Algorithms vs. Human Nature: A Tale of Selective Exposure

The public’s turn towards news websites and social media for news consumption has sparked anxiety over echo chambers, avoidance of opinion-challenging content, and potentially fragmentation and polarization among sociopolitical groups. Algorithms have specifically been blamed for increasing the ease of filtering out counter-attitudinal online content and potentially exacerbating selective exposure tendencies. However, longstanding classic psychological research has demonstrated the ubiquitous phenomenon of cognitive dissonance and selective exposure far before the internet became the primary tool for news consumption. Research investigating how algorithms directly influence online approach and avoidance behavior is unfortunately scarce. This dissertation work aimed to analyze the impact of an algorithm system during online information consumption on selective exposure behavior. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: a neutral condition where presented articles are balanced in attitudinal valence; an algorithm condition where presented articles update to match previous selection behavior; and a motivated condition where participants are encouraged to explore dissimilar viewpoints. Overall, a-priori hypotheses were not supported, and condition had virtually no effect on dependent variables, including selective exposure tendency. However, results provide an in-depth look into perceptual and behavioral processes of highly polarized individuals during the information-seeking process

Persuading the enemy: estimating the persuasive effects of partisan media with the preference-incorporating choice and assignment design

Does media choice cause polarization, or merely reflect it? We investigate a critical aspect of this puzzle: how partisan media contribute to attitude polarization among different groups of media consumers. We implement a new experimental design, called the Preference-Incorporating Choice and Assignment (PICA) design, that incorporates both free choice and forced exposure. We estimate jointly the degree of polarization caused by selective exposure and the persuasive effect of partisan media. Our design also enables us to conduct sensitivity analyses accounting for discrepancies between stated preferences and actual choice, a potential source of bias ignored in previous studies using similar designs. We find that partisan media can polarize both its regular consumers and inadvertent audiences who would otherwise not consume it, but ideologically-opposing media potentially also can ameliorate existing polarization between consumers. Taken together, these results deepen our understanding of when and how media polarize individuals.Accepted manuscrip

Calling Out the Trolls: Responses to Witnessing Use of the “Troll” Label as a Defense in an Online Group Context

Although the term “troll” has existed since the 1980s, its meaning has shifted in recent years as social media use has increased. People provide contrasting and imprecise definitions for what constitutes “trolling,” and often apply the term subjectively to describe online discussants who are uncivil, who are deviant, and who and present counter-attitudinal opinions. Exposure to deviance, counter-attitudinal information, and incivility often leads to unwanted psychological effects. In theory, labeling an uncivil, counter-attitudinal deviant as a “troll” proposes that their intention is to disrupt the conversation and upset other discussants, which provides a reason for why incivility is used, and diminishes the threat of counter-attitudinal exposure. Participants were placed into an online discussion about transgender identities; while participants believed they were discussing with real people, they were actually interacting with a scripted computer program. All discussion comments were pro-attitudinal, save one. A 2 X 3 between-subjects design was employed to examine the effects of the civility of the counter-attitudinal comment (civil vs. uncivil) and the label used against this counter-attitudinal discussant (no label vs. rude label vs. troll label). Incivility exposure overall produced higher ratings of anger, attitude certainty, intentions to participate, and identification with the discussion group. The rude label overall decreased attitude certainty, while the troll label overall increased identification with being a person with their pre-existing attitude. In the uncivil condition, participants were marginally more willing to participate again when the troll label was applied, when compared to the two other label conditions. The intersecting influences of gender, pre-existing attitudes, and suspicions about the deception used are discussed

Reinforcing attitudes in a gatewatching news era: individual-level antecedents to sharing fact-checks on social media

Despite the prevalence of fact-checking, little is known about who posts fact-checks online. Based upon a content analysis of Facebook and Twitter digital trace data and a linked online survey (N = 783), this study reveals that sharing fact-checks in political conversations on social media is linked to age, ideology, and political behaviors. Moreover, an individual’s need for orientation (NFO) is an even stronger predictor of sharing a fact-check than ideological intensity or relevance, alone, and also influences the type of fact-check format (with or without a rating scale) that is shared. Finally, participants generally shared fact-checks to reinforce their existing attitudes. Consequently, concerns over the effects of fact-checking should move beyond a limited-effects approach (e.g., changing attitudes) to also include reinforcing accurate beliefs.Accepted manuscrip

Anatomy of emotions in politics : the role of discrete emotions in political information search and participation

Discrete emotions in response to politics have increasingly been examined. However, there has been a negativity bias where scholars have been primarily focusing on discrete negative emotions. Despite documented evidence of their distinctiveness in cognitive psychology, discrete positive emotions, such as enthusiasm, hope, and pride, have received little to no attention from communication scholars and political scientists. Drawing from appraisal theories, this dissertation advances our knowledge about the different constructs of discrete emotions, especially positive emotions, and their effects on information search and political participation. I answered two main questions in this research: First, how different are enthusiasm, hope, and pride from one another in terms of their constructs of appraisal components? Second, to what extent do discrete positive and negative emotions result in differential effects on people’s information seeking and political participation? I employed a multi-methodological approach to analyze the cognitive constructs and effects of discrete emotions. First, I executed an online survey to find out which appraisal components predict each positive emotion. The confirmatory factor analysis captured three different sets of cognitive appraisal dimensions for enthusiasm, hope, and pride. Second, I conducted an online experiment to test the varying effects of six discrete emotions on participants’ information seeking behavior and their intentions to participate in eight political activities. I investigated the differential effects for three positive emotions and three negative emotions. This research uncovers that enthusiasm, hope, and pride, prevalent positive emotions in the political realm, are different from one another in regard to their cognitive appraisal constructs. Moreover, the dynamics among emotions, information seeking, and participation intentions are found to vary across discrete emotions with the same valance in several instances. The dissertation sheds light on different profiles of discrete emotions as well as their varying effects on people’s political life. The closer look at the role of discrete emotions in politics increases our chance to better democracy as citizens become more aware of their own emotions enacted by the media, politicians, parties, and can thus make conscious decisions about exercising their rights as a citizenry.Communication Studie

Conceptualizing leadership perceptions as attitudes:using attitude theory to further the understanding of the relation between leadership and outcomes

Leadership is one of the most examined factors in relation to understanding employee wellbeing and performance. While there are disparate approaches to studying leadership, they share a common assumption that perceptions of a leader's behavior determine reactions to the leader. The concept of leadership perception is poorly understood in most theoretical approaches. To address this, we propose that there are many benefits from examining leadership perceptions as an attitude towards the leader. In this review, we show how research examining a number of aspects of attitudes (content, structure and function) can advance understanding of leadership perceptions and how these affect work-related outcomes. Such a perspective provides a more multi-faceted understanding of leadership perceptions than previously envisaged and this can provide a more detailed understanding of how such perceptions affect outcomes. In addition, we examine some of the main theoretical and methodological implications of viewing leadership perceptions as attitudes to the wider leadership area. The cross-fertilization of research from the attitudes literature to understanding leadership perceptions provides new insights into leadership processes and potential avenues for further research. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserve

Picture Power? The Contribution of Visuals and Text to Partisan Selective Exposure

Today’s high-choice media environment allows citizens to select news in line with their political preferences and avoid content counter to their priors. So far, however, selective exposure research has exclusively studied news selection based on textual cues, ignoring the recent proliferation of visual media. This study aimed to identify the contribution of visuals alongside text in selective exposure to pro-attitudinal, counter-attitudinal and balanced content. Using two experiments, we created a social media-style newsfeed with news items comprising matching and non-matching images and headlines about the contested issues of immigration and gun control in the U.S. By comparing selection behavior of participants with opposing prior attitudes on these topics, we pulled apart the contribution of images and headlines to selective exposure. Findings show that headlines play a far greater role in guiding selection, with the influence of images being minimal. The additional influence of partisan source cues is also considered