Die Dynamik der Medienaufmerksamkeit

Waldherr, Annie

doi:10.5771/9783845236889

Cited by 19 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Probably the best known model in research on issue attention (for an overview see Brossard, Shanahan, & McComas, 2004;McComas & Shanahan, 1999;Nisbet & Huge, 2006;Shih, Wijaya, & Brossard, 2008;Waldherr, 2012) is the "issue-attention cycle" created by Downs (1972). According to him, an issue passes through different phases of attention: (1) the preproblem stage, where it is only discussed by specialists, and (2) alarmed discovery and euphoric enthusiasm, where it makes a breakthrough into the public agenda and receives a lot of attention, often through key events (Kepplinger & Habermeier, 1995).…”

Section: Research On Issue Attentionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kolb, 2005), it is not universally valid. Differences exist between issues 1 (Waldherr, 2012), countries (Brossard et al, 2004;M. Schäfer, Ivanova, & Schmidt, 2014) and also between online and traditional mass media publics: Anderson, Brossard, and Scheufele (2012) found that a scientific publication received ten times more coverage online and over a longer timespan.…”

Section: Research On Issue Attentionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Anderson et al (2012) did not explore the causes for these differences. In general, it was criticized that the cycle might only explain the process of issue attention, but not its causes (Nisbet & Huge, 2006;Waldherr, 2012).…”

Section: Research On Issue Attentionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Waldherr (2012) made an important contribution to the research on issue attention by detecting four interdependent variables influencing public attention. They might explain the differences between countries, issues and the public arenas: (1) stakeholders, (2) constellations of stakeholders, (3) events and (4) issues.…”

Section: Research On Issue Attentionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, we develop a theoretical model to explain the assumed differences. It is based on previous empirical findings that explore which variables influence issue-attention cycles (Waldherr, 2012) and on the concept of online public arenas (J.-H. Schmidt, 2013). In contrast to the given literature we do not speak of "cycles", but of "dynamics" of attention on issues and sub-topics, which we understand here as changes in the frequency of communication units (like articles, posts or comments) or of certain sub-topics over time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The Dynamics of Issue Attention in Online Communication on Climate Change

Lörcher¹,

Neverla²

2015

MaC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Issues and their sub-topics in the public agenda follow certain dynamics of attention. This has been studied for "offline" media, but barely for online communication. Furthermore, the enormous spectrum of online communication has not been taken into account. This study investigates whether specific dynamics of attention on issues and sub-topics can be found in different online public arenas. We expect to identify differences across various arenas as a result of their specific stakeholders and constellations of stakeholders, as well as different trigger events. To examine these assumptions, we shed light on the online climate change discourse in Germany by undertaking a quantitative content analysis via manual and automated coding methods of journalistic articles and their reader comments, scientific expert blogs, discussion forums and social media at the time of the release of the 5th IPCC report and COP19, both in 2013 (n = 14.582). Our results show online public arena-specific dynamics of issue attention and sub-topics. In journalistic media, we find more continuous issue attention, compared to a public arena where everyone can communicate. Furthermore, we find event-specific dynamics of issue attention and sub-topics: COP19 received intensive and continuous attention and triggered more variation in the sub-topics than the release of the IPCC report.

show abstract