IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v10y2022i3p196-205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Insidiously Trivial: Meme Format Reduces Perceived Influence and Intent to Debate Partisan Claims

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin A. Lyons

    (Department of Communication, University of Utah, USA / Department of Politics, University of Exeter, UK)

Abstract

If citizens systematically respond differently to claims conveyed by memes, their effects on the broader information ecosystem may be underestimated. This US-based study (N = 598) uses a 2 (partisan news/meme format) x 2 (congenial/uncongenial message) design to examine perceptions of partisan memes’ influence on self and others, and the format’s effect on willingness to share disagreement in the context of partisan claims about corruption surrounding biofuels operations. Results indicate that meme format enhances individuals’ tendency to see messages as less influential on oneself than on others and individuals less intent to share disagreement with claims presented in meme format. This decrease is mediated by the decrease in perceived influence over self. These findings call attention to the role format differences may play in the psychological processes underlying political discussion as it becomes increasingly mediated and visual.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin A. Lyons, 2022. "Insidiously Trivial: Meme Format Reduces Perceived Influence and Intent to Debate Partisan Claims," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(3), pages 196-205.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v10:y:2022:i:3:p:196-205
    DOI: 10.17645/mac.v10i3.5388
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/5388
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/mac.v10i3.5388?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Transue, John E. & Lee, Daniel J. & Aldrich, John H., 2009. "Treatment Spillover Effects across Survey Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 143-161, April.
    2. Fung, Timothy K.F. & Choi, Doo Hun & Scheufele, Dietram A. & Shaw, Bret R., 2014. "Public opinion about biofuels: The interplay between party identification and risk/benefit perception," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 344-355.
    3. Shmargad, Yotam & Watts, Jameson K.M., 2016. "When Online Visibility Deters Social Interaction: The Case of Digital Gifts," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 1-14.
    4. Jonathan Albright, 2017. "Welcome to the Era of Fake News," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 87-89.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Benjamin A. Lyons, 2022. "Insidiously Trivial: Meme Format Reduces Perceived Influence and Intent to Debate Partisan Claims," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(3), pages 196-205.
    2. Filimonau, Viachaslau & Högström, Michaela, 2017. "The attitudes of UK tourists to the use of biofuels in civil aviation: An exploratory study," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 84-94.
    3. Qiulai Su & Fei Zhou & Yenchun Jim Wu, 2020. "Using Virtual Gifts on Live Streaming Platforms as a Sustainable Strategy to Stimulate Consumers’ Green Purchase Intention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-15, May.
    4. Ryan Suttle & Scott Hogan & Rachel Aumaugher & Matthew Spradling & Zak Merrigan & Jeremy Straub, 2022. "Deceptive Content Labeling Survey Data from Two U.S. Midwestern Universities," Data, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-10, February.
    5. Florence Namasinga Selnes, 2024. "Adolescents’ experiences and (re)action towards fake news on social media: perspectives from Norway," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    6. Matthew Spradling & Jeremy Straub, 2022. "Evaluation of the Factors That Impact the Perception of Online Content Trustworthiness by Income, Political Affiliation and Online Usage Time," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-55, November.
    7. Schillo, R. Sandra & Isabelle, Diane A. & Shakiba, Abtin, 2017. "Linking advanced biofuels policies with stakeholder interests: A method building on Quality Function Deployment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 126-137.
    8. Claudia Rodríguez-Hidalgo & Diana Rivera-Rogel & Luis M. Romero-Rodríguez, 2020. "Information Quality in Latin American Digital Native Media: Analysis Based on Structured Dimensions and Indicators," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 135-145.
    9. Huw C Davies, 2018. "Redefining Filter Bubbles as (Escapable) Socio-Technical Recursion," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 23(3), pages 637-654, September.
    10. Okazaki, Shintaro & Plangger, Kirk & West, Douglas & Menéndez, Héctor D., 2020. "Exploring digital corporate social responsibility communications on Twitter," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 675-682.
    11. Chen, Zonghao & Keefe, Michael O'Connor & Watts, Jameson K.M., 2020. "Board of director compensation in China: It pays to be connected," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    12. Sean Nicholson-Crotty & Jill Nicholson-Crotty & Sean Webeck, 2019. "Are public managers more risk averse? Framing effects and status quo bias across the sectors," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 2(1).
    13. Chengyu Liu & Yan Li & Mingjie Fang & Feng Liu, 2023. "Using machine learning to explore the determinants of service satisfaction with online healthcare platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 17(2), pages 449-476, June.
    14. Marko Selakovic, 2020. "Typology of Business-Related Fake News Online: A Literature Review," GATR Journals jmmr259, Global Academy of Training and Research (GATR) Enterprise.
    15. Goldfarb, Jillian L. & Kriner, Douglas L., 2021. "U.S. public support for biofuels tax credits: Cost frames, local fuel prices, and the moderating influence of partisanship," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    16. Ari Haasio & Markku Mattila & Anu Ojaranta, 2018. "The Role of Libraries in Avoiding Hate Speech and False Information," Information and Communication Sciences Research, University of Bucharest, Faculty of Letters, Department of Communication Sciences, issue 22, pages 9-15, April.
    17. Jeremy Straub & Matthew Spradling & Bob Fedor, 2022. "Assessment of Factors Impacting the Perception of Online Content Trustworthiness by Age, Education and Gender," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-66, March.
    18. Könsgen, Raoul & Schaarschmidt, Mario & Ivens, Stefan & Munzel, Andreas, 2018. "Finding Meaning in Contradiction on Employee Review Sites — Effects of Discrepant Online Reviews on Job Application Intentions," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 165-177.
    19. Plangger, Kirk & Montecchi, Matteo, 2020. "Thinking Beyond Privacy Calculus: Investigating Reactions to Customer Surveillance," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 32-44.
    20. Robert Johns & Graeme A. M. Davies, 2019. "Civilian Casualties and Public Support for Military Action: Experimental Evidence," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(1), pages 251-281, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v10:y:2022:i:3:p:196-205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.