6]  Marc J. Hetherington,et al.  Resurgent Mass Partisanship: The Role of Elite Polarization , 2001, American Political Science Review.

[7]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Normative influences on thoughtful online participation , 2011, CHI.

[8]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  Social Information Processing in Social News Aggregation , 2007, ArXiv.

[9]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Audience response as a heuristic cue in persuasion. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[10]  Pamela J. Shoemaker,et al.  Hardwired for News: Using Biological and Cultural Evolution to Explain the Surveillance Function , 1996 .

[11]  A.M.J. Derks Post-broadcast democracy: How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections , 2009 .

[12]  Jason Reifler,et al.  PARTY POLARIZATION IN AMERICAN POLITICS : Characteristics , Causes , and Consequences , 2013 .

[13]  Kyu S. Hahn,et al.  Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media Use , 2009 .

[14]  N. Stroud Polarization and Partisan Selective Exposure , 2010 .

[15]  Jon A. Krosnick,et al.  Selective Exposure to Campaign Communication: The Role of Anticipated Agreement and Issue Public Membership , 2008, The Journal of Politics.

[16]  Natalie Jomini Stroud,et al.  Media Use and Political Predispositions: Revisiting the Concept of Selective Exposure , 2008 .

[17]  E. Katz The Two-Step Flow of Communication: An Up-To-Date Report on an Hypothesis , 1957 .

[18]  J. Cappella,et al.  Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment , 2008 .

[19]  Steven Kull,et al.  Misperceptions, the Media, and the Iraq War , 2003 .

[20]  Kyle L. Saunders,et al.  Why Can't We All Just Get Along? The Reality of a Polarized America , 2005 .

[21]  Kristin L. Drogos,et al.  Hostile News: Partisan Use and Perceptions of Cable News Programming , 2008 .

[22]  Dan Zakay,et al.  The Impact of Time Perception Processes on Decision Making under Time Stress , 1993 .

[23]  Kyle L. Saunders,et al.  Ideological Realignment in the U.S. Electorate , 1998, The Journal of Politics.

[24]  Keith N. Hampton,et al.  Social isolation and new technology , 2009 .

[25]  H. Brosius,et al.  Processing the News: How People Tame the Information Tide , 2016 .

[26]  D. Kahneman A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. , 2003, The American psychologist.

[27]  Eli Pariser,et al.  The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You , 2011 .

[28]  Diana C. Mutz Cross-cutting Social Networks: Testing Democratic Theory in Practice , 2002, American Political Science Review.

[29]  J. Berry,et al.  From Incivility to Outrage: Political Discourse in Blogs, Talk Radio, and Cable News , 2011 .

[30]  Diana C. Mutz,et al.  The Workplace as a Context for Cross-Cutting Political Discourse , 2006, The Journal of Politics.

[31]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  News cues: Information scent and cognitive heuristics , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[32]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[33]  Matthew A. Baum Red, Blue, and the Flu: Media Self-Selection and Partisan Gaps in Swine Flu Vaccinations , 2011 .

[34]  M. Hoffman,et al.  Some psychodynamic factors in compulsive conformity. , 1953, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[35]  Jarol B. Manheim,et al.  The One-Step Flow of Communication , 2006 .

[36]  William Stephenson,et al.  The Play Theory of Mass Communication , 1967 .

[37]  Nicholas A. Valentino,et al.  Selective Exposure in the Internet Age: The Interaction between Anxiety and Information Utility , 2009 .

[38]  Matthew Levendusky The Partisan Sort: How Liberals Became Democrats and Conservatives Became Republicans , 2009 .

[39]  Tim O'Reilly,et al.  What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software , 2007 .

[40]  Arthur L. Stinchcombe,et al.  Going to Extremes: How Like Minds Unite and Divide , 2010 .

[41]  W. Bennett,et al.  A New Era of Minimal Effects? The Changing Foundations of Political Communication , 2008 .

[42]  S. Chaiken The heuristic model of persuasion. , 1987 .

[43]  Winter A. Mason,et al.  Real and perceived attitude agreement in social networks. , 2010, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[44]  R. Garrett Politically Motivated Reinforcement Seeking: Reframing the Selective Exposure Debate , 2009 .

[45]  Laurel S. Gleason,et al.  A New Era of Minimal Effects? A Response to Bennett and Iyengar , 2010 .

[46]  Jon Sprouse A validation of Amazon Mechanical Turk for the collection of acceptability judgments in linguistic theory , 2010, Behavior research methods.

[47]  Y. Croissant Estimation of multinomial logit models in R : The mlogit Package , 2010 .

[48]  Derek L. Hansen,et al.  Impact of Popularity Indications on Readers' Selective Exposure to Online News , 2005 .

[49]  Gilbert Cockton,et al.  CHI '03 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems , 2003, CHI 2003.

[50]  C. Sunstein Republic.com , 2001 .

[51]  J. Horowitz,et al.  PARTY POLARIZATION IN AMERICAN POLITICS: Characteristics, Causes, and Consequences , 2006 .

[52]  Erin M. Steffes,et al.  Social ties and online word of mouth , 2009, Internet Res..

[53]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  Social Information Processing in News Aggregation , 2007, IEEE Internet Computing.

[54]  Sara Kiesler,et al.  Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication , 1984 .

[55]  Grey Giddins,et al.  Statistics , 2016, The Journal of hand surgery, European volume.

[56]  SCOTT L. ALTHAUS,et al.  Agenda Setting and the “New” News , 2002, Commun. Res..

[57]  Charles S. Taber,et al.  Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs , 2006 .

[58]  Markus Prior,et al.  Any Good News in Soft News? The Impact of Soft News Preference on Political Knowledge , 2003 .

[59]  Matthew J. Salganik,et al.  Experimental Study of Inequality and Unpredictability in an Artificial Cultural Market , 2006, Science.

[60]  Michael D. Buhrmester,et al.  Amazon's Mechanical Turk , 2011, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[61]  C. Nass,et al.  Conceptualizing Sources in Online News , 2001 .

[62]  C. Sunstein Infotopia: How Many Minds Produce Knowledge , 2006 .

[63]  Maurice Lorr,et al.  A comparison of right-wing authoritarianism, conformity and conservatism , 1991 .

[64]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  Social and Heuristic Approaches to Credibility Evaluation Online , 2010 .

[65]  Diana C. Mutz,et al.  Facilitating Communication across Lines of Political Difference: The Role of Mass Media , 2001, American Political Science Review.