Assessing (In)accuracy and Biases in Self-reported Measures of Exposure to Disagreement: Evidence from Linkage Analysis Using Digital Trace Data

IF 6.3 1区文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION

Communication Methods and Measures Pub Date : 2021-07-03 DOI:10.1080/19312458.2021.1935824

Hyunjin Song, Jaeho Cho

{"title":"Assessing (In)accuracy and Biases in Self-reported Measures of Exposure to Disagreement: Evidence from Linkage Analysis Using Digital Trace Data","authors":"Hyunjin Song, Jaeho Cho","doi":"10.1080/19312458.2021.1935824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Citizen’s exposure to disagreement – whether intentional or incidental – is a central concept in communication research, yet the precise degree to which citizens are exposed to opposing views online and the antecedents to this phenomenon continue to be debated. Despite the theoretical importance of this question, empirical assessments of cross-cutting exposure, especially those involving online settings, are largely based on individuals’ perception of their own behavior. Therefore, we know little regarding response bias in self-reports of cross-cutting exposure online. Combining digital trace data with a panel survey, we observe overreporting of self-reported online cross-cutting exposure. We then demonstrate that self-reported exposure to disagreement is retrospectively conditioned by the perception of the opinion climate in a given context. Finally, using Monte Carlo simulations, we examine the consequences of relying on (potentially imperfect) self-reported measures.","PeriodicalId":47552,"journal":{"name":"Communication Methods and Measures","volume":"15 1","pages":"190 - 210"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19312458.2021.1935824","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Methods and Measures","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2021.1935824","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: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT Citizen’s exposure to disagreement – whether intentional or incidental – is a central concept in communication research, yet the precise degree to which citizens are exposed to opposing views online and the antecedents to this phenomenon continue to be debated. Despite the theoretical importance of this question, empirical assessments of cross-cutting exposure, especially those involving online settings, are largely based on individuals’ perception of their own behavior. Therefore, we know little regarding response bias in self-reports of cross-cutting exposure online. Combining digital trace data with a panel survey, we observe overreporting of self-reported online cross-cutting exposure. We then demonstrate that self-reported exposure to disagreement is retrospectively conditioned by the perception of the opinion climate in a given context. Finally, using Monte Carlo simulations, we examine the consequences of relying on (potentially imperfect) self-reported measures.

查看原文本刊更多论文

评估自我报告的不一致暴露测量的准确性和偏差:使用数字跟踪数据的关联分析的证据

公民对不同意见的暴露——无论是有意的还是偶然的——是传播学研究中的一个核心概念，然而公民在网上接触到反对意见的确切程度以及这一现象的先决条件仍在争论中。尽管这个问题在理论上很重要，但对跨领域接触的实证评估，尤其是那些涉及网络环境的评估，在很大程度上是基于个人对自己行为的感知。因此，我们对在线交叉接触自我报告中的反应偏差知之甚少。将数字跟踪数据与小组调查相结合，我们观察到自我报告的在线交叉暴露的夸大报告。然后，我们证明，自我报告暴露于分歧是回顾性的条件下，在给定的背景下，意见气候的感知。最后，使用蒙特卡罗模拟，我们检查依赖(可能不完美的)自我报告的措施的后果。

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 Methods and Measures COMMUNICATION-

CiteScore

21.10

自引率

1.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： Communication Methods and Measures aims to achieve several goals in the field of communication research. Firstly, it aims to bring attention to and showcase developments in both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies to communication scholars. This journal serves as a platform for researchers across the field to discuss and disseminate methodological tools and approaches. Additionally, Communication Methods and Measures seeks to improve research design and analysis practices by offering suggestions for improvement. It aims to introduce new methods of measurement that are valuable to communication scientists or enhance existing methods. The journal encourages submissions that focus on methods for enhancing research design and theory testing, employing both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Furthermore, the journal is open to articles devoted to exploring the epistemological aspects relevant to communication research methodologies. It welcomes well-written manuscripts that demonstrate the use of methods and articles that highlight the advantages of lesser-known or newer methods over those traditionally used in communication. In summary, Communication Methods and Measures strives to advance the field of communication research by showcasing and discussing innovative methodologies, improving research practices, and introducing new measurement methods.