Voices of convergence or conflict? a path analysis investigation of selective exposure to political websites

Social Science Computer Review

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 449-469

  Johnson, Thomas J ^a   Zhang, Weiwu ^b   Bichard, Shannon L ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

partisanship; political blogs; political websites; selective exposure; web reliance

Indexed keywords

EID: 81755166952     PISSN: 08944393     EISSN: 15528286     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0894439310379962     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Albrecht S.Whose voice is heard in online deliberation? A study of participation and representation in political debates on the Internet.Information, Communication & Society. 2006;9:62-82.
2. Bennett S. E.Predicting Americans' exposure to political talk radio in 1996, 1998, and 2000.Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics. 2002;7:9-22.
3. Best S. J.,Chmielewski B.,Krueger B. S.Selective exposure to online foreign news during the conflict with Iraq.Harvard Journal of Press/Politics. 2005;10:52-70.
4. Bichard S. L.Building blogs: A multi-dimensional analysis of the distribution of frames on the 2004 presidential candidate websites.Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 2006;82:329-345.
5. Bimber B.,Davis R.Campaigning online: The Internet in U.S. elections. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press; 2003:.
6. Boulianne S.Does Internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research.Political Communication. 2009;26:193-211.
7. Brannon L. A.,Tagler M. J.,Eagly A. H.The moderating role of attitude strength in selective exposure to information.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2007;43:611-617.
8. Brundidge J., The contribution of the Internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks: Does the medium matter?. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference; 2006, JuneDresden, Germany; 2006, June.
9. Brundidge J., Modeling the impact of the Internet on exposure to disagreement. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference; 2007, MaySan Francisco, CA, USA; 2007, May.
10. Brundidge J., The contemporary media environment and breadth of communication: The contribution of the Internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference; 2008, MayMontreal, Canada; 2008, May.
11. Brundidge J.,Rice R. E. Political engagement online: Do the information rich get richer and the like-minded more similar?, Routledge handbook of Internet politics. Chadwick A.Howard P. N., ed. New York: Routledge; 2009:144-156.
12. Chaffee S. H.,Saphir M. N.,Grap J.,Sandvig C.,Hahn K. S.Attention to counter-attitudinal messages in a state election campaign.Political Communication. 2001;18:247-272.
13. Cho J.,Shah D. V.,McLeod J. M.,McLeod D. M.,Scholl R. M.,Gotlieb M. R.Campaigns, reflection, and deliberation: Advancing an O-S-R-O-R model of communication effects.Communication Theory. 2009;19:66-88.
14. DiMaggio P. J.,Sato K., Does the Internet balkanize political attention? A test of the Sunstein thesis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association; 2003, AugustAtlanta, GA, USA; 2003, August.
15. Edwards K.,Smith E. E.A disconfirmation bias in the evaluation of arguments.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996;71 (1): 5-24.
16. Eveland W. P.,Thomson T.Is it talking, thinking, or both? A lagged dependent variable model of discussion effects on political knowledge.Journal of Communication. 2006;56:523-542.
17. Festinger L.A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 1957:.
18. Fischer P.,Jonas E.,Frey D.,Schulz-Hardt S.Selective exposure to information: The impact of information limits.European Journal of Social Psychology. 2005;35:469-492.
19. Garrett R. K.Echo chambers online? Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2009;14:265-285.
20. Graf J.,Aday S.Selective attention to online political information.Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 2008;52:86-100.
21. Hardy B. W.,Scheufele D. A.,Wang Z., Defining deliberation: Key determinants and distinct dimensions. Paper presented to the annual convention of the International Communication Association; 2005, MayNew York, NY, USA; 2005, May.
22. Hill K. A.,Hughes J. E.Cyberpolitics: Citizen activism in the age of the Internet. Lanham, MD: Roman & Littlefield Publishers; 1998:.
23. Hollander B. A.Talk radio: Predictors of use and effects on attitudes about government.Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 1996;73:102-13.
24. Huckfeldt R.,Sprague J.Citizens, politics, and social communication: Information and influence in an election campaign. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 1995:.
25. Iyengar S.,Hahn K.Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use.Journal of Communication. 2009;59:19-39.
26. Iyengar S.,Hahn K. S.,Krosnick J. A.,Walker J.Selective exposure to campaign communication: The role of anticipated agreement and issue public membership.Journal of Politics. 2008;70:186-200.
27. Johnson T. J.,Bichard S. L.,Zhang W., Revived and refreshed: Selective exposure to blogs and political Websites. Paper presented at the International Communication Association annual convention; 2008, MayMontreal, Canada; 2008, May.
28. Johnson T. J.,Kaye B. K.Wag the Blog: How reliance on traditional media and the Internet influence perceptions of credibility of weblogs among blog users.Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 2004;81:622-642.
29. Johnson T. J.,Kaye B. K., The dark side of the boon?: Credibility, selective exposure and the proliferation of online sources of political information. Paper presented at the Midwest Association for Public Opinion Research; 2009, NovemberChicago, IL, USA; 2009, November.
30. JohnsonT. J.KayeB. K.BichardS. L.WongW. J. (2007). Every blog has its day: Politically interested Internet users' perceptions of blog credibility. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, article 6. Retrieved fromhttp://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/johnson.html.
31. CyberSociety: Computer-mediated communication and community. Jones S. G., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 1995:.
32. Kavanaugh A.,Kim B. J.,Perez-Quinones M. A.,Schmitz J.,Isenhour P.Net gains in political participation: Secondary effects of Internet on community.Information, Communication & Society. 2008;11:933-963.
33. Kelly J.,Fisher D.,Smith M., Friends, foes, and fringe: Norms and structure in political discussion networks. In. Online deliberation: Design, research, and practice. Davies T.Gangadharan S. P., ed. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications/University of Chicago Press; 2009:83-93.
34. Knobloch-Westerwick S.,Meng J.Looking the other way: Selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counter-attitudinal political information.Communication Research. 2009;36:426-448.
35. Koop R.,Jansen H.J.Political blogs and blogrolls in Canada: Forums for democratic deliberation?.Social Science Computer Review. 2009;27 (2): 155-173.
36. 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;56:27-51.
37. Melican D. B.,Dixon T. L.News on the net: Credibility, selective exposure, and racial prejudice.Communication Research. 2008;35:151-168.
38. Mende A.-M. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conference; 2008, MayMontreal, Canada; 2008, May.
39. Mutz D. C.Cross-cutting social networks: Testing democratic theory in practice.American Political Science Review. 2002;96:111-126.
40. Mutz D. C.Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2006:.
41. Mutz D. C.,Martin P. S.Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: The role of mass media.American Political Science Review. 2001;95:97-114.
42. Mutz D. C.,Mondak J. J.The workplace as a context for cross-cutting political discourse.The Journal of Politics. 2006;69:140-155.
43. Norris P.A Virtuous Circle? Political Communications in Post-Industrial Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000:.
44. Park H. M.,Perry J. L.Do campaign web sites really matter in electoral civic engagement?: Empirical evidence from the 2004 post-election Internet tracking survey.Social Science Computer Review. 2008;26:190-212.
45. Perlmutter D. A.Blog wars. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2008:.
46. Pettigrew T. F.Generalized intergroup contact effects on prejudice.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1997;23:173-185.
47. Petty R.,Cacioppo J.Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1986:.
48. Scheufele D. A.,Hardy B. W.,Brossard D.,Waismel-Manor I. S.,Nisbet E.Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship.Journal of Communication. 2006;56:728-753.
49. Scheufele D. A.,Nisbit M. C.,Brossard D.,Nisbet E. C.Social structure and citizenship: Examining the impact of social setting, network homogeneity, and information variables on political participation.Political Communication. 2004;21:315-338.
50. Sears D. O.,Freedman J. L.Selective exposure to information: A critical review.Public Opinion Quarterly. 1967;31:194-213.
51. Shah D.,Schmierbach M.,Hawkins J.,Espino R.,Donavan J.Nonrecursive models of Internet use and community engagement: Questioning whether time spent online erodes social capital.Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 2002;79:964-987.
52. Smith S. M.,Fabrigar L. R.,Norris M. E.Reflecting on six decades of selective exposure research: Progress, challenges and opportunities.Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2008;2:464-93.
53. Sniderman P. M.,Tetlock P. E.,Glaser J. M,Green D. P,Hout M.Principled tolerance and the American mass public.British Journal of Political Science. 1989;19:25-45.
54. Southwell B. G.,Yzer M. C. The roles of interpersonal communication in mass media campaigns,. Communication yearbook 31. Beck C., ed. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2007:420-462.
55. Stromer-GalleyJ. (2003). Diversity of political conversations on the Internet: Users' perspectives. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. Retrieved March 7, 2008, fromhttp://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue3/stromergalley.html.
56. Stroud N. J.Selective exposure to partisan information. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Unpublished dissertation, University of Pennsylvania; 2006:.
57. Stroud N. J.Media effects, selective exposure, and Fahrenheit 9/11.Political Communication. 2007;24:415-432.
58. Stroud N. J.Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure.Political Behavior. 2008;30:341-366.
59. Sunstein C.Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2001:.
60. Taylor S. E. The interface of cognitive and social psychology. In Cognition, social behavior, and the environment. Harvey J. H., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1981:189-211.
61. Tian Y.Political use and perceived effects of the Internet: A case study of the 2004 election.Communication Research Reports. 2006;23:129-137.
62. Weber L. M.,Loumakis A.,Bergman J.Who participates and why?: An analysis of citizens on the Internet and the mass public.Social Science Computer Review. 2003;21:26-42.
63. Wojciewszak M. E.,Mutz D. C.Online groups and political discourse: Do online discussion spaces facilitate exposure to political disagreement?.Journal of Communication. 2009;59:40-56.
64. Ziemke D. A. Selective exposure in a presidential campaign contingent on certainty and salience. In,Communication Yearbook. Nimmo D., ed. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books; 1980:497-511.