The role of perceptions of media bias in general and issue-specific political participation

Mass Communication and Society

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 343-374

  Ho, Shirley S ^a   Binder, Andrew R ^b   Becker, Amy B ^c   Moy, Patricia ^d   Scheufele, Dietram A ^b   Brossard, Dominique ^b   Gunther, Albert C ^b  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^c TOWSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79957877453     PISSN: 15205436     EISSN: 15327825     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15205436.2010.491933     Document Type: Article

References (101)

1. ABC. (2009). Stem cells: Back by popular demand. Retrieved from http://usliberals.about.com
2. Barnhurst, K. G., & Mutz, D. C. (1997). American journalism and the decline in event-centered reporting. Journal of Communication, 47(4), 27-54.
3. Becker, A. B., Dalrymple, K. E., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., & Gunther, A. C. (2010). Getting citizens involved: How controversial policy debates stimulate issue participation during a political campaign. The International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(2), 181-203. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edp047
4. Bennett, W. L. (1992). The governing crisis: Media, money, and marketing in American elections. New York, NY: St. Martin's.
5. Bennett, S. E., Rhine, S. L., Flickinger, R. S., & Bennett, L. L. M. (1999). "Video malaise" revisited: Public trust in the media and government. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 4(4), 8-23.
6. Binder, A. R., Dalrymple, K. E., Brossard, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (2009). The soul of a polarized democracy: Testing theoretical linkages between talk and attitude extremity during the 2004 presidential election. Communication Research, 36, 315-340.
7. Bollen, K. A. (1987). Structural equation models with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
8. Broder, D. S. (2006, July 9). Stem cells back in political spotlight: Issue is key in Wisconsin gubernatorial election. Washington Post, p. A5.
9. Cappella, J. N., & Jamieson, K. H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. New York: Oxford University Press.
10. Chaffee, S. H. (1991). Explication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
11. Chanley, V. A., Rudolph, T. J., & Rahn, W. M. (2000). The origins and consequences of public trust in government: A time-series analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 239-256.
12. Choi, J., Yang, M., & Chang, J. J. C. (2009). Elaboration of the hostile media phenomenon: The roles of involvement, media skepticism, congruency of perceived media influence, and perceived opinion climate. Communication Research, 36(1), 54-75.
13. Cohen, J., & Tsfati, Y. (2009). The influence of presumed media influence on strategic voting. Communication Research, 36, 359-378.
14. Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206-261). New York, NY: Free Press.
15. Craig, S. C., Niemi, R. E., & Silver, G. E. (1990). Political efficacy and trust: A report on the NES pilot study items. Political Behavior, 12, 289-314.
16. Curtin, R., Presser, S., & Singer, E. (2005). Changes in telephone survey nonresponse over the past quarter century. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69(1), 87-98.
17. D'Alessio, D., & Allen, M. (2000). Media bias in presidential elections: A meta-analysis. Journal of Communication, 50, 133-156.
18. Dennis, E. E. (1997). How liberal are the media anyway? The continual conflict of professionalism and partnership. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 2, 115-119.
19. deVreese, C. H., & Elenbaas, M. (2008). Media in the game of politics: Effects of strategic metacoverage on political cynicism. The International Journal of Press/ Politics, 13, 285-309.
20. Entman, R. M. (1996). Reporting environmental policy debate: The real media bias. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 1, 77-92.
21. Esser, F., Reinemann, C., & Fan, D. (2001). Spin doctors in the United States, Great Britain, and Germany: Metacommunication about media manipulation. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 6(1), 16-42.
22. Eveland, W. P., & Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Connecting news media use with gaps in knowledge and participation. Political Communication, 17, 215-237.
23. Ewing, T. N. (1942). A study of certain factors involved in changes of opinion. Journal of Social Psychology, 16(1), 63-88.
24. Fico, F., & Freedman, E. (2008). Biasing influences on balance in election news coverage: An assessment of newspaper coverage of the 2006 U.S. Senate elections. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 85, 499-514.
25. Fico, F., & Soffin, S. (1995). Fairness and balance of selected newspaper coverage of controversial national, state, and local issues. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 72, 621-633.
26. Fico, F., Zeldes, G. A., Carpenter, S., & Diddi, A. (2008). Broadcast and cable network news coverage of the 2004 presidential election: An assessment of partisan and structural imbalance. Mass Communication and Society, 11, 319-339.
27. Finkel, S. E. (1985). Reciprocal effects of participation and political efficacy: A panel analysis. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 891-913.
28. Giner-Sorolla, R., & Chaiken, S. (1994). The causes of hostile media judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 165-180.
29. Goidel, K., & Nisbet, M. C. (2006). Exploring the roots of public participation in the controversy over embryonic stem cell research and cloning. Political Behavior, 28, 175-192.
30. Gopalan, P. (1997). The trust factor in participation and social education. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 554, 178-192.
31. Gunther, A. C. (1992). Biased press of biased public? Attitudes toward media coverage of social groups. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56, 147-167.
32. Gunther, A. C., & Chia, S. C. (2001). Predicting pluralistic ignorance: The hostile media perception and its consequences. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 688-701.
33. Gunther, A. C., & Liebhart, J. L. (2006). Broad reach or biased source? Decomposing the hostile media effect. Journal of Communication, 56, 449-466.
34. Gunther, A. C., & Schmitt, K. (2004). Mapping boundaries of the hostile media effect. Journal of Communication, 54(1), 55-70.
35. Hahn, H. (1970). The political impact of shifting attitudes. Social Science Quarterly, 51, 730-742.
36. Ho, S. S., Brossard, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (2008). Effects of value predispositions, mass media use, and knowledge on public attitudes toward embryonic stem cell research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20, 171-192.
37. Hwang, H., Pan, Z., & Sun, Y. E. (2008). Influence of hostile media perception on willingness to engage in discursive activities: An examination of mediating role of media indignation. Media Psychology, 11(1), 76-97.
38. Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: The human development sequence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
39. Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59(1), 19-39.
40. Iyengar, S., Hahn, K. S., Krosnick, J. A., & Walker, J. (2008). Selective exposure to campaign communication: The role of anticipated agreement and issue public membership. Journal of Politics, 70(1), 186-200.
41. Jennings, M. K., & Andersen, E. A. (2003). The importance of social and political context: The case of AIDS activism. Political Behavior, 25, 177-199.
42. Johnson, A. (2004, October 22). Kerry issues personal plea for research; With Reeve's widow, Democrat cites need for stem-cell studies. Columbus Dispatch, p. 01A.
43. Johnson, T. J., Boudreau, T., & Glowaki, C. (1996). Turning the spotlight inward: How leading news organizations covered the media in the 1992 presidential election. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73, 657-671.
44. Jones, D. A. (2004). Why Americans don't trust the media: A preliminary analysis. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics, 9(2), 60-75.
45. Jöreskog, K. G. (1993). Testing structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 294-316). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
46. Joslyn, M. R., & Cigler, A. (2001). Group involvement and democratic orientations: Social capital in the postelection context. Social Science Quarterly, 82, 357-368.
47. Kaplan, D. (2009). Structural equation modeling: Foundations and extensions. (2nd ed.). London, UK: Sage.
48. Keeter, S., Kennedy, C., Dimock, M., Best, J., & Craighill, P. (2006). Gauging the impact of growing nonresponse on estimates from a national RDD telephone survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 759-779.
49. Keeter, S., Miller, C., Kohut, A., Groves, R. M., & Presser, S. (2000). Consequences of reducing nonresponse in a national telephone survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 125-148.
50. Kepplinger, H. M. (2007). Reciprocal effects: Toward a theory of mass media effects on decision makers. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12, 3-23.
51. Kim, Y. M. (2007). How intrinsic and extrinsic motivations interact in selectivity: Investigating the moderating effects of situational information processing goals in issue publics' web behavior. Communication Research, 34, 185-211.
52. Kleinnijenhuis, J., van Hoof, A. M. J., & Oegema, D. (2006). Negative news and the sleeper effect of distrust. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 11, 86-104.
53. Krosnick, J. A. (1990). Government policy and citizen passion: A study of issue publics in contemporary America. Political Behavior, 12(1), 59-92.
54. Krosnick, J., & Telhami, S. (1995). Public attitudes toward Israel: A study of the attentive and issue publics. International Studies Quarterly, 39, 535-554.
55. Krueger, B. S. (2002). Assessing the potential of Internet political participation in the United States: A resource approach. American Politics Research, 30, 476-498.
56. Lacy, S., Fico, F., & Simon, T. F. (1991). Fairness and balance in the prestige press. Journalism Quarterly, 68, 363-370.
57. Lee, T. T. (2005). The liberal media myth revisited: An examination of factors influencing perceptions of media bias. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(1), 43-64.
58. Levi, M., & Stoker, L. (2000). Political trust and trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 475-507.
59. Mansbridge, J. (1997). Social and cultural causes of dissatisfaction with U. S government. In J. S. Nye, P. D. Zelikow & D. C. King (Eds.), Why people don't trust government (pp. 133-154). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
60. Marcus, G. E., Neuman, W. R., & MacKuen, M. (2000). Affective intelligence and political judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
61. McAdam, D. (1999). Political process and the development of Black insurgency, 1930-1970 (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
62. McAdam, D. (2003). Beyond structural analysis: Toward a more dynamic understanding of social movements. In M. Diani & D. McAdam (Eds.), Social movements and networks: Relational approaches to collective action (pp. 281-298). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
63. McCluskey, M. R., Deshpande, S., Shah, D. V., McLeod, D. M. (2004). The efficacy gap and political participation: When political influence fails to meet expectations. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 16, 437-455.
64. McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., & Moy, P. (1999). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication, 16, 315-336.
65. Miller, A. H. (1974). Political issues and trust in government: 1964-1970. American Political Science Review, 68, 951-972.
66. Morris, A., & Braine, N. (2001). Social movements and oppositional consciousness. In J. Mansbridge & A. Morris (Eds.), Oppositional consciousness: The subjective roots of social protest (pp. 20-37). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
67. Moy, P., & Pfau, M. (2000). With malice toward all? The media and public confidence in democratic institutions. Westport, CT: Praeger.
68. Moy, P., Torres, M., McCluskey, M. R., & Tanaka, K. (2005). Knowledge or trust? Investigating linkages between media reliance and participation. Communication Research, 32(1), 59-86.
69. Mutz, D. C. (2002). The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 46, 838-855.
70. National Bioethics Advisory Committee. (1999). Ethical issues in human stem cell research, Vol. I. Rockville, MD: Author.
71. Nisbet, M. C. (2004). Poll trends: Public opinion about stem cell research and human cloning. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(1), 131-154.
72. Nisbet, M. C., Brossard, D., & Kroepsch, A. (2003). Framing science: The stem cell controversy in an age of press/politics. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 8(2), 36-70.
73. Niven, D. (1999). Partisan bias in the media? A new test. Social Science Quarterly, 80, 847-857.
74. Niven, D. (2001). Bias in the news: Partisanship and negativity in media coverage of Presidents George Bush and Bill Clinton. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics, 6(3), 31-46.
75. Nivola, P. S., & Brady, D. W. (Eds.). (2006). Red and blue nation? Characteristics and causes of America's polarized politics (Vol. 1). Baltimore: Brookings Institution Press.
76. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1993). The spiral of silence: Public opinion, our social skin (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
77. Norris, P. (1996). Did television erode social capital? A reply to Putnam. Political Science and Politics, 29, 474-480.
78. Pew Research Center (2004a). News interest index poll [Data file and codebook]. Retrieved January 21, 2010, from iPOLL Databank.
79. Pew Research Center (2004b). Political typology poll [Data file and codebook]. Retrieved January 21, 2010, from iPOLL Databank.
80. Pew Research Center. (2005). Pew news interest index poll [Data file and codebook]. Retrieved January 21, 2010, from iPOLL Databank.
81. Pew Research Center. (2006a). Election weekend poll, November 2006 [Data file and codebook]. Retrieved January 21, 2010, from iPOLL Databank.
82. Pew Research Center. (2006b). Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life survey [Data file and codebook]. Retrieved January 21, 2010, from iPOLL Databank.
83. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. (1997, March 21). Fewer favor media scrutiny of political leaders: Press "unfair, inaccurate and pushy. " Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Retrieved January 21, 2010, from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID/112
84. Pinkleton, B. E., & Austin, E. W. (2001). Individual motivations, perceived media importance, and political disaffection. Political Communication, 18, 321-334.
85. Price, V. (1992). Public opinion. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
86. Price, V., David, C., Goldthorpe, B., Roth, M. M., & Cappella, J. N. (2006). Locating the issue public: The multi-dimensional nature of engagement with health care reform. Political Behavior, 28(1), 33-63.
87. Roper, B. W. (1969). A ten-year view of public attitudes toward television and other mass media, 1959-1968. New York: Television Information Office.
88. Rosenstone, S. J., & Hansen, J. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.
89. Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Talk or conversation? Dimensions of interpersonal discussion and their implications for participatory democracy. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 727-743.
90. Scheufele, D. A., Hardy, B.W., Brossard, D., Waismel-Manor, I., & Nisbet, E. (2006). Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication, 56, 728-753.
91. Stanley, A. (2006, October 25). Making stem cell issue personal, and political. New York Times, p. A15.
92. Streckfuss, R. (1990). Objectivity in journalism: A search and a reassessment. Journalism Quarterly, 67, 973-983.
93. Stroud, N. J., & Lee, J. K. (2009, May). Public opinion about the news media: The industry, the medium, the outlet, and the personality. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Hollywood, FL.
94. Tan, Y., & Weaver, D. H. (2009). Media bias, public opinion, and policy liberalism from 1956 to 2004: A second-level agenda-setting study. Mass Communication and Society, 13, 412-434.
95. Timpone, R. J. (1992). Structure, behavior, and voter turnout in the Unites States. American Political Science Review, 92(1), 145-158.
96. Tsfati, Y. (2007). Hostile media perceptions, presumed media influence, and minority alienation: The case of Arabs in Israel. Journal of Communication, 57, 632-651.
97. Tsfati, Y., & Cohen, J. (2003). On the effect of the 'third person effect': Perceived influence of media coverage and residential mobility intentions. Journal of Communication, 53, 711-727.
98. Tsfati, Y., & Cohen, J. (2005). Democratic consequences of hostile media perceptions: The case of Gaza settlers. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 10(4), 28-51.
99. Vallone, R. P., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perceptions and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 577-585.
100. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
101. Watts, M. D., Domke, D., & Shah, D. V. (1999). Elite cues and media bias in presidential campaigns. Communication Research, 26, 144-175.