nach oben

Political Behavior

Erschienen in:

31.10.2016 | Original Paper

Social Influences on Online Political Information Search and Evaluation

verfasst von: Douglas R. Pierce, David P. Redlawsk, William W. Cohen

Erschienen in: Political Behavior | Ausgabe 3/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Americans are turning to the Internet to learn about politics in greater and greater numbers. Under the current “Web 2.0” paradigm in which users are encouraged to interact with online content, voters encountering political information on the Internet are typically exposed to more than just the news; online information is often colored by the reactions of previous readers, whether in the form of displayed comments or in readily apparent tallies of the number of “likes” or “shares” a particular item has received. In this paper we consider the effect these social cues have on online political information search and evaluation. Using processing-tracing software to monitor the patterns of information search and evaluation among our subjects, we find that social cues can function as a heuristic, allowing voters to reach judgments similar to those of their more informed counterparts. However, we also find that negative cues can adversely influence candidate evaluation, making subjects less disposed to a candidate than they would be in the absence of such signals.

Vorheriger Artikel Tweetment Effects on the Tweeted: Experimentally Reducing Racist Harassment

Nächster Artikel Disputed Ownership: Parties, Issues, and Traits in the Minds of Voters

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Report available at http://www.pewinternet.org/2009/04/15/the-internets-role-in-campaign-2008/.

Indeed, the social cues common to online media have begun to appear in more traditional outlets, as some news programs now incorporate viewer comments and reactions into their stories.

All figures were based on website visits on April 19th, 2015.

In a largely positive information environment, another mechanism that may decrease overall information search is suggested by Marcus and colleague’s “Affective Intelligence Theory” (Marcus et al. 2000). Affective Intelligence Theory proposes that a positive political context activates the brain’s “disposition” system, resulting in a decreased motivation to expand cognitive effort. In effect, positive signals tell the voter that the status quo is fine and there is no need to be on alert or vigilant. Thus, positive signals surrounding political information should decrease a person’s need to acquire information.

We use a primary campaign to eliminate reliance on party identification when making a voting decision. In a primary, our subjects will presumably need more information to make their choices, giving us more leverage on our research question.

The DPTE software is free to use and available to any researcher at www.processtracing.org.

When we added a measure of political expertise to our models, subjects’ level of political sophistication had no substantive effects on the results reported here. Complete results are available from the authors.

These and subsequent estimates from our statistical models are generated using the “sim” function for the Zelig statistical package in R (Imai et al. 2012).

Recall that 22 of the 33 items pertaining to our manipulated candidate were marked with social cues. Of these, 11 items were initially presented with 20–30 likes or dislikes. The other 11 items contained 10–19 likes or dislikes and the final 11 items had no cues attached at all. The effects we report hold for both high and low–cued items, so we combine them here.

While all subjects in our treatment groups were alerted to the presence of comments on a news item, in order to actually view the comments subjects had to choose to open a separate panel within the information box, much like visitors to Internet news sites must choose to read user comments.

In the “negative + comments” treatment, the p value for the dummy variable is .051.

A likely explanation for the increase in processing time is a “cognitive response” mechanism (Mutz 1998). Our subjects are probably taking the time to stop and think about the cues and what they imply. This interpretation is bolstered by the fact that subjects in the negative cues only group (i.e., no comments, only “dislikes”), also saw their processing time increase significantly.

Although there were three candidates in the primary, our design focused the bulk of the cues on one politician. Our goal was to make one candidate appear to be either exceedingly popular or unpopular. The other two “non-manipulated” candidates received a smattering of cues simply to make the environment more realistic.

To further investigate whether the distribution of cues mattered, we re-ran our analysis with dummy variables indicating whether the subject took the experiment early in the process (among the first third of subjects) or late (the last third). Since the later groups saw a different array of cues—because of the cues left by previous participants—we might see differences in information acquisition among these groups. However, the likelihood of opening an item declined for all subjects, regardless of when they took the study.

Banerjee, A. V. (1992). A simple model of herd behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107, 797–817.CrossRef

Bartels, L. M. (1996). Uninformed votes: Information effects in presidential elections. American Journal of Political Science, 40(1), 194–230.CrossRef

Bartels, L. M. (2002). Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perceptions. Political Behavior, 24(2), 117–150.CrossRef

Berger, J., & Milkman, K. L. (2012). What makes online content viral? Journal of Marketing Research, 49(2), 192–205.CrossRef

Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon. com’s mechanical turk. Political Analysis, 20(3), 351–368.CrossRef

Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s mechanical turk a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5.CrossRef

Carpini, M. X. D., & Keeter, S. (1993). Measuring political knowledge: Putting first things first. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 1179–1206.CrossRef

Cohen, G. L. (2003). Party over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. Journal of personality and social psychology, 85(5), 808–822.CrossRef

Dancey, L., & Sheagley, G. (2013). Heuristics behaving badly: Party cues and voter knowledge. American Journal of Political Science, 57(2), 312–325.CrossRef

Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row.

Gaines, B. J., Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Peyton, B., & Verkuilen, J. (2007). Same facts, different interpretations: Partisan motivation and opinion on iraq. Journal of Politics, 69(4), 957–974.CrossRef

Imai, K., King, G., and Lau, O. (2012). Zelig: Everyone’s statistical software, R Package Version 3.5.5. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Zelig

Kuklinski, J. H., & Quirk, P. J. (2000). Reconsidering the rational public: Cognition, heuristics, and mass opinion. In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality (pp. 153–182). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schwieder, D., & Rich, R. F. (2000). Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. Journal of Politics, 62(3), 790–816.CrossRef

Lau, R. R., Andersen, D. J., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2008). An exploration of correct voting in recent us presidential elections. American Journal of Political Science, 52(2), 395–411.CrossRef

Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (1997). Voting correctly. American Political Science Review, 91, 585–598.CrossRef

Lau, R. R. and Redlawsk, D. P. (2001). Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science, pages 951–971.

Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2006). How voters decide: Information processing during election campaigns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Lavine, H. G., Johnston, C. D., & Steenbergen, M. R. (2012). The ambivalent partisan: How critical loyalty promotes democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2000). Three steps toward a theory of motivated political reasoning. In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of Reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2013). The rationalizing voter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Lupia, A. (1998). The democratic dilemma: Can citizens learn what they need to know?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Marcus, G. E., Neuman, W. R., & MacKuen, M. (2000). Affective intelligence and political judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

McDermott, M. L. (2005). Candidate occupations and voter information shortcuts. Journal of Politics, 67(1), 201–219.CrossRef

Muchnik, L., Aral, S., & Taylor, S. J. (2013). Social influence bias: A randomized experiment. Science, 341, 647–651.CrossRef

Mutz, D. C. (1998). Impersonal influence: How perceptions of mass collectives affect political attitudes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175.CrossRef

Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303–330.CrossRef

Popkin, S. L. (1991). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Redlawsk, D. P. (2002). Hot cognition or cool consideration? Testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision making. The Journal of Politics, 64(04), 1021–1044.CrossRef

Redlawsk, D. P., Civettini, A. J. W., & Emmerson, K. M. (2010). The affective tipping point: Do motivated reasoners ever âĂIJget itâĂİ? Political Psychology, 31(4), 563–593.CrossRef

Sniderman, P. M., Brody, R. A., & Tetlock, P. E. (1991). Reasoning and choice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755–769.CrossRef

Zaller, J., & Feldman, S. (1992). A simple theory of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 579–616.CrossRef

Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Titel: Social Influences on Online Political Information Search and Evaluation
verfasst von: Douglas R. Pierce
David P. Redlawsk
William W. Cohen
Publikationsdatum: 31.10.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Political Behavior / Ausgabe 3/2017
Print ISSN: 0190-9320
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-6687
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-016-9374-4

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2017

Disputed Ownership: Parties, Issues, and Traits in the Minds of Voters

Call for Applications for Editorship of Political Behavior

The Political Economy: Political Attitudes and Economic Behavior

Disagreement, Diversity, and Participation: Examining the Properties of Several Measures of Political Discussion Network Characteristics

The Correlates of Discord: Identity, Issue Alignment, and Political Hostility in Polarized America

Tweetment Effects on the Tweeted: Experimentally Reducing Racist Harassment

Premium Partner