Partisan news versus party cues: The effect of cross-cutting party and partisan network cues on polarization and persuasion

IF 2 3区社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Research and Politics Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20531680221075455

Adam L. Ozer, Jamie M. Wright

{"title":"Partisan news versus party cues: The effect of cross-cutting party and partisan network cues on polarization and persuasion","authors":"Adam L. Ozer, Jamie M. Wright","doi":"10.1177/20531680221075455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The pervasiveness of partisan media and the 24/7 news cycle allow ample opportunity for partisan-motivated reasoning and selective exposure. Nonetheless, individuals still frequently encounter out-party media outlets and expert pundits through mainstream news and social media. We seek to examine the effects of cross-cutting partisan outlet cues (e.g. Fox News, MSNBC) and direct party cues (e.g. Republican, Democrat) on citizens’ perceptions of ideology, source credibility, and news consumption. Using an experiment that pits outlet cues against direct party cues, we find that cross-cutting outlet and direct party cues lead citizens to perceive pundits as more ideologically moderate. As a result, respondents find out-party pundits on in-party outlets to be less biased, increasing interest in the pundits’ perspectives. However, while cross-cutting pundits gain among the out-party, they lose among the in-party. This trade-off holds important normative implications for individual news consumption and the ability of outlets and pundits to appear unbiased while garnering the largest possible audience.","PeriodicalId":37327,"journal":{"name":"Research and Politics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680221075455","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Abstract

The pervasiveness of partisan media and the 24/7 news cycle allow ample opportunity for partisan-motivated reasoning and selective exposure. Nonetheless, individuals still frequently encounter out-party media outlets and expert pundits through mainstream news and social media. We seek to examine the effects of cross-cutting partisan outlet cues (e.g. Fox News, MSNBC) and direct party cues (e.g. Republican, Democrat) on citizens’ perceptions of ideology, source credibility, and news consumption. Using an experiment that pits outlet cues against direct party cues, we find that cross-cutting outlet and direct party cues lead citizens to perceive pundits as more ideologically moderate. As a result, respondents find out-party pundits on in-party outlets to be less biased, increasing interest in the pundits’ perspectives. However, while cross-cutting pundits gain among the out-party, they lose among the in-party. This trade-off holds important normative implications for individual news consumption and the ability of outlets and pundits to appear unbiased while garnering the largest possible audience.

查看原文本刊更多论文

党派新闻与党派线索:跨党派和党派网络线索对极化和说服的影响

党派媒体的无所不在和全天候的新闻周期为党派动机的推理和选择性曝光提供了充足的机会。尽管如此，个人仍然经常通过主流新闻和社交媒体遇到党外媒体和专家专家。我们试图研究跨党派渠道线索(如福克斯新闻，MSNBC)和直接政党线索(如共和党，民主党)对公民意识形态，来源可信度和新闻消费的看法的影响。通过将出口线索与直接政党线索进行对比的实验，我们发现，交叉出口和直接政党线索导致公民认为专家在意识形态上更温和。因此，受访者发现党内媒体上的党外专家偏见较少，这增加了对专家观点的兴趣。然而，尽管跨领域专家在党外获得了好处，但在党内却失去了好处。这种权衡对于个人新闻消费以及媒体和权威人士在获得尽可能多的受众的同时表现出公正的能力具有重要的规范性意义。

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

Research and Politics Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations

CiteScore

2.80

自引率

3.70%

发文量

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Research & Politics aims to advance systematic peer-reviewed research in political science and related fields through the open access publication of the very best cutting-edge research and policy analysis. The journal provides a venue for scholars to communicate rapidly and succinctly important new insights to the broadest possible audience while maintaining the highest standards of quality control.