Broadcast Information Diffusion Processes on Social Media Networks: Exogenous Events Lead to More Integrated Public Discourse

gong, Xuanjun; Huskey, Richard; Xue, Haoning; Shen, Chen; Frey, Seth

doi:10.33767/osf.io/wautz

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 56 publications

(67 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Radio marked another milestone, then most notably followed by Television. And, although social media has now upended the traditional “one-to-many” model of mass communication, providing a many-to-many mode of communication instead, it is still true that a single social media message can be sent out to a large audience, and the brains of audience members would then still respond to the same message ( Schmälzle and Grall, 2020a , b ; Gong et al, 2022 ).…”

Section: The Arrow Of Causality: From Media Content To Reception Resp...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating media content analysis, reception analysis, and media effects studies

Schmälzle

Huskey

2023

Front. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Every day, the world of media is at our fingertips, whether it is watching movies, listening to the radio, or browsing online media. On average, people spend over 8 h per day consuming messages from the mass media, amounting to a total lifetime dose of more than 20 years in which conceptual content stimulates our brains. Effects from this flood of information range from short-term attention bursts (e.g., by breaking news features or viral ‘memes’) to life-long memories (e.g., of one’s favorite childhood movie), and from micro-level impacts on an individual’s memory, attitudes, and behaviors to macro-level effects on nations or generations. The modern study of media’s influence on society dates back to the 1940s. This body of mass communication scholarship has largely asked, “what is media’s effect on the individual?” Around the time of the cognitive revolution, media psychologists began to ask, “what cognitive processes are involved in media processing?” More recently, neuroimaging researchers started using real-life media as stimuli to examine perception and cognition under more natural conditions. Such research asks: “what can media tell us about brain function?” With some exceptions, these bodies of scholarship often talk past each other. An integration offers new insights into the neurocognitive mechanisms through which media affect single individuals and entire audiences. However, this endeavor faces the same challenges as all interdisciplinary approaches: Researchers with different backgrounds have different levels of expertise, goals, and foci. For instance, neuroimaging researchers label media stimuli as “naturalistic” although they are in many ways rather artificial. Similarly, media experts are typically unfamiliar with the brain. Neither media creators nor neuroscientifically oriented researchers approach media effects from a social scientific perspective, which is the domain of yet another species. In this article, we provide an overview of approaches and traditions to studying media, and we review the emerging literature that aims to connect these streams. We introduce an organizing scheme that connects the causal paths from media content → brain responses → media effects and discuss network control theory as a promising framework to integrate media content, reception, and effects analyses.

show abstract

Section: The Arrow Of Causality: From Media Content To Reception Resp...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating media content analysis, reception analysis, and media effects studies

Schmälzle

Huskey

2023

Front. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

To Reply or to Quote: Comparing Conversational Framing Strategies on Twitter

Zade,

Williams,

Tran

et al. 2024

ACM J. Comput. Sustain. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social media platform affordances allow users to interact with content and with each other in diverse ways. For example, on Twitter 1 , users can like, reply, retweet, or quote another tweet. Though it’s clear that these different features allow various types of interactions, open questions remain about how these different affordances shape the conversations. We examine how two similar, but distinct conversational features on Twitter — specifically reply vs. quote — are used differently. Focusing on the polarized discourse around Robert Mueller’s congressional testimony in July 2019, we look at how these features are employed in conversations between politically aligned and opposed accounts. We use a mixed methods approach, employing grounded qualitative analysis to identify the different conversational and framing strategies salient in that discourse and then quantitatively analyzing how those techniques differed across the different features and political alignments. Our research (1) demonstrates that the quote feature is more often used to broadcast and reply is more often used to reframe the conversation; (2) identifies the different framing strategies that emerge through the use of these features when engaging with politically aligned vs. opposed accounts; (3) discusses how reply and quote features may be re-designed to reduce the adversarial tone of polarized conversations on Twitter-like platforms.

show abstract

Broadcast Information Diffusion Processes on Social Media Networks: Exogenous Events Lead to More Integrated Public Discourse

Cited by 2 publications

References 56 publications

Integrating media content analysis, reception analysis, and media effects studies

Integrating media content analysis, reception analysis, and media effects studies

To Reply or to Quote: Comparing Conversational Framing Strategies on Twitter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About