真相与偏见,左与右:用现实的新闻供给检验意识形态的不对称性。

IF 2.9 1区 社会学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Bernhard Clemm von Hohenberg
{"title":"真相与偏见,左与右:用现实的新闻供给检验意识形态的不对称性。","authors":"Bernhard Clemm von Hohenberg","doi":"10.1093/poq/nfad013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The debate around \"fake news\" has raised the question of whether liberals and conservatives differ, first, in their ability to discern true from false information, and second, in their tendency to give more credit to information that is ideologically congruent. Typical designs to measure these asymmetries select, often arbitrarily, a small set of news items as experimental stimuli without clear reference to a \"population of information.\" This pre-registered study takes an alternative approach by, first, conceptualizing estimands in relation to all political news. Second, to represent this target population, it uses a set of 80 randomly sampled items from a large collection of articles from Google News and three fact-checking sites. In a subsequent survey, a quota sample of US participants (n = 1,393) indicate whether they believe the news items to be true. Conservatives are less truth-discerning than liberals, but also less affected by the congruence of news.</p>","PeriodicalId":51359,"journal":{"name":"Public Opinion Quarterly","volume":"87 2","pages":"267-292"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10371040/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Truth and Bias, Left and Right: Testing Ideological Asymmetries with a Realistic News Supply.\",\"authors\":\"Bernhard Clemm von Hohenberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/poq/nfad013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The debate around \\\"fake news\\\" has raised the question of whether liberals and conservatives differ, first, in their ability to discern true from false information, and second, in their tendency to give more credit to information that is ideologically congruent. Typical designs to measure these asymmetries select, often arbitrarily, a small set of news items as experimental stimuli without clear reference to a \\\"population of information.\\\" This pre-registered study takes an alternative approach by, first, conceptualizing estimands in relation to all political news. Second, to represent this target population, it uses a set of 80 randomly sampled items from a large collection of articles from Google News and three fact-checking sites. In a subsequent survey, a quota sample of US participants (n = 1,393) indicate whether they believe the news items to be true. Conservatives are less truth-discerning than liberals, but also less affected by the congruence of news.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51359,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Opinion Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"87 2\",\"pages\":\"267-292\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10371040/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Opinion Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfad013\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Opinion Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfad013","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

围绕“假新闻”的辩论引发了这样一个问题:首先,自由派和保守派在辨别真假信息的能力上是否存在差异;其次,他们倾向于更多地相信与意识形态一致的信息。衡量这些不对称性的典型设计通常是武断地选择一小部分新闻作为实验刺激,而没有明确提及“信息总体”。这项预先登记的研究采用了另一种方法,首先,将与所有政治新闻相关的估计概念化。其次,为了表示这一目标人群,它从谷歌新闻和三个事实核查网站的大量文章中随机抽取了80个项目。在随后的一项调查中,美国参与者的配额样本(n = 1393)表明他们是否相信新闻是真实的。保守派对真相的辨别能力不如自由派,但也不太受新闻一致性的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Truth and Bias, Left and Right: Testing Ideological Asymmetries with a Realistic News Supply.

Truth and Bias, Left and Right: Testing Ideological Asymmetries with a Realistic News Supply.

Truth and Bias, Left and Right: Testing Ideological Asymmetries with a Realistic News Supply.

Truth and Bias, Left and Right: Testing Ideological Asymmetries with a Realistic News Supply.

The debate around "fake news" has raised the question of whether liberals and conservatives differ, first, in their ability to discern true from false information, and second, in their tendency to give more credit to information that is ideologically congruent. Typical designs to measure these asymmetries select, often arbitrarily, a small set of news items as experimental stimuli without clear reference to a "population of information." This pre-registered study takes an alternative approach by, first, conceptualizing estimands in relation to all political news. Second, to represent this target population, it uses a set of 80 randomly sampled items from a large collection of articles from Google News and three fact-checking sites. In a subsequent survey, a quota sample of US participants (n = 1,393) indicate whether they believe the news items to be true. Conservatives are less truth-discerning than liberals, but also less affected by the congruence of news.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
2.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Published since 1937, Public Opinion Quarterly is among the most frequently cited journals of its kind. Such interdisciplinary leadership benefits academicians and all social science researchers by providing a trusted source for a wide range of high quality research. POQ selectively publishes important theoretical contributions to opinion and communication research, analyses of current public opinion, and investigations of methodological issues involved in survey validity—including questionnaire construction, interviewing and interviewers, sampling strategy, and mode of administration. The theoretical and methodological advances detailed in pages of POQ ensure its importance as a research resource.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信