The role of self-reports in the study of news production

Abstract

For decades, scholars have known that much of journalistic practice is motivated by habits that lie beyond the conscious reflection of journalists. Yet, when studying news production, scholars often rely on methods, like interviewing, which elicit consciously articulated self-reports from journalists. Doing so leaves unexplored the comparatively vast terrain of news production driven by pre-reflective motivations. Borrowing from the dual-processing theory of human cognition, this article explores what methods like interviewing can and cannot explain about news production. It also discusses alternative methods specifically designed to investigate the role of ‘practical consciousness’ in behavior. The benefits of this exercise are several, including greater clarity about the sorts of claims that can be made on the basis of self-reported data, better alignment between theories and methods in the study of news production, and consideration of alternative methods for accessing the parts of journalistic practice that work in implicit and unconscious ways.

How journalists internalize news practices and why it matters

“…However, taking advantage of these tools in empirical research is, admittedly, a challenge. As Miles et al (2019: 309) observes, the challenge is “primarily methodological.” Simply put, it is difficult to gather data about nondeclarative knowledge, precisely because such knowledge is implicit, and so lies beyond the conscious reflection of actors (e.g., Ryfe, 2020). The result, Moore (2017: 196) observes, is that “sociologists who make use of dual-process theories…often fail to provide empirical data…specifically confirming their dual-process claims.” This methodological conundrum is potentially a serious impediment to deeper study of nondeclarative knowledge, so it is not surprising that cultural sociologists have eagerly sought solutions.…”

“…As Miles et al (2019: 309) observes, the challenge is "primarily methodological." Simply put, it is difficult to gather data about nondeclarative knowledge, precisely because such knowledge is implicit, and so lies beyond the conscious reflection of actors (e.g., Ryfe, 2020). The result, Moore (2017: 196) observes, is that "sociologists who make use of dual-process theories…often fail to provide empirical data…specifically confirming their dual-process claims."…”

“…Scholars of news production also have adopted this approach (e.g., Ryfe, 2020). For instance, following Bourdieu, Schultz (2007) describes the actions of journalists in terms of a “gut feeling,” or, to borrow directly from Bourdieu, a “doxa”: a set of tacit presuppositions that journalists take for granted, and thus naturally and unself-consciously reproduce in their actions (see also Willig, 2013).…”

Covering Hate: Field Theory and Journalistic Role Conception in Reporting on White Nationalist Rallies

“…Interviewing has been a particularly reliable method for exploring journalists' conceptions of their work through the lens of a particular topic or issue that journalists have covered (Lewis and Reese 2009;Usher 2009;Bourk, Rock, and Davis 2017). The method is certainly not without its limitations: interviewing cannot validly capture the underlying cultural motivations that drive journalists due to a gap between interviewees' practical consciousness and intentional thinking (Ryfe 2020). However, Ryfe (2020) also suggests that interviewing is still well suited for exploring how journalists make meaning of their actions, allowing researchers to sketch out journalists' motives for making decisions in their reporting.…”

Methodological Considerations in the Professional Accreditation Research

“…This requires access to complete and bias-free data reflecting practitioner practices. The data collection methods referred to in the literature of practice theory and the underpinning constructs of competence and capability are direct or field observation (Thompson & Illes, 2021), participatory action research (Ayaya et al, 2020), and practitioner self-reports (Ryfe, 2020).…”