Modeling Self-Selection Bias in Interactive-Communications Research

Interactive media use is a key issue in contemporary and future communication research. However, when users can interact with messages, new sources of variation emerge that make generalization difficult. This article introduces methods that communication researchers can use to increase the external validity of studies investigating the effects of interactivity versus noninteractivity. For this area of research, the article recommends the use of forced-interaction studies with random assignment to maximize internal validity, and free-interaction studies with self-selection bias modeling to maximize external validity. The article concludes with examples of self-selection bias modeling, using data from real studies, and a discussion of their implications for communication researchers.

[1]  Hilde A. M. Voorveld,et al.  The relation between actual and perceived interactivity: what makes the websites of top global brands truly interactive? , 2011 .

[2]  María Sicilia,et al.  EFFECTS OF INTERACTIVITY IN A WEB SITE: The Moderating Effect of Need for Cognition , 2005 .

[3]  T. Cook,et al.  Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings , 1979 .

[4]  Alfred DeMaris,et al.  Regression With Social Data: Modeling Continuous and Limited Response Variables , 2004 .

[5]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[6]  Dan Ariely,et al.  Controlling the Information Flow: Effects on Consumers' Decision Making and Preferences , 2000 .

[7]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[8]  Christoph Klimmt,et al.  Interactivity and Generalizability: New Media, New Challenges , 2007 .

[9]  Shyam Sundar,et al.  Social psychology of interactivity in human-website interaction , 2009 .

[10]  J. Heckman.  Sample selection bias as a specification error , 1979 .

[11]  Byung-Kwan Lee,et al.  The Moderating Effects of Expectation on the Patterns of the Interactivity-Attitude Relationship , 2007 .

[12]  Erik P. Bucy.  The Interactivity Paradox: Closer to the News but Confused , 2003 .

[13]  Gráinne M. Fitzsimons,et al.  On the dangers of pulling a fast one: Advertisement disclaimer speed, brand trust, and purchase intention , 2012 .

[14]  H. Marsh,et al.  In Search of Golden Rules: Comment on Hypothesis-Testing Approaches to Setting Cutoff Values for Fit Indexes and Dangers in Overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's (1999) Findings , 2004 .

[15]  Banwari Mittal.  A comparative analysis of four scales of consumer involvement , 1995 .

[16]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Experimentation in social psychology. , 1998 .

[17]  Patrick De Pelsmacker,et al.  The Effectiveness of Telescopic Ads Delivered Via Interactive Digital Television: The Impact of the Amount of Information and the Level of Interactivity on Brand Responses , 2010 .

[18]  Michael D. Cooper,et al.  Stochastic modeling of usage patterns in a web-based information system , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[19]  F. Thomas Juster,et al.  Consumer Buying Intentions and Purchase Probability: An Experiment in Survey Design , 1966 .

[20]  Peter H. Bloch,et al.  After the New Wears Off: The Temporal Context of Product Involvement , 1986 .

[21]  D. Green,et al.  Measurement error masks bipolarity in affect ratings. , 1993, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[22]  Guohua Wu,et al.  The Mediating Role of Perceived Interactivity in the Effect of Actual Interactivity on Attitude Toward the Website , 2005 .

[23]  Jinhee Kim,et al.  Interactivity and Persuasion , 2005 .

[24]  Annie Lang.  Using the Limited Capacity Model of Motivated Mediated Message Processing to Design Effective Cancer Communication Messages , 2006 .

[25]  Mark Tremayne,et al.  Lessons Learned from Experiments with Interactivity on the Web , 2005 .

[26]  G. Zinkhan,et al.  Determinants of Perceived Web Site Interactivity , 2008 .

[27]  Jinkook Lee,et al.  Consumers’ use of information intermediaries and the impact on their information search behavior in the financial market , 2005 .

[28]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. , 1999 .

[29]  D. Marlowe,et al.  A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. , 1960, Journal of consulting psychology.

[30]  Wendy W. Moe,et al.  The Influence of Goal‐Directed and Experiential Activities on Online Flow Experiences , 2003 .

[31]  B. Ratchford,et al.  The impact of the internet on consumers' use of information sources for automobiles : A re-inquiry , 2007 .

[32]  Justin L. Tobias,et al.  Simple Estimators for Treatment Parameters in a Latent-Variable Framework , 2003, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[33]  Jonathan Steuer,et al.  Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence , 1992 .

[34]  Clay M. Voorhees,et al.  Conveying Trustworthiness to Online Consumers: Reactions to Consensus, Physical Store Presence, Brand Familiarity, and Generalized Suspicion , 2010 .

[35]  Meryl P. Gardner,et al.  Does Attitude toward the Ad Affect Brand Attitude under a Brand Evaluation Set? , 1985 .

[36]  M. Zimmer,et al.  Migration and income: the question of self-selection. , 1980, Southern economic journal.

[37]  Y. Amichai-Hamburger.  Personality, individual differences and Internet use , 2009 .

[38]  Yuping Liu,et al.  A Dual-Process Model of Interactivity Effects , 2009 .

[39]  C. Allen,et al.  The Mature Brand and Brand Interest: An Alternative Consequence of Ad-Evoked Affect , 1993 .

[40]  Robert F. Potter,et al.  Psychophysiological Measurement and Meaning: Cognitive and Emotional Processing of Media , 2011 .

[41]  S. Rafaeli,et al.  Assessing interactivity in computer-mediated research , 2009 .

[42]  Pablo J. Boczkowski,et al.  How Users Take Advantage of Different Forms of Interactivity on Online News Sites: Clicking, E-Mailing, and Commenting. , 2012 .

[43]  Edwin A. Locke,et al.  Cognitive and motivational effects of participation: A mediator study , 1994 .

[44]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Turning Visitors into Customers: A Usability-Centric Perspective on Purchase Behavior in Electronic Channels , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[45]  Shalom Levy,et al.  The influence of product involvement on consumers’ interactive processes in interactive television , 2008 .

[46]  D. Relles,et al.  Tools for intuition about sample selection bias and its correction , 1997 .

[47]  James J. Heckman,et al.  Four Parameters of Interest in the Evaluation of Social Programs , 2001 .

[48]  E. Bucy,et al.  The Mediated Moderation Model of Interactivity , 2007 .

[49]  Bart J. Bronnenberg,et al.  Do Digital Video Recorders Influence Sales? , 2010 .

[50]  Michael A. Shapiro,et al.  Generalizability in Communication Research , 2002 .

[51]  R. Bucklin,et al.  Click Here for Internet Insight: Advances in Clickstream Data Analysis in Marketing , 2009 .

[52]  Mark D. Griffiths,et al.  Demographic Factors and Playing Variables in Online Computer Gaming , 2004, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[53]  Bernhard Debatin,et al.  Facebook and Online Privacy: Attitudes, Behaviors, and Unintended Consequences , 2009, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[54]  SHYAM SUNDAR,et al.  Explicating Web Site Interactivity , 2003, Commun. Res..