Search

This study examines the relationship between partisan media consumption and changes in democratic values during the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. By integrating self-reported news consumption data with the partisan slant of news outlets, we explore how different media environments shape voters’ attitudes about democracy. Our analysis of a two-wave panel survey conducted before and after the election reveals significant changes in democratic values among general voters, including both Biden and Trump supporters. The findings also highlight the complex effects of a polarized media ecosystem on political beliefs, demonstrating that partisan media flow influences democratic values beyond the traditional winner-loser dichotomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After four years into the pandemic, we know that COVID-19 vaccines are effective, and it is crucial to increase public compliance with getting the COVID-19 vaccines. The current study examines the interplay of credibility perceptions, perceived benefits, and two different types of vaccine promotion messages: individual versus collective. Data was collected using an online randomized experiment. Findings demonstrated that individual versus collective frames did not influence everyone similarly. The results show a significantly moderated mediation model, such that the association between message frame and vaccine intention was mediated by the credibility of the message, and the relationship between message frame and perceived credibility was moderated by perceived benefits of the vaccine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Misinformation and substance use both increased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study examined potential links between misinformation beliefs and substance use among adults, along with the potential for media literacy to mitigate misinformation's influences on problematic use of widely available substances of misuse. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test a theoretical model of media literacy's effects on substance use, fully mediated by disinformation beliefs, with a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults recruited through a Qualtrics panel of adults using census-based quotas for geographic region, population density, ethnic diversity and gender (N = 1264). The sample was 51.5% male (N = 651); 46.7% female (N = 591); 1.1% nonbinary (N = 13); and 0.7% (N = 9) not reporting. Media literacy for source of news positively associated with media literacy for content of news (b = 0.814, p < 0.001). Media literacy for content of news then positively associated with science media literacy (b = 0.192, p < 0.001). Science media literacy then negatively associated with disinformation beliefs (b = −0.586, p < 0.001), and COVID-19 disinformation beliefs associated with an increase in substance use (b = 0.466, p < 0.001). Disinformation beliefs also associated with alcohol and sleep medication co-use (odds = 1.956, p < 0.05). Results demonstrate media literacy's value for substance misuse prevention and effective public health messaging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores the framing strategies and language features of U.S. news coverage surrounding sexual violence and gender issues across the ideological media spectrum at two pivotal phases of the #MeToo movement: (1) during its initial rise as a hashtag-driven social movement in 2017 and (2) during the Kavanaugh nomination and confirmation in 2018. Using structural topic modeling, community detection, and feature extraction, we reveal a heightened employment of political framing during the Kavanaugh accusations. Topical prevalence and language use in news treatment also showed clear partisan differences, consistent with theories of moral foundation and issue ownership. Implications for research on news coverage of gender rights and framing of social movements are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Beyond a consciousness-raising hashtag, #MeToo has become a transnational movement, crossing the borders of many societies. However, outsized attention has been paid to the manifestations of #MeToo in the US and on Twitter when the reach of this movement was not restricted to a single country, language, or platform. Drawing from the concept of hybridization, we seek to understand how the uses of #MeToo are contextualized across cultures, languages, and social media platforms. By establishing a macroscopic computational approach, we examine the global diffusion of #MeToo as a hybrid communicative process across different language groups (English, Spanish, and Korean) and social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram). Through time-series analysis and comparative descriptions of language groups and platforms, we demonstrate how discourse flows, language characteristics, and actors differ across cultural and platform contexts and how public discourse of #MeToo was reappropriated and re-signified in different parts of the world to localize connective action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current study has three main purposes: to examine 1) the impact of theory-driven corrective messages using individual vs. collective frames on information-seeking intention 2) the mediating role of risk perceptions and 3) the moderating role of reflection and gender. Our findings from a randomized experimental study and Hayes’ moderated, moderated mediation model show collective frames were associated with high-risk perceptions among women, which in turn led to higher information seeking intention. The second moderator reveals that people who scored higher on reflection were more willing to seek information. Our findings have critical implications for misinformation research by demonstrating the importance of theoretically driven messages in understanding misperceptions as well as people’s information seeking behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Political polarization surrounding the COVID-19 health crisis has been on the rise since the beginning of the pandemic. We combine prior research on motivated reasoning, selective exposure, and news framing to understand the association between partisan media use and social distancing behavior related to COVID-19. To do so, we collected media content data and national survey data during the onset of the pandemic. We employed structural topic modeling (STM), dependency parsing, word co-occurrence, and manual coding to examine the media coverage. Next, we analyzed survey data collected with a Qualtrics panel from a sample of U.S. residents for factors explaining social distancing behaviors. Results reveal coverage from the right leaning outlets downplayed the virus and highlighted the consequences of lockdowns on the economy. Our survey findings show that even after accounting for a range of demographic, political orientation, and COVID-19 awareness variables, conservative media use was linked, although modestly, with a lower likelihood of social distancing behavior. Our findings echo past research on media framing of pandemics and their association with public attitudes and behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

More than 6 million people have died due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In order to slow down the spread of COVID-19, health authorities have created numerous guidelines. In the current study, we use survey data from the U.S. and social cognitive theory (SCT) to examine the associations among self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, and willingness to perform recommended COVID-19 related health behavior. Considering the misinformation-filled information ecology during the pandemic, we also examine the moderating role of misperceptions in these relationships. Our findings show that in general the SCT hypotheses hold for COVID-19 related behavior willingness. The interaction effects with COVID-19 misperceptions show that self-efficacy is not enough to understand people's health behavior. Higher outcome expectancies are important and may be able to overcome even if people held high misperceptions. Our findings have direct implications for communication theory and for health organizations in the contemporary information ecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the sheer devastation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, vaccine hesitancy is a major barrier to a successful implementation of the vaccine. We apply two moderators to examine the associations of efficacy and expectancies with COVID-19 vaccine intention. Specifically, we use national survey data collected online in 2020 (N = 1264) and a moderated moderated mediation PROCESS model to examine 1) the associations between self-efficacy about COVID-19 and vaccine intention mediated by positive outcome expectancies and 2) moderating roles of individual responsibility and partisan media use. The findings show that the path from efficacy to expectancies is moderated by individual responsibility, while the path from expectancies to vaccine intention is moderated by liberal media use. Our findings support the strategic application of SCT to emphasize the role of personal responsibility in campaigns to encourage vaccination for the COVID-19 virus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fake information about COVID-19 continues to circulate widely, including false causes and cures. The current study examined the (a) relationship between information gathering sources and misperceptions; (b) association between literacy variables and misperceptions; and (c) the moderating role of political ideology on these relationships. Conservative ideology, younger age, conservative media use, information gathering from social media, and information gathering from Donald Trump were positively associated with COVID-19 misperceptions. Meanwhile, information gathering from local media, CDC, and scientists was negatively related to COVID-19 misperceptions. Interaction models showed critical conditional patterns with political ideology. For example, liberals with higher media literacy for content held lower COVID-19 misperceptions, but this did not hold true for conservatives. The results revealed a need to facilitate more exposure to alternative viewpoints to counteract the echo chamber of misinformation that conservatives appear to trust regardless of self-reported media literacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As privacy concern is proven to be a pivotal thought that determines online self-disclosure, the current study examined the simultaneous influence of the antecedents of privacy concern. Specifically, this study focused on the nature of information (i.e., personal involvement) and the diversity of recipients (i.e., audience representation) in influencing individuals' cognitive processes pertinent to privacy concerns on Facebook. We conducted an experiment and a total of 241 young adults participated in the study. The results suggested that information that was highly involved with oneself would trigger extended thought elaboration related to privacy. However, surprisingly, influence from audience representation in the network was revealed to be minimal. The study underscores the self-serving purpose of privacy concern online, such that users would primarily focus on considerations surrounding themselves. The results of the current study highlight the importance of self-concerns when users are making sense of their decisions pertinent to self-disclosure on SNSs. Future directions are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social media platforms that are full of misinformation and conspiracy theories about the COVID-19 pandemic can have an adverse impact on young adults. Young adults are going through critical changes in their lives due to the pandemic including educational challenges, uncertainties in employment, changes in routines, and loss of security and safety. Yet another challenge during this time is the uncertainty and the exposure to massive amount of misinformation. The pandemic has had a global impact on people of all ages, including young adults, who are the primary interest for the current study. We conducted 30 in-depth interviews with young adults to understand their misperceptions about COVID-19, how young adults are coping with the COVID-19 'infodemic', and young adults' recommendations for combatting this challenge. Findings show majority of participants are stressed about the abundance of misinformation available about the pandemic. Additionally, young adults provide important ways to combat misinformation about COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although there is a wide variety of scientific evidence that demonstrates the benefits of vaccination on a multitude of diseases, vaccination rates remain low while misperceptions about vaccines are on the rise. The primary objective of the present study is to examine the role of doctor–patient communication and vaccination. We test the impact of doctor–patient communication on trust in doctors' vaccine recommendations as a mediator, to understand the mechanisms leading to positive vaccination attitudes, and ultimately leading to actual H1N1 vaccination behavior. We use data from a nationally representative U.S. sample from one of the Multimedia Audience Research Systems (MARS) data sets collected by Kantar Media. Our results demonstrate the crucial role of doctor–patient communication in building patients' trust in doctors, which in turn positively impact vaccination attitudes and H1N1 vaccination behavior. Unlike other preventive health measures, getting vaccines after a pandemic is a critical decision because these vaccines are previously unknown. Our finding implies that verified communication from the physician's office may be one of the effective strategies during or after a pandemic. Our findings have implications for public health organizations to incorporate effective vaccination communication and could have critical implications for the COVID-19 vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed many communication challenges for public health authorities, especially communicating the safety, effectiveness, and importance of the COVID-19 vaccine. This study takes an integrative approach that includes a content analysis of COVID-19 vaccine-related messages from the CDC Facebook page and an experimental test of the effectiveness of the same types of vaccine-related messages on participants' attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine. Our findings from the content analysis show that gain-frame was used significantly more than loss-frame, and statistical evidence was more prevalent than narrative evidence in the CDC's COVID-19 vaccine-related messaging. Results from the experiment indicated that loss-framed, and messages with statistical evidence, may be more successful in promoting positive attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the fact that scientific evidence has repeatedly affirmed the safety of the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, unconfirmed stories on social media that allege the vaccine is harmful has led to vaccination refusal, which drastically hampers immunization rates. Although social media makes it easy for the spread of misinformation, these platforms are also suitable for misinformation correction. The current study employs an experimental design to 1) test theory-based correction messages using loss- vs. gain-frames, to combat misinformation online in the context of Facebook, 2) extend the effects of correction messages from misperceptions to behavioral intentions, and 3) examine the conditional effects of reflection which is one of the most important variables for information processing. Our findings demonstrated that individuals with low reflection had lower misperceptions about the vaccine when exposed to loss-framed messages. However, exposure to loss- or gain-framed messages did not seem to differ the misperceptions for individuals with high reflection. Additionally, our findings showed that loss-framing elicited lower information seeking intention among individuals with low reflection. Implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Media depictions of refugees play a significant role in determining public attitudes toward policies and dispensation of aid. Given this centrality, the study analyzes prominent visual frames of the Rohingya refugee crisis in newspapers from Pakistan, Bangladesh, the United States, and Canada. We also examine the frames qualitatively. Findings show that overall coverage tended to focus on negative aspects by highlighting refugees' vast numbers, vulnerability, gendered stereotypes, and dependence on Western benevolence. Results show cross-cultural appeal of frames such as "Exodus" and "mother and child," both of which have roots in the Biblical tradition. Even though visuals came from different sources, there were not many differences among the newspapers. This suggests the role of standardized journalistic routines across multiple organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study examines prominent news frames, sources, and refugee characteristics present in coverage of the under-reported Rohingya refugee crisis across newspapers from four nations. Findings show victim, thematic, and administrative frames were most commonly used. Politicians, international organizations, and NGOs were dominant sources, while nationality, age, and gender were frequently used refugee characteristics. Findings suggest positive practices that journalists can incorporate while reporting refugee crises. These include more frequent use of thematic and personalized frames that will help provide holistic background to crises and lead to nuanced portrayals of refugee subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research examines the influence of norm-based messages (positively worded descriptive vs. negatively worded descriptive vs. injunctive vs. basic information) on intentions and risk perceptions about receiving human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination among young adults aged 18–29. Results from an experiment show that compared to the basic information condition, additional exposure to injunctive normative messages increased intention to seek further information about HPV vaccination, which in turn enhanced intention to get the vaccine. Negatively worded descriptive normative messaging should be used with caution since it resulted in the highest risk perceptions of the HPV vaccine, compared to positively worded descriptive norms and basic information messages. Theoretical and practical implications are further discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States is one of the hardest-hit countries by the COVID-19 pandemic and yet there is widespread hesitancy to take the vaccine. In order to address vaccine hesitancy and foster public understanding of the COVID-19 vaccine, it is necessary to strategize public health messages based on evidence. To this end, we use experimental data to examine the effects of four message frames on participants' attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine and their vaccine intention. The primary purposes of this paper are to examine the 1) impact of loss vs. gain frames and individual vs. collective frames and 2) role of perceived benefits on participants' attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine and their vaccine intention. Our findings show that participants with higher perceived benefits and exposed to the loss frame showed higher positive attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine and greater intention to vaccinate. Similar patterns were revealed in case of the individual frame message. Implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Individuals increasingly rely on the Internet, and social media in particular, for health-related information. A recent survey reports that 80% of Internet users search for health information online. In the present study, we employ Twitter data to understand content characteristics and the patterns of content flow of the conversations about the HPV vaccine debate. Approaching the HPV vaccine conversations on Twitter as a social network, we can identify key self-formed subgroups—clusters of users who create "siloes" of interactions and information flow. Combining network analysis, computer-aided content analysis, and human-coded content analysis, we explored the communication dynamics within the groups in terms of group members' affective and cognitive characteristics. Our findings show that positive emotion is positively correlated with cluster density, an indicator of strong ties and rapid information flow. In the case of negative emotion, we found that anger is a significant negative predictor for graph density. We also found a correlation between certainty and tentativeness; both at cluster as well as at tweet level, suggesting that clusters bring together people who are sure about the HPV vaccine and people who are exploring for answers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study is to explore the intermedia influence between Twitter's and newspapers' agendas on the topic of climate change. Accordingly, using President Trump's announcement of withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Agreement as a dividing point, we compare the agendas on Twitter and newspapers before and after the announcement, analyzing rank-order and cross-lagged correlations between both platforms. Results suggest that newspapers influenced Twitter before the announcement, whereas Twitter conversely influenced newspapers within five days after the announcement. However, Twitter's influence was found ephemeral, newspapers regained its unidirectional impact five days after the announcement. The findings imply that Twitter is more likely to influence newspapers' agenda in terms of breaking news, whereas newspapers are more likely to lead Twitter's agenda in terms of ongoing discussions during non-breaking news periods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Few studies have examined political content on YouTube, especially in comparison to the traditional television spots. Relying on both audience- and platform-based theories, we develop expectations of differences in content between political ads posted online and aired on television. We use content analysis to compare both online political ads and televised political ads from the 2012 presidential campaign, relying upon data from YouTube and the Wesleyan Media Project. We find that negative ads are more likely to be sponsored by groups than candidates on both television and YouTube. Online ads are less negative and less policy focused. By comparing ads made for TV uploaded to YouTube and those only on YouTube, we find that there is no difference in viewership between the two types, but online ads are more likely to be shared. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Online sources not only permeate the information-seeking environment of the younger generation, but also have profound influence in shaping their beliefs and behaviors. In this landscape, examining the factors responsible for credibility perceptions of online information is fundamental, particularly for health-related information. Using a 2 (frames: gain vs. loss) × 2 (source: expert vs. non-expert) × 2 (social endorsement: high vs. low) randomized between-subjects experimental design, this study examines the effect of health message framing and the moderating effects of social endorsement and source type on credibility perceptions of Facebook posts. Testing across two issues--physical activity and alcohol consumption--findings indicate that the gain-framed message was perceived as most credible. Additionally, significant three-way interactions suggest that social endorsement and source type affect the relationship between message framing and credibility perceptions. Specifically, the findings demonstrate that a gain-framed message from an expert source with high number of 'likes' is considered the most credible message. These findings have significant implications for information gathering from social media sources, such as the influence of 'likes' on health information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although there is increasing research about the influence of political use of social networking sites on audience members, few studies have examined the content in candidates’ pages on these sites. To fully comprehend the impact of these online political messages, an analysis of the messages themselves is fundamental. The present study uses theoretical concepts from functional theory, political advertising, emotional appeals, and social endorsement to conduct a content analysis of the official Facebook posts of U.S. presidential candidates in 2008 and 2012 elections. Results demonstrate that John McCain and Mitt Romney attacked more, while Barack Obama acclaimed more. The Republican candidates used higher percentage of fear appeals, while Barack Obama used humor and enthusiasm in his posts. Implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Literature on blog credibility shows that blog readers find blogs more credible than the mainstream media, whereas it is just the opposite with the general audience. Using three experiments, the present study examines the influence of two factors: identity of the blogger (journalist blogger vs. nonjournalist blogger) and reach of the blog (low vs. high) on blog credibility. Findings show that in the case of the general audience, the journalist blogger was perceived as more credible. Of interest, results also show that reach of the blog-influenced blog credibility only in the case of the nonjournalist blogger. Implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research explores the extent to which YouTube helps democratize campaigns by allowing nontraditional political actors to be heard. We examine political advertisements posted on YouTube in races for the U.S. Senate in 2010. We find that ads posted by citizens and quasi-political organizations are viewed just as often as ads sponsored by some traditional electoral actors, such as parties and interest groups, but that ads sponsored by candidates are most likely to be viewed. However, news media coverage of ads posted online by nontraditional actors is dwarfed by coverage of traditional television advertisements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Concerns about selective exposure to partisan information have become a mainstay for scholars of political communication in the changing media environment. This study draws on a survey of a unique population—readers of political blogs—to explore the relationship between perceptions of mainstream media bias (as hostile media perception) and selective exposure to media sources that provide like-minded information as well as social support. We find that hostile media perception is an important motivator for partisan selective exposure among this audience, and also that such perceptions can lead indirectly to expressive political participation by encouraging visits to politically homogeneous online spaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The anonymity and flexibility of the online world allows the free expression of views. This same anonymity and unconstrained expression can initiate uncivil debate. The political blogosphere is thus replete with uncivil discussions and becomes an apt context to examine the influence of incivility on news frames. Moreover, although there is an increasingly growing literature on framing, few have examined framing effects in the contemporary media landscape. Thus, the present study brings in literature from incivility and framing effects to examine the influence of incivility on news frames for perceptual outcomes. The study uses an experiment embedded in a Web survey. Findings show that incivility increases the credibility of a news article while decreasing political trust and political efficacy. Further, results demonstrate the interactions of incivility and news frames. For instance, news credibility is increased only in the value framed condition. And a combination of strategic frames and incivility results in the least political trust and external efficacy. Implications are discussed. [Supplementary material is available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of Political Communication for the following free supplemental resource(s): stimulus material for the experiment.] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although scholars have enthusiastically examined the outcomes of cross-cutting exposure, few studies have explored its antecedents. Moreover, most studies have attended to adults. But it is during adolescence and early adulthood that citizens are most likely to be socialized into valuing and engaging in heterogeneous discussion. The present study employs a panel survey of American adolescents, age 12 to 17, to examine the predictive power of home, school, and media use variables on two outcomes related to valuing and talking to the other side. Our findings demonstrate that adolescents’ attitudes toward valuing cross-cutting exposure as well as indulging in heterogeneous talk are consistently predicted by concept-oriented home environment and school curriculum. Among the media variables, cable news negatively and newspaper and online news positively influenced our outcome variables. Implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This study employs three methods to understand media content. First, the study examines the 'peak periods' to ascertain the pattern of coverage. Second, with a sample of 4058 articles the study examines the prominent frames used by newspapers. Third, with the help of interviews of journalists from the same newspapers, the study examines the factors that influence the way these frames are created in the first place. Results show that, in general, the driving force of this coverage is marketability of the stories. This is implied by the overall coverage as well as the responses of journalists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]