scholarly journals Incidental Exposure, Selective Exposure, and Political Information Sharing: Integrating Online Exposure Patterns and Expression on Social Media

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 363-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian E. Weeks ◽  
Daniel S. Lane ◽  
Dam Hee Kim ◽  
Slgi S. Lee ◽  
Nojin Kwak
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Information Sharing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Selective Exposure ◽  
Political Information ◽  
Party Affiliation ◽  
Information Exposure ◽  
Incidental Exposure ◽  
Exposure Patterns ◽  
Political Party Affiliation

Political information sharing in social media offers citizens opportunities to engage with news and express their political views, but how do different patterns of online political information exposure, including both incidental and selective exposure, affect sharing? Using two-wave panel survey data collected in the United States, we examine the relationship between incidental and selective exposure and their consequent links to political information sharing, across different levels of strength of political party affiliation. Our results demonstrate that incidental exposure to counter-attitudinal information drives stronger partisans to more actively seek out like-minded political content, which subsequently encourages political information sharing on social media. The results highlight the need to consider both types of political information exposure when modeling citizens' political behavior online.

scholarly journals From Online Disagreement to Offline Action: How Diverse Motivations for Using Social Media Can Increase Political Information Sharing and Catalyze Offline Political Participation

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 205630511771627 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel S. Lane ◽  
Dam Hee Kim ◽  
Slgi S. Lee ◽  
Brian E. Weeks ◽  
Nojin Kwak
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Political Participation ◽  
Information Sharing ◽  
Political Engagement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
Relationship Maintenance ◽  
Political Information ◽  
Political Discussion ◽  
Political Disagreement

Amid growing concerns over the contentious tenor of online political discourse, scholars have begun to recognize that the social contexts and affordances provided by social media may present indirect pathways from online political discussion to offline political participation. Less work has addressed how users’ motivations for using social media might influence such dynamics. In this study, we use two-wave panel survey data collected in the United States to test the possibility that online cross-cutting discussion involving political disagreement can encourage users to share political information on social media, which in turn can increase their offline political engagement. We also test how specific motivations for using social media (i.e., political engagement, relationship maintenance, and self-promotion) moderate the amount users share political information on social media when engaged in conversations involving political disagreement. Our results find that increased online cross-cutting political discussion indirectly affects offline political participation through the influence of social media political information sharing. We also observe that this indirect effect is stronger for users who are motivated to use social media for either political engagement or relationship maintenance (but not self-promotion) purposes. Our findings advance one route from online political disagreement to offline political action, which can impact both politically and nonpolitically motivated social media users.

Now We’re Talking? Understanding the Interplay Between Online Selective and Incidental Exposure and Their Influence on Online Cross-Cutting Political Discussion

2020 ◽  
pp. 089443932092079
Author(s):  
Nojin Kwak ◽  
Daniel S. Lane ◽  
Brian E. Weeks ◽  
Dam Hee Kim ◽  
Slgi S. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Panel Data ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Selective Exposure ◽  
Political Information ◽  
Political Discussion ◽  
Information Exposure ◽  
Incidental Exposure ◽  
The Impact

This study examines how two distinct patterns of online political information exposure—pro-attitudinal selective exposure and counter-attitudinal incidental exposure—can work together to influence engagement in online cross-cutting political discussion. Using panel data from a two-wave national survey conducted in 2012, we test two competing theoretical accounts. Findings suggest that incidental exposure affects selective exposure’s contribution to cross-cutting discussion in a curvilinear way. Incidental exposure strengthens the impact of selective exposure on cross-cutting discussion up until a certain point, after which it begins to attenuate its impact. Results emphasize the need to account for the multiple ways people encounter political information online.

scholarly journals Does incidental exposure on social media equalize or reinforce participatory gaps? Evidence from a panel study

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 2463-2482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffael Heiss ◽  
Jörg Matthes
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Panel Study ◽  
Political Engagement ◽  
Political Information ◽  
Political Interest ◽  
Main Effect ◽  
Incidental Exposure ◽  
Low Levels ◽  
Using Data ◽  
High Effort

Existing research indicates that incidental exposure to political information on social media may function as an equalizer, stimulating political engagement among the politically detached. In this article, we challenge this notion and propose that there are good reasons to assume that incidental exposure may reinforce existing gaps. We test the equalizing against the reinforcing hypothesis using data from a two-wave panel study ( N = 559). We find a positive main effect of incidental exposure on low-effort digital participation. However, this effect was not conditional on political interest, as the equalizing assumption would have suggested. More interestingly, we found that the effect of incidental exposure on high-effort digital participation was conditional on political interest. However, against the assumption of equalization, individuals with low levels of political interest were negatively affected by incidental exposure, thus lending support for the reinforcement hypothesis. Possible reasons for these findings are discussed.

scholarly journals Digital Media and Perceptions of Source Credibility in Political Communication

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Flanagin ◽  
Miriam J. Metzger
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Digital Media ◽  
Political Communication ◽  
Source Credibility ◽  
Selective Exposure ◽  
Political Information ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Information Consumers

The rich research heritage on source credibility is fundamentally linked to processes of political communication and the provision of political information. Networked digital technologies, however, have recently complicated the assessment of source credibility by modifying people’s ability to determine source expertise and trustworthiness, which are the foundations upon which credibility evaluations have traditionally rested. This chapter explores source credibility in online contexts by examining the credibility of digital versus traditional channels, the nature of political information conveyed by social media, and the dynamics of political information online. In addition, this chapter considers related research concerns, including the link between credibility and selective exposure, the potential for group polarization, and the role of social media in seeking and delivering credible political information. These concerns suggest challenges and opportunities as information consumers navigate the contemporary information environment in search of the knowledge to make them informed members of a politically engaged citizenry.

Bridging the divide: The effect of humanizing information on attitudes toward political outgroup members

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonah Koetke ◽  
Beverly Conrique ◽  
Karina Schumann
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social Media ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Information ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Political ◽  
Information Cues ◽  
Emotional Complexity ◽  
Promising Avenue ◽  
Individuating Information

Liberals and conservatives in the United States dislike and dehumanize those on the other side. This divide leads to political stalemates, destroyed relationships, and even violence. We examined the benefits of humanizing members of the political outgroup by providing people with humanizing information—cues that signal a person’s cognitive and emotional complexity. We examined the effectiveness of humanizing information in three preregistered experiments (N = 1389). Study 1 tested whether learning humanizing information about an outgroup member would reduce bias towards them, relative to a control containing only political information. Study 2 sought to replicate this effect by comparing the humanizing information to a control that contained non-humanizing individuating information. Study 3 tested this effect in the timely context of social media feeds, while also testing whether the benefits of learning humanizing information extended to additional members of the outgroup. Each methodology revealed that, compared to those who read non-humanizing controls, participants who learned humanizing information about a political outgroup member were less hostile and more empathic toward that outgroup member. All three studies also provided evidence that judging the outgroup member as more human contributed to this reduction in bias. Further, Study 3 revealed that the benefits of humanizing information extended to members of the outgroup that were connected to the humanized member. The current studies thus identify a promising avenue for reducing interparty hostility.

scholarly journals Mapping information exposure on social media to explain differences in HPV vaccine coverage in the United States

Vaccine ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (23) ◽  
pp. 3033-3040 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam G. Dunn ◽  
Didi Surian ◽  
Julie Leask ◽  
Aditi Dey ◽  
Kenneth D. Mandl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Hpv Vaccine ◽  
Vaccine Coverage ◽  
The United States ◽  
Information Exposure ◽  
Mapping Information

scholarly journals Discussion Network Activation: An Expanded Approach to Selective Exposure

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 32-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin A. Lyons
Keyword(s):  
Selective Exposure ◽  
Political Information ◽  
Traditional Media ◽  
Political News ◽  
Political Beliefs ◽  
Network Activation ◽  
Information Exposure

Studies of selective exposure have focused on use of traditional media sources. However, discussion networks are an integral part of individuals’ information diets. This article extends the selective exposure literature by exploring the potential for networks to likewise be selectively accessed. A pre-registered experiment found that participants nominate denser, more ideologically coherent networks in response to congenial political news relative to uncongenial news, and express willingness to share it with more people. Analysis of open-ended data suggest shared political beliefs are more likely to motivate discussant selection in response to congenial, rather than uncongenial, news. Properties of networks generated in response to political and non-political news did not vary. These results provide nuance to our understanding of political information exposure.

scholarly journals Correlates of Levels of Willingness to Engage in Climate Change Actions in the United States

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (17) ◽  
pp. 9204
Author(s):  
Carl A. Latkin ◽  
Lauren Dayton ◽  
Da-In Lee ◽  
Grace Yi ◽  
Mudia Uzzi
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
The United States ◽  
Party Affiliation ◽  
Multinomial Regression ◽  
Climate Change Concern ◽  
Political Party Affiliation ◽  
Climate Change Attitudes ◽  
Political Actions ◽  
Willingness To Engage

While the majority of the American public believe climate change is occurring and are worried, few are engaged in climate change action. In this study, we assessed factors associated with the level of willingness to engage in climate change actions using an online, longitudinal US study of adults. Climate change action outcomes included the level of willingness to post materials online, take political actions, talk with peers about climate change, and donate to or help an organization. Predictors included climate change attitudes, environmental attitudes, political ideology, political party affiliation, and demographic variables. Most (72%) of the 644 respondents only talked about climate change with peers a few times a year or less, though 65% were very or extremely worried about climate change. Many respondents indicated a willingness to do somewhat or a lot more, from 38% willing to talk to peers to 25% for willing to take political actions. In multinomial regression models, the Climate Change Concern scale was strongly and consistently associated with willingness to engage in climate change action. These findings indicate a need to both identify those who are willing to act and finding activities that fit with their interests and availability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document