“Pick and choose” opinion climate: How browsing of political messages shapes public opinion perceptions and attitudes

References

• Albarracín, D., & Shavitt, S. (2018). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 299–327. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011911
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allison, P. D. (1990). Change scores as dependent variables in regression analysis. Sociological Methodology, 20, 93–114. doi: 10.2307/271083
   Google Scholar
• American Press Institute. (2014, March). The personal news cycle: How Americans choose to get their news. Retrieved from https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/publications/
   Google Scholar
• Arceneaux, K., Johnson, M., & Cryderman, J. (2013). Communication, persuasion, and the conditioning value of selective exposure: Like minds may unite and divide but they mostly tune out. Political Communication, 30, 213–231. doi: 10.1080/10584609.2012.737424
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2016). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48. doi: 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boxell, L., Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2017). Greater Internet use is not associated with faster growth in political polarization among US demographic groups. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114, 10612–10617. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1706588114
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clay, R., Barber, J. M., & Shook, N. J. (2013). Techniques for measuring selective exposure: A critical review. Communication Methods & Measures, 7, 147–171. doi: 10.1080/19312458.2013.813925
   Google Scholar
• Dalecki, M., & Willits, F. K. (1991). Examining change using regression analysis: Three approaches compared. Sociological Spectrum, 11, 127–145. doi: 10.1080/02732173.1991.9981960
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donsbach, W. (2009). Cognitive dissonance theory – a roller coaster career. In T. Hartmann (Ed.), Media choice (pp. 128–148). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dvir-Gvirsman, S., Garrett, R. K., & Tsfati, Y. (2018). Why do partisan audience participate? Perceived public opinion as the mediating mechanism. Communication Research, 45, 112–136. doi: 10.1177/0093650215593145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feezell, J. T. (2018). Agenda setting through social Media: The importance of incidental news exposure and social filtering in the digital era. Political Research Quarterly, 71, 482–494. doi: 10.1177/1065912917744895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2018). Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis. New Media & Society, 20, 2450–2468. doi: 10.1177/1461444817724170
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett, R. K., Gvirsman, S. D., Johnson, B. K., Tsfati, Y., Neo, R., & Dal, A. (2014). Implications of pro- and counterattitudinal information exposure for affective polarization. Human Communication Research, 40, 309–332. doi: 10.1111/hcre.12028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett, R. K., & Stroud, N. J. (2014). Partisan paths to exposure diversity: Differences in pro- and counterattitudinal news consumption. Journal of Communication, 64, 680–701. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 update (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Glynn, C. J., Shapiro, R. Y., O’Keefe, G. J., Lindeman, M., & Herbst, S. (2015). Public opinion (3rd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gunther, A. C., & Christen, C. T. (1999). Effects of news slant and base rate information on perceived public opinion. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 76, 277–292. doi: 10.1177/107769909907600207
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Jang, S. M. (2014). Challenges to selective exposure: Selective seeking and avoidance in a multitasking media environment. Mass Communication & Society, 17, 665–688. doi: 10.1080/15205436.2013.835425
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judd, C. M., Kenny, D. A., & McClelland, G. H. (2001). Estimating and testing mediation and moderation in within-subject designs. Psychological Methods, 6, 115–134. doi:10.1037//1082-989X.6.2.115 doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.6.2.115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karnowski, V., Kümpel, A. S., Leonhard, L., & Leiner, D. J. (2017). From incidental news exposure to news engagement. How perceptions of the news post and news usage patterns influence engagement with news articles encountered on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 42–50. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.06.041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, Y. (2015). Does disagreement mitigate polarization? How selective exposure and disagreement affect political polarization. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92, 915–937. doi:10.1177%2F1077699015596328 doi: 10.1177/1077699015596328
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2012). Selective exposure and reinforcement of attitudes and partisanship before a presidential election. Journal of Communication, 62, 628–642.
   Google Scholar
• Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2015). Choice and preference in media use: Advances in selective exposure theory and research. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Johnson, B. K., Silver, N. A., & Westerwick, A. (2015). Science exemplars in the eye of the beholder: How exposure to online science information affects attitudes. Science Communication, 37, 575–601. doi: 10.1177/1075547015596367
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2009). Looking the other way: Selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counterattitudinal political information. Communication Research, 36, 426–448. doi: 10.1177/0093650209333030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Mothes, C., Johnson, B. K., Westerwick, A., & Donsbach, W. (2015). Political online information searching in Germany and the United States: Confirmation bias, source credibility, and attitude impacts. Journal of Communication, 65, 489–511. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12154
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Mothes, C., & Polavin, N. (in press). Confirmation bias, ingroup bias, and negativity bias in selective exposure to political information. Communication Research. doi: 10.1177/0093650217719596
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2016). Package ‘ImerTest’, 2.0-33. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lmerTest/lmerTest.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lau, R., Andersen, D., Ditonto, T., Kleinberg, M., & Redlawsk, D. (2017). Effect of media environment diversity and advertising tone on information search, selective exposure, and affective polarization. Political Behavior, 39, 231–255. doi: 10.1007/s11109-016-9354-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milkman, R. (2017). A new political generation: Millennials and the post-2008 Wave of protest. American Sociological Review, 82, 1–31. doi: 10.1177/0003122416681031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neubaum, G., & Krämer, N. C. (2017). Monitoring the opinion of the crowd: Psychological mechanisms underlying public opinion perceptions on social media. Media Psychology, 20, 502–531. doi: 10.1080/15213269.2016.1211539
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panek, E. (2016). High-choice revisited: An experimental analysis of the dynamics of news selection behavior in high-choice media environments. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93, 836–856. doi:10.1177%2F1077699016630251 doi: 10.1177/1077699016630251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prior, M. (2007). Post-broadcast democracy: How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Prior, M. (2013). Media and political polarization. Annual Review of Political Science, 16, 101–127. doi: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
   Google Scholar
• Ripley, B., Venables, B., Bates, D. M., Hornik, K., Gebhardt, A., & Firth, D. (2018). Package ‘MASS’ [software package]. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/MASS/MASS.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Rockwood, N. (2017). Advancing the formulation and testing of multilevel mediation and moderated mediation models (thesis). Ohio State University. Retrieved from https://etd.ohiolink.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 279–301. doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroud, N. J. (2010). Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal of Communication, 60, 556–576. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroud, N. J. (2011). Niche news: The politics of news choice. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stroud, N. J., & Muddiman, A. (2013). Selective exposure, tolerance, and comedic news. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 25, 271–290. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edt013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2012). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). New York: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tewksbury, D., Weaver, A. J., & Maddex, B. D. (2001). Accidentally informed: Incidental news exposure on the world wide web. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 533–554. doi:10.1177%2F107769900107800309 doi: 10.1177/107769900107800309
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trilling, D., van Klingeren, M., & Tsfati, Y. (2017). Selective exposure, political polarization, and possible mediators: Evidence from the Netherlands. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 29, 189–213. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edw003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsfati, Y., & Chotiner, A. (2016). Testing the selective exposure-polarization hypothesis in Israel using three indicators of ideological news exposure and testing for mediating mechanisms. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 28, 1–24. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edv001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsfati, Y., & Nir, L. (2017). Frames and reasoning: Two pathways from selective exposure to affective polarization. International Journal of Communication, 11, 301–322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsfati, Y., Stroud, N. J., & Chotiner, A. (2014). Exposure to ideological news and perceived opinion climate: Testing the media effects component of spiral-of-silence in a fragmented media landscape. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 19, 3–23. doi:10.1177%2F1940161213508206 doi: 10.1177/1940161213508206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venables, W. N., & Ripley, B. D. (2002). Modern applied statistics with S-plus (4th ed.). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Westerwick, A., Johnson, B. K., & Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2017). Confirmation biases in selective exposure to political online information: Source bias vs. Content bias. Communication Monographs, 84, 343–364. doi:10.1080/03637751.2016.12727611 doi: 10.1080/03637751.2016.1272761
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wojcieszak, M., Bimber, B., Feldman, L., & Stroud, N. J. (2016). Partisan news and political participation: Exploring mediated relationships. Political Communication, 33, 241–260. doi: 10.1080/10584609.2015.1051608
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar