Political Online Information Searching in Germany and the United States: Confirmation Bias, Source Credibility, and Attitude Impacts

Journal of Communication

Volumn 65, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 489-511

  Knobloch Westerwick, Silvia ^a   Mothes, Cornelia ^b   Johnson, Benjamin K ^a   Westerwick, Axel ^a   Donsbach, Wolfgang ^b  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b DRESDEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Attitudes; Comparative Studies; Confirmation Bias; Online Search; Politics; Selective Exposure; Source Credibility

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; ELECTION; POLITICAL CHANGE; POLITICS; PUBLIC ATTITUDE; WORLD WIDE WEB;

GERMANY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84930823477     PISSN: 00219916     EISSN: 14602466     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jcom.12154     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Aalberg, T., Van Aelst, P., & Curran, J. (2010). Media systems and the political information environment: A cross-national comparison. International Journal of Press/Politics, 15, 255-271. doi:10.1177/1940161210367422.
2. Baum, M. A., & Groehling, T. (2008). New media and the polarization of American political discourse. Political Communication, 25, 345-365. doi:10.1080/10584600802426965.
3. Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58, 707-731. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00410.x.
4. Blekesaune, A., Elvestad, E., & Aalberg, T. (2012). Tuning out the world of news and current affairs: An empirical study of Europe's disconnected citizens. European Sociological Review, 28, 110-126. doi:10.1093/esr/jcq051.
5. Boczkowski, P. J., Mitchelstein, E., & Walter, M. (2012). When burglar alarms sound, do monitorial citizens pay attention to them? The online news choices of journalists and consumers during and after the 2008 U.S. election cycle. Political Communication, 29, 347-366. doi:10.1080/10584609.2012.722173.
6. Carter, E., & Farrell, D. M. (2010). Electoral systems and election management. In L. LeDuc, R. G. Niemi, & P. Norris (Eds.), Comparing democracies 3: Elections and voting in the 21st century (pp. 25-44). London, England: Sage.
7. Dalton, R. J., & Anderson, C. (2011). Citizens, context and choice. In R. Dalton & C. Anderson (Eds.), Citizens, context and choice: How context shapes citizens' electoral choices (pp. 3-30). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
8. Dilliplane, S. (2011). All the news you want to hear: The impact of partisan news exposure on political participation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75, 287-316. doi:10.1093/poq/nfr006.
9. Donsbach, W. (1991). Exposure to political content in newspapers: The impact of cognitive dissonance on readers' selectivity. European Journal of Communication, 6, 155-186. doi:10.1177/0267323191006002003.
10. Donsbach, W. (2009). Cognitive dissonance theory-A roller coaster career: How communication research adapted the theory of cognitive dissonance. In T. Hartmann (Ed.), Media choice. A theoretical and empirical overview (pp. 128-149). New York, NY: Routledge.
11. Donsbach, W. (2010). Journalists and their professional identities. In S. Allan (Ed.), The Routledge companion to news and journalism (pp. 38-48). New York, NY: Routledge.
12. Duverger, M. (1917/1959). Political parties: Their organization and activity in the modern state (2nd ed.). London, England: Methuen. (Original work published 1917).
13. Esser, F., & De Vreese, C. H. (2007). Comparing young voters' political engagement in the United States and Europe. American Behavioral Scientist, 50, 1195-1213. doi:10.1177/0002764207299364.
14. Esser, F., De Vreese, C. H., Strömbäck, J., Van Aelst, P., Aalberg, T., Stanyer, J., ... Reinemann, C. (2012). Political information opportunities in Europe: A longitudinal and comparative study of thirteen television systems. International Journal of Press/Politics, 17, 247-274. doi:10.1177/1940161212442956.
15. Esser, F., & Pfetsch, B. (2004). Meeting the challenges of global communication and political integration: The significance of comparative research in a changing world. In F. Esser & B. Pfetsch (Eds.), Comparing political communication: Theories, cases, and challenges (pp. 384-410). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
16. Esser, F., & Umbricht, A. (2013). Competing models of journalism? Political affairs coverage in US, British, German, Swiss, French and Italian newspapers. Journalism, 14, 989-1007. doi:10.1177/1464884913482551.
17. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149-1160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149.
18. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
19. Frey, D. (1981). Postdecisional preference for decision-relevant information as a function of the competence of its source and the degree of familiarity with this information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 51-67. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(81)90006-8.
20. Garrett, R. K. (2009). Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication, 59, 676-699. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01452.x.
21. Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2010). What drives media slant? Evidence from U.S. daily newspapers. Econometrica, 78, 35-71. doi:10.3982/ECTA7195.
22. Gscheidle, C., & Gerhard, H. (2013). Berichterstattung zur bundestagswahl 2013 aus sicht der zuschauer [Coverage of the 2013 campaign from the viewers' perspective]. Media Perspektiven, 12, 558-573.
23. Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
24. Hart, W., Albarracin, D., Eagly, A. H., Brechan, I., Lindberg, M. J., & Merrill, L. (2009). Feeling validated versus being correct: A meta-analysis of selective exposure to information. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 555-588. doi:10.1037/a0015701.
25. Hasebrink, U. (2012). Comparing media use and reception. In F. Esser & T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), The handbook of comparative communication research (pp. 382-399). New York, NY: Routledge.
26. Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635-650. doi:10.1086/266350.
27. Infratest. (2013). Stichtag Sonntagsfrage am 1.8.2013. Retrieved from http://www.infratest-dimap.de/umfragen-analysen/bundesweit/sonntagsfrage/
28. Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59, 19-39. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.x.
29. Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (2013). The dark side of the boon? Credibility, selective exposure and the proliferation of online sources of political information. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1862-1871. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.011.
30. Jonas, E., Graupmann, V., Fischer, P., Greitemeyer, T., & Frey, D. (2003). Schwarze kassen, weiße westen? Konfirmatorische Informationssuche und-bewertung im kontext der parteispendenaffäre der CDU [Slush fund, clean slate? Confirmation bias in the context of the CDU political donations scandal]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 34, 47-61. doi:10.1024//0044-3514.34.1.47.
31. Kleinhesselink, R. R., & Edwards, R. E. (1975). Seeking and avoiding belief-discrepant information as a function of its perceived refutability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 787-790. doi:10.1037/h0076702.
32. Knobloch, S., Hastall, M., Zillmann, D., & Callison, C. (2003). Imagery effects on the selective reading of internet newsmagazines. Communication Research, 30, 3-29. doi:10.1177/0093650202239023.
33. Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2015). Choice and preference in media use: Advances in selective exposure theory and research. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
34. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Johnson, B. K. (2014). Selective exposure for better or worse: Its mediating role for online news' impact on political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 184-196. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12036.
35. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Johnson, B. K., & Westerwick, A. (2015). Confirmation bias in online searches: Impacts of selective exposure before an election on political attitude strength and shifts. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20, 171-187. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12105.
36. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Kleinman, S. (2012). Pre-election selective exposure: Confirmation bias versus informational utility. Communication Research, 39, 170-193. doi:10.1177/0093650211400597.
37. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2009). Looking the other way: Selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counter-attitudinal political information. Communication Research, 36, 426-448. doi:10.1177/0093650209333030.
38. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2011). Reinforcement of the political self through selective exposure to political messages. Journal of Communication, 61, 349-368. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01543.x.
39. Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480-498. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480.
40. Laakso, M., & Taagepera, R. (1979). "Effective" number of parties: A measure with application to West Europe. Comparative Political Studies, 12, 3-27. doi:10.1177/001041407901200101.
41. Lavine, H. (2001). The electoral consequences of ambivalence toward presidential candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 915-929. doi:10.2307/2669332.
42. Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1944). The people's choice. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
43. Leung, K., & van de Vijver, F. (2008). Strategies for strengthening causal inferences in cross cultural research: The consilience approach. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 8, 145-169. doi:10.1177/1470595808091788.
44. Lijphart, A. (2012). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries (2nd ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
45. Lowin, A. (1967). Approach and avoidance: Alternate modes of selective exposure to information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 1-9. doi:10.1037/h0024531.
46. McGuire, W. J. (2002). Input and output variables currently promising for constructing persuasive communications. In R. E. Rice & C. K. Atkin (Eds.), Public communication campaigns (3rd ed., pp. 22-48). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47. Mothes, C. (2014). Objektivität als professionelles abgrenzungskriterium im journalismus: Eine dissonanztheoretische studie zum informationsverhalten von journalisten und nicht-journalisten [Objectivity as professional demarcation criterion in journalism: A dissonance theoretical study on the information behavior of journalists and non-journalists]. Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos.
48. Mutz, D. C., & Martin, P. S. (2001). Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: The role of mass media. American Political Science Review, 95, 97-114. doi:10.2307/3117631.
49. Neuberger, C. (2012). Journalismus im Internet aus nutzersicht. Ergebnisse einer onlinebefragung [Journalism on the Internet from a user perspective: Results of an online survey]. Media Perspektiven, 1, 40-55.
50. Nir, L. (2012). Cross-national differences in political discussion: Can political systems narrow deliberation gaps? Journal of Communication, 62, 553-570. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01648.x.
51. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The spiral of silence: A theory of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 24, 43-51. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1974.tb00367.x.
52. Parsons, B. M. (2010). Social networks and the affective impact of political disagreement. Political Behavior, 32, 181-204. doi:10.1007/s11109-009-9100-6.
53. Peter, J. (2004). Our long 'return to the concept of powerful mass media': A cross-national comparative investigation of the effects of consonant media coverage. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 16, 144-168. doi:10.1093/ijpor/16.2.144.
54. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). New York, NY: Academic Press.
55. Semetko, H. A. (1996). Political balance on television: Campaigns in the United States, Britain, and Germany. International Journal of Press/Politics, 1, 51-71. doi:10.1177/1081180X96001001005.
56. Stroud, N. J. (2010). Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal of Communication, 60, 556-576. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497.x.
57. Stroud, N. J. (2011). Niche news: The politics of news choice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
58. Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 755-769. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x.
59. Van Eimeren, B., & Frees, B. (2013). Rasanter anstieg des Internet konsums-Onliner fast drei stunden täglich im netz [Rapid increase in internet exposure-Onliners almost three hours on the Internet]. Media Perspektiven, 7-8, 358-372.
60. Wessler, H., & Rinke, E. M. (2014). Deliberative performance of television news in three types of democracy: Insights from the United States, Germany, and Russia. Journal of Communication, 64, 827-851. doi:10.1111/jcom.12115.
61. Westerwick, A., Kleinman, S. B., & Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2013). Turn a blind eye if you care: Impacts of attitude consistency, importance, and credibility on seeking of political information and implications for attitudes. Journal of Communication, 63, 432-453. doi:10.1111/jcom.12028.
62. Zillmann, D., Knobloch, S., & Yu, H. (2001). Effects of photographs on the selective reading of news reports. Media Psychology, 3, 301-324. doi:10.1207/S1532785XMEP0304_01.