Facebook news and (de)polarization: reinforcing spirals in the 2016 US election

References

• Abramowitz, A. I. (2010). The disappearing center: Engaged citizens, polarization, and American democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (2008). Is polarization a myth? The Journal of Politics, 70(2), 542–555. doi: 10.1017/S0022381608080493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrejevic, M. (2013). Infoglut: How too much information is changing the way we think and know. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ansolabehere, S., & Rivers, D. (2013). Cooperative survey research. Annual Review of Political Science, 16, 307–329. doi: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-022811-160625
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansolabehere, S., & Schaffner, B. F. (2014). Does survey mode still matter? Findings from a 2010 multi-mode comparison. Political Analysis, 22(3), 285–303. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpt025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anspach, N. M. (2017). The new personal influence: How our Facebook friends influence the news we read. Political Communication, 34, 590–606. doi: 10.1080/10584609.2017.1316329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348, 1130–1132. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa1160
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beam, M. A. (2014). Automating the news: How personalized news recommender system design choices impact news reception. Communication Research, 41(8), 1019–1041. doi: 10.1177/0093650213497979
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beam, M. A., Haridakis, P. M., Hutchens, M. J., & Hmielowski, J. (2017). Social media, news platforms, and partisan exposure: Voters’ media preferences during the 2016 presidential campaign season. In D. Schill & J. Hendricks (Eds.), The presidency and social media: Discourse, disruption, and digital democracy in the 2016 presidential election (pp. 37–55). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Beam, M. A., Hutchens, M. J., & Hmielowski, J. D. (2016). Clicking vs. sharing: The relationship between online news behaviors and political knowledge. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 215–220. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bello, J., & Rolfe, M. (2013). Is influence mightier than selection? Forging agreement in political discussion networks during a campaign. Social Networks, 36, 134–146. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2013.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benkler, Y., Faris, R., Roberts, H., & Zuckerman, E. (2017, March 3). Study: Breitbart-led right-wing media ecosystem altered broader media agenda. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved from https://www.cjr.org/analysis/breitbart-media-trump-harvard-study.php
   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. PNAS, 114, 10612–10617. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1706588114
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Donsbach, W., & Mothes, C. (2012). The dissonant self: Contributions from dissonance theory to a new agenda for studying political communication. In C. T. Salmon (Ed.), Communication yearbook 36 (pp. 3–44). New York: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Dylko, I., Dolgov, I., Hoffman, W., Eckhart, N., Molina, M., & Aaziz, O. (2018). Impact of customizability technology on political polarization. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 15, 19–33. doi: 10.1080/19331681.2017.1354243
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiorina, M., Abrams, S., & Pope, J. (2011). Culture war?: The myth of a polarized America. New York, NY: Pearson Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298–320. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfw006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fowler, E. F., Ridout, T. N., & Franz, M. M. (2016). Political advertising in 2016: The presidential election as outlier? The Forum, 14(4), 445–469.
   Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett, R. K., Carnahan, D., & Lynch, E. K. (2013). A turn toward avoidance? Selective exposure to online political information, 2004–2008. Political Behavior, 35(1), 113–134. doi: 10.1007/s11109-011-9185-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett, R. K., Dvir-Gvirsman, S., Johnson, B. K., Tsfati, Y., Neo, R., & Dal, A. (2014). Implications of pro- and counterattitudinal information exposure for affective polarization. Human Communication Research, 40(3), 309–332. doi: 10.1111/hcre.12028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett, R. K., & Stroud, N. J. (2014). Partisan oaths to exposure diversity: Differences in pro-and counterattitudinal news consumption. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 680–701. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2011). Ideological segregation online and offline. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(4), 1799–1839. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjr044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gil de Zúñiga, H., Weeks, B., & Ardèvol-Abreu, A. (2017). Effects of the news-finds-me perception in communication: Social media use implications for news seeking and learning about politics. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(3), 105–123. doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gottfried, J., & Shearer, E. (2016, May 26). News use across social media platforms 2016. Retrieved from http://www.journalism.org/2016/05/26/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2016/
   Google Scholar
• Hardy, B. W., & Scheufele, D. A. (2009). Presidential campaign dynamics and the ebb and flow of talk as a moderator: Media exposure, knowledge, and political discussion. Communication Theory, 19(1), 89–101. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.01334.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmielowski, J. D. (2012). Intramedia moderation, electoral ambivalence, and electoral decision making. Mass Communication and Society, 15(3), 454–477. doi: 10.1080/15205436.2011.616640
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmielowski, J. D., Beam, M. A., & Hutchens, M. J. (2016). Structural changes in media and attitude polarization: Examining the contributions of TV news before and after the Telecommunications Act of 1996. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18(2), 123–143.
   Google Scholar
• Hmielowski, J. D., Beam, M. A., & Hutchens, M. J. (2017). Bridging the partisan divide? Exploring ambivalence and information seeking over time in the 2012 US presidential election. Mass Communication and Society, 20(3), 336–357. doi: 10.1080/15205436.2017.1278775
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes, J. W., & McNeal, R. S. (2016). Social media, participation, and attitudes: Does social media drive polarization? In T. Deželan & I. Vobič (Eds.), (R)evolutionizing political communication through social media (pp. 1–21). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
   Google Scholar
• Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405–421. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfs038
   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(4), 915–937. doi: 10.1177/1077699015596328
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence, E., Sides, J., & Farrell, H. (2010). Self-segregation or deliberation? Blog relationships, participation, and polarization in American politics. Perspectives in Politics, 8, 141–157. doi: 10.1017/S1537592709992714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lelkes, Y., Sood, G., & Iyengar, S. (2017). The hostile audience: The effect of access to broadband internet on partisan affect. American Journal of Political Science, 61(1), 5–20. doi: 10.1111/ajps.12237
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lessig, L. (2011). Republic, lost: How money corrupts congress – and a plan to stop it. New York, NY: Twelve.
   Google Scholar
• McCarty, N., Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (2016). Polarized America: The dance of ideology and unequal riches (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Messing, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2014). Selective exposure in the age of social media: Endorsements trump partisan source affiliation when selecting news online. Communication Research, 41(8), 1042–1063. doi: 10.1177/0093650212466406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. New York: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Pek, J., & Hoyle, R. H. (2016). On the (in)validity of tests of simple mediation: Threats and solutions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(3), 150–163. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12237
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prior, M. (2007). Post-broadcast democracy: How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections. Cambridge, UK: 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
• Slater, M. D. (2007). Reinforcing spirals: The mutual influence of media selectivity and media effects and their impact on individual behavior and social identity. Communication Theory, 17(3), 281–303. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00296.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slater, M. D. (2015). Reinforcing spirals model: Conceptualizing the relationship between media content exposure and the development and maintenance of attitudes. Media Psychology, 18(3), 370–395. doi: 10.1080/15213269.2014.897236
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroud, N. J. (2014). Selective exposure theories. In K. Kenski & K. H. Jamieson (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Communication. New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.013.009
   Google Scholar
• Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tufekci, Z. (2015). Facebook said its algorithms do help form echo chambers, and the tech press missed it. New Perspectives Quarterly, 32(3), 9–12. doi: 10.1111/npqu.11519
   Google Scholar
• US Census Bureau. (2016). American Fact Finder. Retrieved from https://factfinder.census.gov.
   Google Scholar
• Weeks, B. E., & Holbert, R. L. (2013). Predicting dissemination of news content in social media: A focus on reception, friending, and partisanship. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 90(2), 212–232. doi: 10.1177/1077699013482906
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weeks, B. E., Lane, D. S., Kim, D. H., Lee, S. S., & Kwak, N. (2017). Incidental exposure, selective exposure, and political information sharing: Integrating online exposure patterns and expression on social media. Journal of Computed Mediated Communication, 22, 363–379. doi: 10.1111/jcc4.12199
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamamoto, M., Kushin, M. J., & Dalisay, F. (2015). Social media and mobiles as political mobilization forces for young adults: Examining the moderating role of online political expression in political participation. New Media & Society, 17, 880–898. doi: 10.1177/1461444813518390
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar