Impact of popularity indications on readers' selective exposure to online news

Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media

Volumn 49, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 296-313

  Knobloch Westerwick, Silvia ^a   Sharma, Nikhil ^b   Hansen, Derek L ^b   Alter, Scott ^c  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^c NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745031035     PISSN: 08838151     EISSN: 15506878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15506878jobem4903_3     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Althaus, S. L., & Tewksbury, D. (2002). Agenda setting and the new news: Patterns of issue importance among readers of the paper and online versions of the New York Times. Communication Research, 29, 180-207.
2. Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475-482.
3. Byrne, D. (1961). Interpersonal attraction as a function of affiliation need and attitude similarity. Human Relations, 14, 283-289.
4. Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Hermann (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3-39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
5. Claypool, M., Le, P., Waseda, M., & Brown, D. (2001). Implicit interest indicators. Proceedings of ACM Intelligent User Interfaces Conference (IUI). Santa Fe, NM. Retrieved March 3, 2004, from http://www.cs.wpi.edu/ ~claypool/papers/iii/
6. Cosley, D., Lam, S. K., Albert, I., Konstan, J., & Riedl, J. (2003). Is seeing believing? How recommender systems influence users' opinions. Proceedings of CHI 2003 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 585-592). Fort Lauderdale, FL Retrieved March 3, 2004, from http://www.cs.umn. edu/Research/GroupLens/publications.html
7. Deuze, M. (2003). The Web and its journalisms: Considering the consequences of different types of news media online. New Media & Society, 5, 203-230.
8. Eveland, W. P., & Dunwoody, S. (2002). An investigation of elaboration and selective scanning as mediators of learning from the Web versus print. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46, 34-53.
9. Fallows, D. (2004). The Internet and daily life: Many Americans use the Internet in everyday activities, but traditional offline habits still dominate. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved October 19, 2004, from http://www.pewinternet.org
10. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
11. Galtung, J., & Ruge, M. H. (1965). The structure of foreign news: The presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus crises in four Norwegian newspapers. Journal of Peace Research, 2, 64-91.
12. Gans, H. (1979). Deciding what's news. New York: Pantheon.
13. Garcia, M., & Stark, P. (1991). Eyes on the news. St. Petersburg, FL: Poynters Institute.
14. Graber, D. (1984). Processing the news: How people tame the information tide. New York: Longman.
15. Harris Interactive. (2004, May 19). Most Americans who are online use Internet for news, but most say this does not reduce their use of other news media. The Harris poll #35. Retrieved October 18, 2004, from http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=464
16. Kiosis, S. (2004). Explicating media salience: A factor analysis of New York Times issue coverage during the 2000 U.S. presidential election. Journal of Communication, 54(1), 71-87.
17. Klapper, J. T. (1960). The effects of mass communication. Oxford, England: Free Press of Glencoe.
18. Knobloch, S. (2004, May). Social determinants of selective exposure to media information: Recent Web-based experimental investigations. Panel presented at the International Communication Association Conference, New Orleans, LA.
19. Knobloch, S., Dillman Carpentier, F., & Zillmann, D. (2003). Effects of salience dimensions of informational utility on selective exposure to online news. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80, 91-108.
20. Knobloch, S., Hastall, M., Grimmer, D., & Brück, J. (2004, May). Predicting selective exposure to media information: The efficacy dimension in the informational-utility model. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference, New Orleans, LA.
21. Knobloch, S., Hastall, M., Zillmann, D., & Callison, C. (2003). Imagery effects on the selective reading of Internet newsmagazines: A cross-cultural examination, Communication Research, 30, 3-29.
22. Knobloch, S., Patzig, G., & Hastall, M. (2002). Informational Utility: Einfluss von Nützlichkeit auf selektive Zuwendung zu negativen und positiven Online-Nachrichten [Informational utility: Impact of utility on selective exposure to negative and positive online news]. Medien-& Kommunikationswissenschaft, 50, 359-375.
23. Knobloch, S., Sundar, S. S., & Hastall, M. (2005, May). Clicking news: Impacts of newsworthiness, source credibility, and timeliness as online news features on news consumption. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference, New York.
24. Knobloch, S., Zillmann, D., Gibson, R., & Karrh, J. (2002). Effects of salient news items on information acquisition and issue perception. Zeitschrift für Medienpsychologie, 14, 14-22.
25. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Dillman Carpentier, F., Blumhoff, A., & Nickel, N. (2005). Informational utility effects on selective exposure to good and bad news: A cross- cultural investigation. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 82, 181-195.
26. Lasica, J. D. (2002a, April 2). The promise of the Daily Me. Online Journalism Review. Retrieved April 1, 2004, from http://www.ojr.org/ojr/lasica/ 1017779142.php
27. Lasica, I. D. (2002b, April 2). The second coming of personalized news. Online Journalism Review. Retrieved April 1, 2004, from http://www.ojr.org/ojr/ lasica/1017779142.php
28. Lippmann, W. (1922). Public opinion. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
29. Lynn, M., & Snyder, C. R. (2002). Uniqueness seeking. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 395-410). London: Oxford University Press.
30. McCombs, M. E., & Mauro, J. B. (1977). Predicting newspaper readership from content characteristics. Journalism Quarterly, 54, 48-49.
31. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 176-187.
32. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1993). The evolution of agenda-setting research: Twenty-five years in the marketplace of ideas. Journal of Communication, 43(2), 58-67.
33. Mutz, D. (1992). Impersonal influence: Effects of representations of public opinion on political attitudes. Political Behavior, 14, 89-122.
34. Mutz, D. (1998). Impersonal influence: How perceptions of mass collectives affect political attitudes. New York: Cambridge University Press.
35. Neuman, W., Just, M., & Crigler, A. (1992). Common knowledge: News and the construction of political meaning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The spiral of silence: A theory of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 24(2), 43-51.
37. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1977). Turbulences in the climate of opinion: Methodological application of the spiral of silence theory. Public Opinion Quarterly, 41, 113-151.
38. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979). Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915-1926.
39. Redelfs, M. (1996). Electronic publishing und computer-assisted reporting: Auswirkungen des Information Superhighway auf den Journalismus. In H. J. Kleinsteuber (Ed.), Der Information Superhighway: Amerikanische Visionen und Erfahrungen (pp. 257-276). Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
40. Resnick, P., Iacovou, N., Sushak, M., Bergstrom, P., & Riedl, J. (1994). GroupLens: An open architecture for collaborative filtering of netnews. In Proceedings of 1994 Computer Supported Collaborative Work Conference (pp. 175-186). New York: ACM Press.
41. Sharma, N., Hansen, D., Buis, L., Carter, T. J. A., Ng, I., Alter, S., et al. (2004, May). It's all in the ratings: Impact of ratings on selection of online news articles. Panel paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference, New Orleans, LA.
42. Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. (1980). Uniqueness: The human pursuit of difference. New York: Plenum.
43. Sundar, S. (1999). Exploring receivers' criteria for perception of print and online news. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 76, 373-386.
44. Sundar, S., & Nass, C. (2001). Conceptualizing sources in online news. Journal of Communication, 51(1), 52-72.
45. Tewksbury, D., & Althaus, S. L. (2000). Differences in knowledge acquisition among readers of the paper and online versions of a national newspaper. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 457-479.
46. Wanta, W. (1988). The effects of dominant photographs: An agenda-setting experiment. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 107-111.
47. White, D. M. (1950). The gatekeeper: A case study in the selection of news. Journalism Quarterly, 41, 384-390.
48. Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 245-271.
49. Wills, T. A. (1991). Similarity and self-esteem in downward comparison. In J. Suls & T. A. Wills (Eds.), Social comparison: Contemporary theory and research (pp. 51-78). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
50. Wolf, R., & Grotta, G. (1985). Images: A question of readership. Newspaper Research Journal, 6(2), 30-36.
51. Zillmann, D., Knobloch, S., & Yu, H. S. (2001). Effects of photographs on the selective reading of news reports. Media Psychology, 3, 301-324.