top of page

This study addresses the perceptions of online news readers who engage in arguments within the comments sections, and if this is a consequence of selective exposure to online news. A review of the literature found no studies focusing on lack of credibility as the potential key to understanding how selective exposure and intentional exposure work together. This study aims to bridge this gap in the literature. Lack of credibility within online news and the rise of online news readership may be contributing to the tendency of Americans to practice selective exposure of news media. In turn, this lack of credibility within online news may be contributing to the increasing perception of strident partisanship within American discourse.

QUESTIONS

 

  1. Do perceptions of lack of credibility of news websites increase the likelihood that individuals will intentionally expose themselves to opposing viewpoints or challenging information?

  2. Do individuals use websites that they already perceive to lack credibility in order to enhance their arguments and/or their viewpoints?

  3. If individuals do seek opposing views in their online news, do they do so in order to weigh both sides of the issue or are just looking for ammunition to use against others?

 

HYPOTHESES

 

  1. Individuals purposely seek news websites they perceive to lack credibility when looking for opposing viewpoints.

  2. Individuals purposely seek news websites they perceive to lack credibility in order to enhance their arguments and/or their viewpoints.

  3. Individuals purposely seek out opposing views in order to argue with those who disagree.

 

 

 

The study results suggest credibility is not correlated with selective exposure nor with argument-seeking behavior.  Rather the qualitative and quantitative data suggests most persons are not argument-seekers.  Of those who do engage in argument-seeking behavior, this sub-group see themselves as persons who add value and who provide a necessary service.  Furthermore, the data suggests this sub-group believes they are not arguing, but rather are simply attempting to persuade other online news commenters and readers to their "correct" viewpoint.

 

Or as our submission to @lolmythesis put it:

 

Online Trolls Be Trollin'*

 

* (They just don't think they are.)

 

Due to the small size of this subsample, further research is needed to determine if our conclusion holds up.  If it does, future research should explore the link between this form of "persuasion" and punditry.

 

RESEARCH OVERVIEW

INTRODUCTION

 

STUDY AIM

 

CONCLUSION
bottom of page