IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v7y2019i3p32-41.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discussion Network Activation: An Expanded Approach to Selective Exposure

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin A. Lyons

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

Abstract

Studies of selective exposure have focused on use of traditional media sources. However, discussion networks are an integral part of individuals’ information diets. This article extends the selective exposure literature by exploring the potential for networks to likewise be selectively accessed. A pre-registered experiment found that participants nominate denser, more ideologically coherent networks in response to congenial political news relative to uncongenial news, and express willingness to share it with more people. Analysis of open-ended data suggest shared political beliefs are more likely to motivate discussant selection in response to congenial, rather than uncongenial, news. Properties of networks generated in response to political and non-political news did not vary. These results provide nuance to our understanding of political information exposure.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin A. Lyons, 2019. "Discussion Network Activation: An Expanded Approach to Selective Exposure," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 32-41.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v7:y:2019:i:3:p:32-41
    DOI: 10.17645/mac.v7i3.2112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/2112
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/mac.v7i3.2112?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. Mutz, Diana C., 2002. "Cross-cutting Social Networks: Testing Democratic Theory in Practice," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 96(1), pages 111-126, March.
    2. Edward Bishop Smith & Tanya Menon & Leigh Thompson, 2012. "Status Differences in the Cognitive Activation of Social Networks," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 67-82, February.
    3. Laura C Crysel & Gregory D Webster, 2018. "Schadenfreude and the spread of political misfortune," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-27, September.
    4. Barabas, Jason, 2004. "How Deliberation Affects Policy Opinions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(4), pages 687-701, November.
    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, 2019. "Discussion Network Activation: An Expanded Approach to Selective Exposure," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 32-41.
    2. Juita-Elena (Wie) Yusuf & Burton St. John & Pragati Rawat & Michelle Covi & Janet Gail Nicula & Carol Considine, 2019. "The Action-oriented Stakeholder Engagement for a Resilient Tomorrow (ASERT) framework: an effective, field-tested approach for engaging stakeholders," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 9(4), pages 409-418, December.
    3. Meirowitz, Adam, 2005. "Deliberative Democracy or Market Democracy: Designing Institutions to Aggregate Preferences and Information," Papers 03-28-2005, Princeton University, Research Program in Political Economy.
    4. Fabio Sabatini, 2006. "Social Capital and Labour Productivity in Italy," Working Papers 2006.30, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    5. Leif Brändle & Helen Signer & Andreas Kuckertz, 2023. "Socioeconomic status and entrepreneurial networking responses to the COVID-19 crisis," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(1), pages 111-147, January.
    6. de Oliveira Maciel, Cristiano & Netto, Raul Zanon Rocha, 2020. "Architectural agency in intra-organizational networks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 489-497.
    7. Sabatini, Fabio, 2010. "Questionario e guida pratica per la misurazione del capitale sociale [Questionnaire and Guide Book for the Measurement of Social Capital]," MPRA Paper 21355, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Marco Tortoriello & Ray Reagans & Bill McEvily, 2012. "Bridging the Knowledge Gap: The Influence of Strong Ties, Network Cohesion, and Network Range on the Transfer of Knowledge Between Organizational Units," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1024-1039, August.
    9. Heltberg,Rasmus & Lakhani,Sadaf Sayyeda & Sacks,Audrey, 2014. ""They Are Not Like Us": Understanding Social Exclusion," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6784, The World Bank.
    10. George Butler & Gabriella Pigozzi & Juliette Rouchier, 2019. "Mixing Dyadic and Deliberative Opinion Dynamics in an Agent-Based Model of Group Decision-Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-31, August.
    11. Carolin V. Zorell, 2020. "Nudges, Norms, or Just Contagion? A Theory on Influences on the Practice of (Non-)Sustainable Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-21, December.
    12. Allison Harell, 2010. "Political Tolerance, Racist Speech, and the Influence of Social Networks," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(3), pages 724-740, September.
    13. Wenting Yu & Zhicong Chen & Xiang Meng & Qing Yan, 2024. "Propagating COVID-19 Conspiracy Theories: The Influence of Right-Wing Sources," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, June.
    14. Sarkki, Simo & Heikkinen, Hannu I., 2015. "Why do environmentalists not consider compromises as legitimate?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 110-117.
    15. E. N. Bridwell-Mitchell & Theresa K. Lant, 2014. "Be Careful What You Wish For: The Effects of Issue Interpretation on Social Choices in Professional Networks," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 401-419, April.
    16. Douglas Guilbeault & Damon Centola, 2020. "Networked collective intelligence improves dissemination of scientific information regarding smoking risks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-14, February.
    17. Matteo Prato & Fabrizio Ferraro, 2018. "Starstruck: How Hiring High-Status Employees Affects Incumbents’ Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 755-774, October.
    18. Fiorillo, Damiano & Sabatini, Fabio, 2015. "Structural social capital and health in Italy," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 129-142.
    19. Kris Byron & Blaine Landis, 2020. "Relational Misperceptions in the Workplace: New Frontiers and Challenges," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 223-242, January.
    20. Park, YeJin & Nault, Kelly & Kuwabara, Ko, 2024. "When brokers don’t broker: Mitigating referral aversion in third-party help exchange," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).

    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:v7:y:2019:i:3:p:32-41. 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.