Search

Perceptual bias occurs when factual beliefs deviate from reality. Democrats and Republicans are thought to be especially susceptible to biased information processing. And yet, we know little about the pervasiveness of perceptual bias outside the domain of "performance issues" (e.g., unemployment or inflation rates) or how individual-level partisan motivation interacts with the information environment. We investigate these issues in a study that examines more than two hundred survey questions on a wide range of topics spanning two decades. Using multivariate statistical analyses as well as counterfactual comparisons, we demonstrate that people see the world in a manner that is consistent with their political views. The result is a selective pattern of learning in which partisans have higher levels of knowledge for facts that confirm their world view and lower levels of knowledge for facts that challenge them. This basic relationship is exaggerated on topics receiving high levels of media coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Survey experiments help establish causality, but scholars do not know how closely thetreatments mimic natural phenomena. This study compares survey experiments and a naturalexperiment on the same topic. In two survey experiments providing information about Medicare,we observe double-digit learning effects. In contrast, most respondents in our contemporaneousnatural experiment show little evidence of learning. Consistent with our expectations, the onlypeople who showed comparable levels of learning to respondents in our survey experiment wereindividuals exposed to Medicare facts in their media source of choice as well as people who wereuncertain about the facts from the very beginning. Our conclusion is that survey experiments, atleast on this topic, generate effects that are only likely to be observed among parts of thepopulation that are highly likely to be exposed or to accept the treatment messages. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When individuals encounter information about the distribution of political opinions in a society, it tends to alter their preferences. Most people learn about the attitudes of other citizens from news stories featuring surveys sponsored by major media organizations. For nearly three decades, however, journalists have been blending aggregate-level survey results with in-depth interviews of the respondents from the poll who agree to speak to reporters for attribution. Including qualitative remarks from especially eager and talkative respondents introduces selection-bias into the reporting on an otherwise nationally representative survey. Experiments confirm that the direction and substance of citizen cues found in interviews with survey respondents affects political preferences. While the potential for misrepresentation is great, follow-up interviews with respondents can simulate deliberative exchanges and frame issues. Studying this little known but empirically common form of discourse helps resolve disputes about political disagreement and its effects. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Variations in the quantity and quality of information affect what citizens know about politics. Using data from 41 cross-sectional surveys, a series of multilevel models show that previously documented relationships between socioeconomic characteristics and knowledge vary as a function of the information environment. The difference in knowledge between citizens with low and high levels of income and education grows as the volume of information increases. By contrast, knowledge gaps based upon education, income, and age shrink considerably when the environment conveys contextual information. Differences in knowledge due to race and gender are unaffected by the environmental measures used in this study. Thus, the environment does not have a uniform effect. It works selectively, increasing the advantages that accrue to certain segments of the population and leveling differences that exist between others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the survey results that are sponsored by major media organizations through which people learn about the opinions of their fellow citizens. It states that usually highly qualified respondents and strong partisans are quoted in news stories because of their willingness to contact the reporter and verbosity. It further states that, this type of qualitative quotes may provide misleading picture to the citizens.

Survey experiments help establish causality, but scholars do not know how closely the treatments mimic natural phenomena. This study compares survey experiments and a natural experiment on the same topic. In two survey experiments providing information about Medicare, we observe double-digit learning effects. In contrast, most respondents in our contemporaneous natural experiment show little evidence of learning. Consistent with our expectations, the only people who showed comparable levels of learning to respondents in our survey experiment were individuals exposed to Medicare facts in their media source of choice as well as people who were uncertain about the facts from the very beginning. Our conclusion is that the effects of survey experiments, at least on this topic, only generalize to parts of the population that are likely to be exposed or to accept the treatment messages. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]