Agenda Cueing in Aggregated Newsfeeds

This dissertation brings together the findings from three experimental studies that seek to understand how exposure to information in an online news aggregating portal can influence users’ perceptions of the relative importance of problems facing society. Theoretically, this investigation relies on two foundational ideas. One is that in today’s high-choice, multi-source media environment communication flows are curated by a variety of gatekeeping actors, such as algorithms and fellow users. Individuals can have varying attitudes toward and perceptions of these gatekeepers, which can influence the effects of exposure to online information, including agenda-setting outcomes. Another is that users of digital news, facing a nearly infinite supply of information, rely heavily on presentation cues embedded in news platforms’ interfaces to navigate the news landscape and make sense of the messages they encounter. These powerful features can communicate the identity of gatekeepers who curate the newsfeed, as well as particular mechanisms of curation. Using the data from a longitudinal experiment where participants were exposed to a dynamic, constantly updated news portal populated with real news, the first study tests the comparative effects of two user-sourced cues representing different logics of content selection. The analysis does not support the expectation of differential agenda-setting effects, yet this finding could be the result of study design that did not allow for sufficient control of all the aspects of the treatment. The second experiment is a pilot test of an alternative experimental design that allows for a cleaner test of interface agenda cues’ differential effects. Its success in influencing users’ issue priorities paves the way for the main experiment that utilizes the same treatment mechanism. This study reveals that different types of interface agenda cues can influence users’ perceptions of issue importance differently in the news portal context. Consistent with the agenda cueing hypothesis, users high in gatekeeping trust are revealed to be especially susceptible to media agenda cues. In conclusion, I argue that interfaces of digital platforms should become the subject of public scrutiny, while news literacy interventions should focus on raising people’s awareness of how digital platforms aggregate and present the news

Deciding about the unknown: The effect of party and ideological cues on forming opinions about the European Union

This article contributes to the literature on political heuristics by reporting two survey experiments conducted in Spain in 2014-2015 on party and ideology cues regarding preferences on a range of European Union and domestic issues in European and general elections. The findings reveal that party cues increase voters' competence to take positions on European Union issues more than ideological ones. Cues increase competence in a similar fashion regardless of the nature of the topic, although the effect of cues that parties provide on European Union issues seems to be stronger than that of cues on domestic policies. Party cueing effects are also consistent across different electoral arenas (national vs. European), and for all types of parties regardless of their age or positions toward the European Union integration process.The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was funded by the project ‘Crisis y Reto en la Ciudadanía en España: Actitudes y Comportamiento Político de los Españoles Ante la Crisis Económica y de Representación Política (CIUPANEL)’, Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MIMECO), code: CSO2013-47071-R (2014–2016

Street cred : are media consumers craving more “authenticity” in the digital age?

Media organizations that provide news have traditionally relied on audience perceptions of truth and credibility to lure more readers, viewers, and listeners. The author explores whether authenticity has emerged in the digital age as an additional ingredient in media consumers’ daily decisions about where to turn – and where to return – for trustworthy information. As it becomes ever-more of a challenge for consumers to distinguish reliable information from “fake news” in the 21st century, audiences may be seeking content from media organizations that feels more authentic, genuine, and personalized. Three case studies drawn from new media, as well as legacy media, help illustrate what traditional and startup media institutions can do to better understand audience attitudes and behaviors: the HBO series “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver,” the online site Reddit, and the Pulitzer Prize-winning work of Washington Post reporter David Fahrenthold.Communication Studie

Misinformation on Instagram: The Impact of Trusted Endorsements on Message Credibility

This research explores how social validation, measured through trusted endorsements and bandwagon heuristics, influence the credibility of misinformation on Instagram. Using experimental design, this study found that trusted endorsements (i.e., the liking of content by a trustworthy or reputable source) significantly impacted the credibility of misleading content on Instagram. Perceived message credibility was greater when a fabricated post was endorsed by a trustworthy personality. Findings provide insights into how message credibility is evaluated on a social media platform like Instagram in the context of misinformation

Do religious justifications distort policy debates? Some empirics on the case for public reason

Scholars engaged in debates about the use of public reason often view religious arguments as being out of bounds. Yet the real-world impact of religious discourse remains under-explored. This study contributes to research in this area with an empirical test looking at the impact of religious arguments on a particular policy debate. A survey experiment explored the effects of religious and secular cues with varied policy directions on the issue of assisted dying. The findings showed that secular arguments were considerably more likely to elicit a positive response, and that, while religious arguments were not a conversation stopper, they produced significant distortions in political perceptions among participants, though not necessarily along the identity lines critical to the public reason debate

The political conditioning of subjective economic evaluations: the role of party discourse

Classic and revisionist perspectives on economic voting have thoroughly analyzed the role of macroeconomic indicators and individual partisanship as determinants of subjective evaluations of the national economy. Surprisingly, however, top-down analysis of parties’ capacity to cue and persuade voters about national economic conditions is absent in the debate. This study uses a novel dataset containing monthly economic salience in party parliamentary speeches, macroeconomic indicators and individual survey data covering the four last electoral cycles in Spain (1996–2011). The results show that the salience of economic issues in the challenger’s discourse substantially increases negative evaluations of performance when this challenger is the owner of the economic issue. While a challenger’s conditioning of public economic evaluations is independent of the state of the economy (and can affect citizens with different ideological orientations), incumbent parties are more constrained by the true state of the economy in their ability to persuade the electorate on this issue

Understanding Healthcare Knowledge Diffusion in WeChat

Social media such as We Chat provide new ways of communicating healthcare information and knowledge. Many healthcare institutions leverage We Chat public platform to disseminate healthcare knowledge in the hope of attracting public attention. It is critical for them to build a comprehensive understanding of the factors affecting WeChat users’ willingness to diffuse healthcare knowledge, an issue that has seldom been studied in the literature. This research aims to address this gap. Drawing on prior research on word-of-mouth, we develop a research model by integrating six factors regarding three key elements of healthcare knowledge communications: content (interestingness, usefulness, emotionality and positivity), source (source credibility) and channel (institution-based trust). The research model will be tested through a scenario-based online survey. This research is expected to contribute by (1) integrating factors that determine healthcare knowledge diffusion including the factors about content, source and channel, especially including institution-based trust as an important determinant, (2) examining the diffusion of healthcare knowledge and taking WeChat as the research context, and (3) using survey with subjective measurements to test a more comprehensive model. Potential practical implications are offered for healthcare organizations and practitioners

Expert vs. Peer: The Role of Situational Characteristics in Electronic Networks of Practice

Individuals turn to online forums sponsored by Electronic Networks of Practice (ENPs) to acquire information on a range of topics; yet, quality and relevancy of such information can vary greatly. To assist information seekers, many ENP forums incorporate contextual cues that provide signals originating from both expert and lay forum users about the quality of solutions. While extant research has explored how these cue sources influence information filtering on ENP forums, results on their relative impact are fragmented and often contradictory. This paper advances research in this domain by employing situation theory to examine how six situational characteristics influence individuals’ propensity to rely on peer vs. expert recommendations. Results demonstrate that users rely more on expert recommendations when seeking information for situations that they perceive as stressful, task-oriented, or requiring greater cognitive processing, while peer recommendations are preferred for situations perceived as fun. Implications for research and practice are discussed

Prominence-Interpretation Theory: Membangun Kredibilitas Perusahaan di Media Digital

In this time of information is searchable and reachable, companies need to be more aware of their reputation and credibility online.Users always have the tendency of recheck and double check. In other occasions, users are looking for certain or needed information online or to a specific sites or company’s assets. It can be company’s websites, social media, forum, or simply search engine. Using prominence-interpretation theory, companies can be aware of their digital or online credibility evaluated by users. The theory explains and very much can be expanded to cope with current situation of credibility evaluation through various platforms online.Keyword: Prominence-interpretation theory, strategic communication, social medi