Polarization and partisan selective exposure

Journal of Communication

Volumn 60, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 556-576

  Stroud, Natalie Jomini ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ELECTION; MASS MEDIA; MEDIA ROLE; PARTY POLITICS; POLITICAL PARTICIPATION;

EID: 77955730862     PISSN: 00219916     EISSN: 14602466     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497.x     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Adams W C, Salzman A, Vantine W, Suelter L, Baker A, Bonvouloir L. The power of " The Right Stuff": A quasi-experimental field test of the docudrama hypothesis. Public Opinion Quarterly 1985, 49:330-339.
2. Aday S, Livingston S, Hebert M. Embedding the truth: A cross-cultural analysis of objectivity and television coverage of the Iraq war. Harvard Journal of Press/Politics 2005, 10:3-21.
3. Albarracín D, Mitchell A L. The role of defensive confidence in preference for proattitudinal information: How believing that one is strong can sometimes be a defensive weakness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2004, 30:1565-1584.
4. Ball-Rokeach S J, Grube J W, Rokeach M. " Roots: The Next Generation" -Who watched and with what effect? Public Opinion Quarterly 1981, 45:58-68.
5. Beasley R K, Joslyn M R. Cognitive dissonance and post-decision attitude change in six presidential elections. Political Psychology 2001, 22(3):521-540.
6. Berelson B, Steiner G A. Human behavior: An inventory of scientific findings 1964, New York, Harcourt, Brace & World
7. Berger I E, Mitchell A A. The effect of advertising on attitude accessibility, attitude confidence, and the attitude-behavior relationship. Journal of Consumer Research 1989, 16:269-279.
8. Bimber B, Davis R. Campaigning online: The Internet in U.S. elections 2003, New York, Oxford University Press
9. Canon L K. Self-confidence and selective exposure to information. Conflict, decision, and dissonance 1964, 83-95. Festinger L. (Ed.),, (pp., Stanford, Stanford University Press
10. Cappella J N, Turow J, Jamieson K H. Call-in political talk radio: Background, content, audiences, portrayal in mainstream media 1996, Philadelphia, Annenberg Public Policy Center
11. Carey J W. The communications revolution and the professional communicator. James Carey: A critical reader 1997, 128-143. Munson E SWarren C A. [1969], (Eds.),, (pp., Minneapolis, MN, University of Minnesota Press
12. The diversity debate: Media coverage of affirmative action in college education. 2003, Center for Media and Public Affairs., Washington, DC
13. Campaign 2004: The summer: How the media covered the presidential campaign during summer 2004. 2004a, Center for Media and Public Affairs., Washington, DC
14. Campaign 2004: The media agenda. 2004b, Center for Media and Public Affairs., Washington, DC
15. Chaffee S H, McLeod J M. Individuals vs. social predictors of information seeking. Journalism Quarterly 1973, 50:237-245.
16. Craig S C, Martinez M D, Kane J G. The structure of political competition: Dimensions of candidate and group evaluation revisited. Political Behavior 1999, 21(4):283-304.
17. D'Alessio D, Allen M. On the role of newspaper ownership on bias in presidential campaign coverage by newspapers. Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis 2007, 429-453. Preiss R W, Gayle B MBurrell NAllen MBryant J. (Eds.),, (pp., Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum
18. Diebold F X. Elements of forecasting 2004, (3rd ed), Mason, OH, Thomson
19. Druckman J N, Parkin M. The impact of media bias: How editorial slant affects voters. Journal of Politics 2005, 67:1030-1049.
20. Festinger L. Conflict, decision, and dissonance 1964, Stanford, Stanford University Press
21. Fiorina M P, Abrams S J, Pope J C. Culture war? The myth of a polarized America 2005, New York, Pearson Longman
22. Freedman J L. Confidence, utility, and selective exposure: A partial replication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1965, 2:778-780.
23. Garrett R K. Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication 59:676-699. (2009).
24. Green D P. On the dimensionality of public sentiment toward partisan and ideological groups. American Journal of Political Science 1988, 32:758-780.
25. Greene S. The structure of partisan attitudes: Reexamining partisan dimensionality and ambivalence. Political Psychology 2005, 26(5):809-822.
26. Groseclose T, Milyo J. A measure of media bias. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 2005, 120:1191-1237.
27. Huckfeldt R, Mendez J M, Osborn T. Disagreement, ambivalence, and engagement: The political consequences of heterogeneous networks. Political Psychology 2004, 25:65-95.
28. Isenberg D J. Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 50:1141-1151.
29. Jacobson G C. Partisan polarization in presidential support: The electoral connection. Congress & The Presidency 2003, 30:1-37.
30. Jones D A. The polarizing effect of new media messages. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 2002, 14:158-174.
31. Kahn K F, Kenney P J. The slant of the news: How editorial endorsements influence campaign coverage and citizens' views of candidates. American Political Science Review 2002, 96:381-394.
32. Katz E. And deliver us from segmentation. Annals of the American Association of Political and Social Sciences 1996, 546:22-33.
33. Kessler R C, Greenberg D F. Linear panel analysis: Models of quantitative change 1981, New York, Academic Press
34. Klapper J T. The effects of mass communication 1960, Glencoe, IL, The Free Press
35. Knobloch-Westerwick S, Meng J. Selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counter-attitudinal political information. Communication Research 36:426-448. (2009).
36. Krippendorff K. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology 2004, (2nd ed), Thousand Oaks, Sage
37. Krosnick J A, Petty R E. Attitude strength: An overview. Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences 1995, 1-24. Petty R E, Krosnick J A. (Eds.),, (pp., Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum
38. Lavine H, Borgida E, Sullivan J L. On the relationship between attitude involvement and attitude accessibility: Toward a cognitive-motivational model of political information processing. Political Psychology 2000, 21:81-106.
39. Lowin A. Further evidence for an approach-avoidance interpretation for selective exposure. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1969, 5:265-271.
40. Meffert M F, Chung S, Joiner A J, Waks L, Garst J. The effects of negativity and motivated information processing during a political campaign. Journal of Communication 2006, 56(1):27-51.
41. Mendelsohn M, Nadeau R. The magnification and minimization of social cleavages by the broadcast and narrowcast news media. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 1996, 8:374-390.
42. Mills J. The effect of certainty on exposure to information prior to commitment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1965, 1:348-355.
43. Mills J, Ross A. Effects of commitment and certainty upon interest in supporting information. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 1964, 68:552-555.
44. Mutz D C. The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science 2002, 46:838-855.
45. Mutz D C. How the mass media divide us. Red and blue nation? Characteristics and causes of America's polarized politics 2006, 223-242. Nivola P SBrady D W. (Eds.),, (Vol. 1, pp., Stanford, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace, and, Washington, DC, Brookings Institution Press
46. Nivola P S, Brady D W. Red and blue nation? Characteristics and causes of America's polarized politics 2006, (Vol. 1)., Stanford, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace, and, Washington DC, Brookings Institution Press
47. Paletz D L, Koon J, Whitehead E, Hagens R B. Selective exposure: The potential boomerang effect. Journal of Communication 1972, 22:48-53.
48. Prior M. Post-broadcast democracy: How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections 2007, New York, Cambridge University Press
49. The debate effect: How the press covered the pivotal period of the 2004 presidential campaign. 2004, Project for Excellence in Journalism., Washington, DC
50. Romer D. Time series models. Capturing campaign dynamics: The National Annenberg Election Survey 2004, 117-189. Romer DKenski KWaldman PAdasiewicz CJamieson K H. (Eds.),, (pp., New York, Oxford University Press
51. Romer D, Kenski K, Winneg K, Adasiewicz C, Jamieson K H. Capturing campaign dynamics: 2000 & 2004 2006, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press
52. Schultz C B. The effect of confidence on selective exposure: An unresolved dilemma. The Journal of Social Psychology 1974, 94:65-69.
53. Schulz-Hardt S, Frey D, Lüthgens C, Moscovici S. Biased information search in group decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2000, 78:655-669.
54. Slater M D. Operationalizing and analyzing exposure: The foundation of media effects research. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 2004, 81:168-183.
55. Slater M D. Reinforcing spirals: The mutual influence of media selectivity and media effects and their impact on individual behavior and social identity. Communication Theory 2007, 17:281-303.
56. Stroud N J. Media effects, selective exposure, and Fahrenheit 9/11. Political Communication 2007, 24:415-432.
57. Stroud N J. Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior 2008, 30(3):341-366.
58. Sunstein C. Republic.com 2001, Princeton, Princeton University Press
59. Taber C S, Lodge M. Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 2006, 50:755-769.
60. Thayer S. Confidence and postjudgment exposure to consonant and dissonant information in a free-choice situation. Journal of Social Psychology 1969, 77:113-120.
61. Yanovitzky I, Cappella J N. Effect of call-in political talk radio shows on their audiences: Evidence from a multi-wave panel analysis. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 2001, 13:377-397.
62. Ziemke D A. Selective exposure in a presidential campaign contingent on certainty and salience. Communication yearbook 1980, 497-511. (Vol. 4, pp., New Brunswick, NJ, Transaction Books