The growth of partisan news sources has raised concerns that people will increasingly select attitude-consistent information, which might lead to increasing political polarization. Thus far, there is limited research on the long-term mutual influences between selective exposure and political attitudes. To remedy this, this study investigates the reciprocal influences between selective exposure and political attitudes over several years, using a three-wave panel survey conducted in Sweden during 2014–2016. More specifically, we analyse how ideological selective exposure to both traditional and online news media influences citizens’ ideological leaning. Findings suggest that (1) people seek-out ideologically consistent print news and online news and (2) such attitude-consistent news exposure reinforces citizens’ ideological leaning over time. In practice, however, such reinforcement effects are hampered by (3) relatively low overall ideological selective exposure and a (4) significant degree of cross-cutting news exposure online. These findings are discussed in light of selective exposure theory and the reinforcing spirals model.
AcockA (2013). Discovering Structural Equation Modeling Using Stata. College Station: Stata Press.
2.
ArceneauxKJohnsonM (2013) Changing Minds or Changing Channels? Partisan News in an Age of Choice. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
3.
ArceneauxKJohnsonM (2015) Polarization and partisan news media in America. In: ThurberJAYoshinakaA (eds) American Gridlock: The Sources, Character, and Impact of Political Polarization. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 309–336.
4.
AspKBjerlingJ (2014) Mediekratin – mediernas makt i svenska val [Mediacracy – the power of the media in Swedish elections]. Stockholm: Ekerlids.
5.
BakshyEMessingSAdamicLA (2015) Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science348(6239): 1130–1132.
6.
BennettWLIyengarS (2008) A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication58(4): 707–731.
7.
BorahPThorsonKHwangH (2015) Causes and consequences of selective exposure among political blog readers: The role of hostile media perception in motivated media use and expressive participation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics12(2): 186–199.
8.
CarminesEGEnsleyMJWagnerMW (2012) Who fits the left-right divide? Partisan polarization in the American Electorate. American Behavioral Scientist56(12): 1631–1653.
9.
DruckmanJNFeinJLeeperTJ (2012) A source of bias in public opinion stability. American Political Science Review106(2): 430–454.
10.
Dvir-GvirsmanSTsfatiYMenchen-TrevinoE (2016) The extent and nature of ideological selective exposure online: Combining survey responses with actual web log data from the 2013 Israeli elections. New Media & Society18(5): 857–877.
FinkelS (1995). Causal Analysis With Panel Data. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
13.
FischerPLeaSKastenmüllerAet al. (2011) The process of selective exposure: Why confirmatory information search weakens over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes114(1): 37–48.
14.
FreedmanJLSearsDO (1965) Selective exposure. In: BerkowitzL (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press, pp. 57–97.
15.
GarrettRK (2009a) Echo chambers online?: Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication14(2): 265–285.
16.
GarrettRK (2009b) Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication59(4): 676–699.
17.
GarrettRKCarnahanDLynchEK (2013) A turn toward avoidance? Selective exposure to online political information, 2004–2008. Political Behavior35(1): 113–134.
18.
HartWAlbarracínDEaglyAHet al. (2009) Feeling validated versus being correct: A meta-analysis of selective exposure to information. Psychological Bulletin135(4): 555–588.
19.
HeatherlyKALuYLeeJK (2017) Filtering out the other side? Cross-cutting and like-minded discussions on social networking sites. New Media & Society19: 1271–1289.
20.
HoltK (2016) ’Alternativmedier’? En intervjustudie om mediekritik och mediemisstro [’Alternative media’? An interview study on media criticism and media mistrust]. In: TruedsonL (ed.) Migrationen i medierna – men det får en väl inte prata om? [Migration in the media – but that’s something one may not talk about?]. Stockholm: Institutet för mediestudier, pp. 113-149.
21.
IyengarSHahnKS (2009) Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication59(1): 19–39.
22.
JamiesonKHCappellaJN (2008) Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23.
JohnsonTJBichardSLZhangW (2009) Communication communities or ‘CyberGhettos?’: A path analysis model examining factors that explain selective exposure to blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication15(1): 60–82.
24.
JostJT (2006) The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist61(7): 651–670.
25.
JostJTFedericoCMNapierJL (2009) Political ideology: Its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology60(1): 307–337.
26.
Knobloch-WesterwickS (2012) Selective exposure and reinforcement of attitudes and partisanship before a presidential election. Journal of Communication62(4): 628–642.
27.
Knobloch-WesterwickS (2014) Choice and Preference in Media Use: Advances in Selective Exposure Theory and Research (Routledge Communication Series). New York: Routledge.
28.
KobayashiTIkedaK (2009) Selective exposure in political web browsing: Empirical verification of ‘cyber-balkanization’ in Japan and the USA. Information, Communication & Society12(6): 929–953.
29.
KobayashiTInamasuK (2015) The knowledge leveling effect of portal sites. Communication Research42(4): 482–502.
30.
LazarsfeldPFBerelsonBGaudetH (1948) The People’s Choice: How the Voter Makes Up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign. New York: Columbia University Press.
31.
LevenduskyM (2013) How Partisan Media Polarize America (Chicago Studies in American Politics). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
32.
Lewis-BeckMSNadeauREliasA (2008) Economics, party, and the vote: Causality issues and panel data. American Journal of Political Science52(1): 84–95.
33.
LuskinRC (1990) Explaining political sophistication. Political Behavior12(4): 331–361.
34.
MessingSWestwoodSJ (2014) Selective exposure in the age of social media endorsements Trump partisan source affiliation when selecting news online. Communication Research41(8): 1042–1063.
35.
MullinixKJ (2015) Partisanship and preference formation: Competing motivations, elite polarization, and issue importance. Political Behavior38(2): 1–29.
36.
NickersonRS (1998) Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology2(2): 175–220.
37.
NordLStrömbäckJ (2018) Svenska valrörelser [Swedish election campaigns]. Stockholm: Santérus.
38.
OscarssonHHolmbergS (2016) Svenska väljare [Swedish voters]. Stockholm: Wolters Kluwer.
39.
PriorM (2007) Post-Broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections (Cambridge Studies in Public Opinion and Political Psychology). New York: Cambridge University Press.
40.
PriorM (2009) The immensely inflated news audience: Assessing bias in self-reported news exposure. Public Opinion Quarterly73(1): 130–143.
41.
PriorM (2013) Media and political polarization. Annual Review of Political Science16(1): 101–127.
42.
SearsDOFreedmanJL (1967) Selective exposure to information: A critical review. The Public Opinion Quarterly31(2): 194–213.
43.
SkovsgaardMShehataAStrömbäckJ (2016) Opportunity structures for selective exposure: Investigating selective exposure and learning in Swedish election campaigns using panel survey data. The International Journal of Press/Politics21(4): 527–546.
44.
SlaterMD (2007) Reinforcing spirals: The mutual influence of media selectivity and media effects and their impact on individual behavior and social identity. Communication Theory17(3): 281–303.
45.
SlaterMD (2015) Reinforcing spirals model: Conceptualizing the relationship between media content exposure and the development and maintenance of attitudes. Media Psychology18(3): 370–395.
46.
SmithSMFabrigarLRNorrisME (2008) Reflecting on six decades of selective exposure research: Progress, challenges, and opportunities. Social and Personality Psychology Compass2(1): 464–493.
47.
StrömbäckJDjerf-PierreMShehataA (2013) The dynamics of political interest and news media consumption: A longitudinal perspective. International Journal of Public Opinion Research25(4): 414–435.
48.
StroudNJ (2010) Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal of Communication60(3): 556–576.
49.
StroudNJ (2011) Niche News: The Politics of News Choice. New York: Oxford University Press.
50.
TaberCSLodgeM (2006) Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science50(3): 755–769.
51.
ThurberJAYoshinakaA (eds) (2015) American Gridlock: The Sources, Character, and Impact of Political Polarization. New York: Cambridge University Press.
52.
TreierSHillygusDS (2009) The nature of political ideology in the contemporary electorate. Public Opinion Quarterly73(4): 679–703.
53.
TrillingDvan KlingerenMTsfatiY (2017) Selective exposure, political polarization, and possible mediators: Evidence from the Netherlands. International Journal of Public Opinion Research29(2): 189–213.
54.
TsfatiYNirL (2017) Frames and reasoning: Two pathways from selective exposure to affective polarization. International Journal of Communication11: 301–322.
55.
Van AelstPStrömbäckJAalbergTet al. (2017) Political communication in a high-choice media environment: A challenge for democracy?Annals of the International Communication Association41(1): 3–27.
56.
ZallerJ (1992) The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
