In Diversity We Trust? Examining the Effect of Political Newsroom Diversity on Media Trust, Use, and Avoidance

IF 3.2 1区文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION

Communication Research Pub Date : 2025-07-10 DOI:10.1177/00936502251341081

Eliana DuBosar, Jay D. Hmielowski, Muhammad Ehab Rasul

{"title":"In Diversity We Trust? Examining the Effect of Political Newsroom Diversity on Media Trust, Use, and Avoidance","authors":"Eliana DuBosar, Jay D. Hmielowski, Muhammad Ehab Rasul","doi":"10.1177/00936502251341081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In an era of declining American media trust, it is crucial to examine methods for increasing trust and encouraging holistic information seeking. Accordingly, we extend scholarship assessing outcomes of journalistic transparency by examining the effects of providing consumers with a breakdown of the political diversity of journalists working for a news outlet. We conducted three experiments varying the ideological (Study 1) and partisan (Studies 2 and 3) identification of journalists working for an outlet, assessing impacts on outlet trust, use, and avoidance intentions, and whether trust mediated relationships for the latter two outcomes. Participants reported higher trust, greater use, and lower avoidance intentions for balanced (i.e., equally represented political viewpoints) and unaffiliated (i.e., no political information) outlets compared to two partisan majority outlets. Results showed no differences in trust or use/avoidance intentions between the unaffiliated and balanced outlets. Additionally, an out-group bias was prevalent for partisans across all three experiments.","PeriodicalId":48323,"journal":{"name":"Communication Research","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Research","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502251341081","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

In an era of declining American media trust, it is crucial to examine methods for increasing trust and encouraging holistic information seeking. Accordingly, we extend scholarship assessing outcomes of journalistic transparency by examining the effects of providing consumers with a breakdown of the political diversity of journalists working for a news outlet. We conducted three experiments varying the ideological (Study 1) and partisan (Studies 2 and 3) identification of journalists working for an outlet, assessing impacts on outlet trust, use, and avoidance intentions, and whether trust mediated relationships for the latter two outcomes. Participants reported higher trust, greater use, and lower avoidance intentions for balanced (i.e., equally represented political viewpoints) and unaffiliated (i.e., no political information) outlets compared to two partisan majority outlets. Results showed no differences in trust or use/avoidance intentions between the unaffiliated and balanced outlets. Additionally, an out-group bias was prevalent for partisans across all three experiments.

查看原文本刊更多论文

我们信任多样性？考察政治新闻编辑室多样性对媒体信任、使用和回避的影响

在美国媒体信任度下降的时代，研究增加信任和鼓励全面信息寻求的方法至关重要。因此，我们通过研究向消费者提供新闻机构工作的记者的政治多样性分类的影响，扩展了评估新闻透明度结果的学术研究。我们进行了三个实验，改变了为媒体工作的记者的意识形态（研究1）和党派（研究2和3）识别，评估了对媒体信任、使用和回避意图的影响，以及信任是否介导了后两种结果的关系。与两个党派占多数的渠道相比，参与者对平衡（即平等代表政治观点）和独立（即没有政治信息）的渠道报告了更高的信任、更多的使用和更低的回避意图。结果显示，无关联和平衡的门店在信任和使用/回避意向上没有差异。此外，在所有三个实验中，党派者普遍存在群体外偏见。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Communication Research COMMUNICATION-

CiteScore

17.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Empirical research in communication began in the 20th century, and there are more researchers pursuing answers to communication questions today than at any other time. The editorial goal of Communication Research is to offer a special opportunity for reflection and change in the new millennium. To qualify for publication, research should, first, be explicitly tied to some form of communication; second, be theoretically driven with results that inform theory; third, use the most rigorous empirical methods; and fourth, be directly linked to the most important problems and issues facing humankind. Critieria do not privilege any particular context; indeed, we believe that the key problems facing humankind occur in close relationships, groups, organiations, and cultures.