Search

Recent analytical work reveals the need to assess mediated interactions (independent variable-by-mediator multiplicative terms) in mediation models to ensure the proper reporting of indirect effects. Besides their analytical value, mediated interactions can aid theory development. This study adds a theoretical support structure to this emergent analytical imperative and provides a theory-driven decision tree for incorporating mediated interactions into communication models. More broadly, mediated interactions are used as a basis to encourage the field to move beyond a "one variable, one role" approach to model building. Monte Carlo simulations reflecting common communication research practices were constructed and 1,920,000 datasets were analyzed to reveal the relative upsides and minimal risk incurred from assessing mediated interactions. In addition, the analyses elucidate the downsides incurred from not exploring these relationships when they are present in a population. The implications of these findings for future research and theory development are explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study offers a critical test of two competing theoretical accounts of message repetition effects—processing fluency and message fatigue—which have yet to be examined together under a coherent framework. Furthermore, integrating research on metacognition and motivated processing, we propose audience favorability toward message advocacy as a crucial moderator in this dynamic. A repeated-exposure experiment (N  =   845) involving five different messages about climate change mitigation was conducted. Multilevel moderated mediation analyses showed that audience favorability critically moderated the mediational effects of the two mechanisms: For favorable individuals, repeated exposure enhanced persuasion through increased fluency and decreased fatigue. In contrast, for unfavorable individuals, repeated exposure diminished persuasion via increased fatigue and decreased fluency. Collectively, this study demonstrates that message repetition does not have uniform effects on persuasion but rather its effects critically hinge on audience favorability and challenges the fundamental notion that fluency and fatigue necessarily increase with repetition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Repeated exposure to similar messages may be counterproductive, yet the majority of the extant research tends to neglect this possibility. Addressing this issue, So et al. (2017) conceptualized and operationalized the message fatigue construct within the health message context. We replicate their study in a climate change message context and extend their work by proposing and validating a shortened message fatigue scale. The results of a preregistered study (N  =   620) show that the conceptual structure and correlates of message fatigue are well replicated: Climate change message fatigue retains the original factor structure, and it is positively correlated with counterargument and negatively correlated with attention and message elaboration. Moreover, their relationships with message fatigue are shown to be moderated by political ideology in a theoretically expected manner. The shortened message fatigue scale also exhibits adequate psychometric properties, offering a less cumbersome alternative to the original scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers often focus on the benefits of adopting open science, yet questions remain whether the general public, as well as academics, value and trust studies consistent with open science compared to studies without open science. In three preregistered experiments (total N  =   2,691), we find that the general public perceived open science research and researchers as more credible and trustworthy than non-open science counterparts (Studies 1 and 2). We also explored if open science practices compensated for negative perceptions of privately-funded research versus publicly-funded research (Study 2), although the evidence did not support this hypothesis. Finally, Study 3 examined how communication scholars perceive researchers and their work as a function of open science adoption, along with publication outlet (e.g. high-prestige vs. low-prestige journals). We observed open science research was perceived more favorably than non-open science research by academics. We discuss implications for the open science movement and public trust in science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A significant paradigm shift is underway in communication research as open science practices (e.g. preregistration, open materials) are becoming more prevalent. The current work identified how much the field has embraced such practices and evaluated their impact on authors (e.g. citation rates). We collected 10,517 papers across 26 journals from 2010 to 2020, observing that 5.1% of papers used or mentioned open science practices. Communication research has seen the rate of nonsignificant p-values (p >.055) increasing with the adoption of open science over time, but p-values just below p <.05 have not reduced with open science adoption. Open science adoption was unrelated to citation rate at the article level; however, it was inversely related to the journals' h-index. Our results suggest communication organizations and scholars have important work ahead to make open science more mainstream. We close with suggestions to increase open science adoption for the field at large. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the explosive growth in research topics, communication science is said to be more fragmented and hyper-specialized than ever before, producing an increasing number of small, niche research topics that lack intellectual coherence as a whole. While such issues have been a central concern for the field, there has been a relative lack of systematic effort to map the topical interconnections among different communication science subfields, answering the question of how they remain empirically fragmented. Using full-texts of scholarly articles published in the top 20 communication science journals from 2010 to 2019, we provide systematic evidence to such claims in terms of their actual contents and their connectivity patterns. Drawing on extant works concerning the sociology of science and structures of scientific knowledge, as well as on topic modeling and simulation-based inferences on network topological features, we find that subdisciplinary linkage in communication is more frequent than we often think. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Within the context of partisan selective exposure and attitude polarization, this study investigates a mutually reinforcing spiral model, aiming to clarify mechanisms and boundary conditions that affect spiral processes-interpersonal agreement and disagreement, and the ebb and flow of message receptions. Utilizing agent-based modeling ( ABM) simulations, the study formally models endogenous dynamics of cumulative processes and its reciprocal effect of media choice behavior over extended periods of time. Our results suggest that interpersonal discussion networks, in conjunction with election contexts, condition the reciprocal effect of selective media exposure and its attitudinal consequences. Methodologically, results also highlight the analytical utility of computational social science approaches in overcoming the limitations of typical experimental and observations studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do individuals structure their political discussion networks, and what factors systematically shape such patterns? While much research has focused on the effect of personality traits and one's motivations, abilities, and opportunities, network-structural factors present different principles of tie formations. Evidence from an Exponential Family Random Graph Model and the meta-analysis of an Exponential Random Graph Model ( ERGM) from 20 different groups' networks indicated that the pattern of political discussions was shaped by general discussion and network-endogenous structural processes. Results suggest that informal discussions of individuals serve as the important foundations of political behavior, and the processes of citizens' everyday political interactions emerge through complex interactions that cannot be regressed to mere individuals' predispositions or pure social selection processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although research suggests political ambivalence prevails in the American public, little attention has been paid to the mechanisms through which a person's attitude structure and relevant antecedents interact to create ambivalence. This article aims to summarize and synthesize the results of existing studies on ambivalence in order to construct a coherent theoretical framework to explain various ambivalence phenomena identified across the social sciences. First, relevant studies and conceptualizations of ambivalence are reviewed. Next, drawing from the metacognitive model and belief accessibility, potential relations and mechanisms are presented wherein multiple beliefs and metacognitions are related to the attitude object to create ambivalence. Last, the theoretical contributions and implications of the proposed model are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]