Testing the Intramedia Interaction Hypothesis: The Contingent Effects of News

Shen, Fei; Eveland, William P.

doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01486.x

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The contingencies on the other side of the chain, those affecting the contexts within which exposure occurs, have received less detailed examination. For example, Shen and Eveland (2010) pose and test an "intramedia interaction hypothesis," finding that different mixes of news media sources within an individual's media repertoire produce distinct-and not always additive-learning effects.…”

Section: Research Questions Generated By the Curated Flows Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Curated Flows: A Framework for Mapping Media Exposure in the Digital Age

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advancing theory in media exposure and effects requires contending with an increasing level of complexity and contingency. Building on established theoretical concerns and the research possibilities enabled by large social datasets, we propose a framework for mapping information exposure of digitally situated individuals. We argue that from the perspective of an individual's personal communication network, comparable processes of "curation" are undertaken by a variety of actors-not only conventional newsmakers but also individual media users, social contacts, advertisers, and computer algorithms. Detecting the competition, intersection, and overlap of these flows is crucial to understanding media exposure and effects today. Our approach reframes research questions in debates such as polarization, selective and incidental exposure, participation, and conceptual orientations for computational approaches.

show abstract

Section: Research Questions Generated By the Curated Flows Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Curated Flows: A Framework for Mapping Media Exposure in the Digital Age

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That is, discussing topics encountered in the media should lead to better understanding and recall of the media information than exposure to media content-absent discussion. The intramedia interaction hypothesis (53) suggests that the impact of media use across different sources and channels should not be viewed as a simple process of additive effects, with each additional source of news being used adding an additional increment of influence. Rather, the impact of using any given source (e.g., ABC vs. NBC vs. CNN vs. Fox News) or form (e.g., CNN vs. CNN.com) of media may depend on which other forms of media (if any) are also being used.…”

Section: Evidence Of Media Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

An integrated model of communication influence on beliefs

Eveland

Cooper

2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do people develop and maintain their beliefs about science? Decades of social science research exist to help us answer this question. The Integrated Model of Communication Influence on Beliefs presented here combines multiple theories that have considered aspects of this process into a comprehensive model to explain how individuals arrive at their scientific beliefs. In this article, we (i) summarize what is known about how science is presented in various news and entertainment media forms; (ii) describe how individuals differ in their choices to be exposed to various forms and sources of communication; (iii) discuss the implications of how individuals mentally process information on the effects of communication; (iv) consider how communication effects can be altered depending on background characteristics and motivations of individuals; and (v) emphasize that the process of belief formation is not unidirectional but rather, feeds back on itself over time. We conclude by applying the Integrated Model of Communication Influence on Beliefs to the complex issue of beliefs about climate change.knowledge | learning D ecades of scholarship in communication and related fields have examined the role of mass and interpersonal communication as means by which members of the public acquire information or beliefs about a variety of important topics (1, 2). However, there are several properties of this literature that make it less than ideal for succinctly answering the larger question of how scientific beliefs are formed. First, there is a tendency to focus research on a particular form of communication in isolation from others (e.g., news rather than entertainment or media rather than interpersonal discussion), with an emphasis on media effects. Second, most empirical models offer snapshots of associations among variables (3, 4) rather than consideration of how feedback processes connect communication and beliefs in both causal directions. Third, the models tested often seem to have been developed on the basis of the data available in a particular study rather than on a broader consideration of the theoretical processes involved. In those cases in which the models do seem more comprehensive, they usually eschew formal prediction in favor of offering more abstract frameworks and encouraging data exploration (5). Overall, although there is a wealth of insight and evidence relating communication and beliefs, it tends to be scattered because of emphasis on particular subprocesses rather than emphasis on the whole.Sociologist Robert Merton [ref. 6, pp. 52-53 (emphasis in original)] argued that "theories of the middle range hold the largest promise, provided that the search for them is coupled with a pervasive concern with consolidating special theories into more general sets of concepts and mutually consistent propositions" (6). The current body of research on media selection and impact on beliefs, which has, to date, been relatively circumscribed by focusing attention on subprocesses, would seem to be ripe for a comprehens...

show abstract

“…First, from a media effects perspective, this study shows that it is important to move beyond simply looking at the effects of media in isolation from one another. This study provides empirical support for calls made by other scholars (Holbert & Benoit, 2009;Shen & Eveland, 2010) to examine the combined effects of different media on important outcome variables.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 53%

“…However, no empirical work has examined the relationship between consuming Moreover, scholars have recently argued that political communication research should examine mediation and moderation in the context of combined media use (i.e., looking at combined effects of consuming a range of media messages; Holbert & Benoit, 2009). In other words, scholars should look at the complementary effects of political media (Holbert, 2005a;Shen & Eveland, 2010). The combination of these two points indicates that the complimentary effects of consuming both one-sided and two-sided media messages should lead to higher levels of attitudinal ambivalence.…”

Section: Two-sided Political Media Consumption and Attitudinal Ambivamentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Although studies incorporating these approaches have advanced the field, the present work steps beyond the extant literature to stress two points. First, this study stresses the importance of moderationbased relationships between media use variables (e.g., interaction between FOX News use and network news use; Holbert & Benoit, 2009;Shen & Eveland, 2010). Second, it argues that scholars need to approach the conceptualization and operationalization of political attitudes as multidimensional constructs (Cacioppo & Berntson, 1994;Cacioppo, Gardner, & Berntson, 1997;Kaplan, 1972;Thompson, Zanna, & Griffin, 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation