Expectancy violations play important roles as heuristics in communication processes, yet prior research has focused more on incongruence between (news) sources and messages rather than assessing expectation levels as a mechanism for variations in message believability. An online experiment indicated that news headline believability for both a prominent daily newspaper and a religion news wire service was largely determined by an interaction between source trust and the extent to which news consumers were surprised of the headline’s origin.
AdamsR. C.SumnerP.Vivian-GriffithsS.BarringtonA.WilliamsA.BoivinJ.ChambersC. D.BottL. (2017). How readers understand causal and correlational expressions used in news headlines. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 23(1), 1–14.
2.
AndrewB. C. (2007). Media-generated shortcuts: Do newspaper headlines present another roadblock for low-information rationality?Harvard International Journal of Press/politics, 12(2), 24–43.
3.
AriyantoA.HornseyM. J.GalloisC. (2006). Group-directed criticism in Indonesia: Role of message source and audience. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 9(2), 96–102.
4.
ArpanL. M.RaneyA. A. (2003). An experimental investigation of news source and the hostile media effect. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(2), 265–281.
5.
AschS. E. (1948). The doctrine of suggestion, prestige and imitation in social psychology. Psychological Review, 55(5), 250–276.
6.
ReichZ.BarnoyA. (2020). How news become “news” in increasingly complex ecosystems: Summarizing almost two decades of newsmaking reconstructions. Journalism Studies, 21(7), 966–983.
7.
BartholowB. D.FabianiM.GrattonG.BettencourtB. A. (2001). A psychophysiological examination of cognitive processing of and affective response to social expectancy violations. Psychological Science, 12(3), 197–204.
8.
BaumM. A.GroelingT. (2009). Shot by the messenger: Partisan cues and public opinion regarding national security of war. Political Behavior, 31, 157–186.
9.
BaumM. A.GussinP. (2007). In the eye of the beholder: How information shortcuts shape individual perceptions of bias in the media. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 3, 1–31.
10.
BerganD. E. (2012). Partisan stereotypes and policy attitudes. Journal of Communication, 62(6), 1102–1120.
11.
BlomR. (2019a). Fact or fiction: Believability of news content from opposing media outlets. Electronic Journal of Communication, 29(3–4). http://www.cios.org/getfile/0290346_EJC
12.
BlomR. (2019b). The irony at the heart of “fake” news and “alternative” facts. In Jimenez MurguíaS. (Ed.), Trumping truth: Essays on the destructive power of “alternative facts” (pp. 39–52). McFarland Press.
13.
BlomR. (2021). Believing false political headlines and discrediting truthful political headlines: The interaction between news source trust and news content expectancy. Journalism, 22(3), 821–837.
14.
BolceL.De MaioG. (1999). Religious outlook, culture war politics, and antipathy toward Christian fundamentalists. Public Opinion Quarterly, 63, 29–61.
15.
BullockO. M.HubnerA. Y. (2020). Candidates’ use of informal communication on social media reduces credibility and support: Examining the consequences of expectancy violations. Communication Research Reports, 37(3), 87–98.
16.
BurgoonJ. D. (1993). Interpersonal expectations, expectancy violations, and emotional communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12(1–2), 30–48.
17.
CampoS.CameronK. A.BrossardD.FrazerM. S. (2004). Social norms and expectancy violation theories: Assessing the effectiveness of health communication campaigns. Communication Monographs, 71(4), 448–470.
18.
CenterD. B.ThomasJ. (1981). The effects of religious cues on attitudes and credibility. Religious Communication Today, 4, 37–39.
CoeK.TewksburyD.BondB. J.DrogosK. L.PorterR. W.YahnA.ZhangY. (2008). Hostile news: Partisan use and perceptions of cable news programming. Journal of Communication, 58(2), 201–219.
21.
DorD. (2003). On newspaper headlines as relevance optimizers. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(5), 695–721.
22.
EaglyA. H.WoodW.ChaikenS. (1978). Causal influences about communicators and their effect on opinion changes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 847–855.
23.
FiedlerK. (2000). On mere considering: The subjective experience of truth. In BlessH.ForgasJ. P. (Eds.), The message within: The role of subjective and experience in social cognition and behavior (pp. 13–36). Psychology Press.
24.
FlanaginA. J.MetzgerM. J. (2000). Perceptions of Internet information credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 515–540.
25.
FlanaginA. J.WinterS.MetzgerM. J. (2020). Making sense of credibility in complex information environments: The role of message sidedness, information source, and thinking styles in credibility evaluation online. Information, Communication & Society, 23(7), 1038–1056.
26.
FragaleA. R.HeathC. (2004). Evolving informational credentials: The (mis) attribution of believable facts to credible sources. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(2), 225–236.
27.
GordonR.SpearsK. (2012). You don’t act like you trust me: Dissociations between behavioural and explicit measures of source credibility judgement. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(1), 121–134.
28.
HeiderF. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. John Wiley.
29.
HollanderB. A. (1998). The priming of religion in political attitudes: The role of religious programming. Journal of Communication & Religion, 21, 67–83.
30.
HovlandC. I.JanisI. L.KelleyH. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. Yale University Press.
31.
HovlandC. I.MandellW. (1952). An experimental comparison of conclusion-drawing by the communicator and by the audience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47(3), 581–588.
32.
JonesE. E.DavisK. E.GergenK. J. (1961). Role playing variations and their information value for person perception. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 302–310.
33.
KaufmanD. Q.StassonM. F.HartJ. W. (1999). Are the tabloids always wrong or is that just what we think? Need for cognition and perceptions of articles in print media. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(9), 1984–2000.
34.
KimM.GrabeM. E. (2020). The influence of news brand cues and story content on citizen perceptions of news bias. The International Journal of Press/Politics. Advance online publication.
35.
KimS.KrishnaA.DhaneshG. (2019). Economics or ethics? Exploring the role of CSR expectations in explaining consumers’ perceptions, motivations, and active communication behaviors about corporate misconduct. Public Relations Review, 45(1), 76–87.
36.
KoeskeG. F.CranoW. D. (1968). The effect of congruous and incongruous source-statement combinations upon the judged credibility of a communication. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 4(4), 384–399.
37.
LeE. (2012). Gateways to the news: Headlines on Le Monde’s home page and front page. Discourse, Context & Media, 1(1), 32–44.
38.
LewisC. A.ShevlinM.McGuckinC.NavrátilM. (2001). The Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire: Confirmatory factor analysis. Pastoral Psychology, 49, 379–384.
39.
LuoM.HancockJ. T.MarkowitzD. M. (2020). Credibility perceptions and detection accuracy of fake news headlines on social media: Effects of truth-bias and endorsement cues. Communication Research. https://www.x-mol.com/paper/1349521035936690176
40.
MalleB. F. (2011). Attribution theories: How people make sense of behavior. In ChadeeD. (Ed.), Theories in social psychology (pp. 72–95). Wiley-Blackwell.
41.
McPeekR. W.EdwardsJ. D. (1975). Expectancy disconfirmation and attitude change. Journal of Social Psychology, 96(2), 193–208.
42.
MessingS.WestwoodS. J. (2014). Selective exposure in the age of social media: Endorsements trump partisan source affiliation when selecting news online. Communication Research, 41(8), 1042–1063.
43.
MeyerP. (1988). Defining and measuring credibility of newspapers: Developing an index. Journalism Quarterly, 65(3), 567–574.
44.
NgY. L.ZhaoX. (2020). The human alarm system for sensational news, online news headlines, and associated generic digital footprints: A uses and gratifications approach. Communication Research, 47(2), 251–275.
45.
OlkkonenL.Luoma-ahoV. (2019). Theorizing expectations as enablers of intangible assets in public relations: Normative, predictive, and destructive. Public Relations Inquiry, 8(3), 281–297.
46.
ParkS. Y.ChoM.KimS. (2021). The effect of CSR expectancy violation: Value from expectancy violation theory and confirmation bias. Journal of Marketing Communications, 27, 365–388.
47.
PettyR. E.FlemingM. A.PriesterJ. R.FeinsteinA. H. (2001). Individual versus group interest violation: Surprise as a determinant of argument scrutiny and persuasion. Social Cognition, 19, 418–442.
48.
PlanteT. G.BoccacciniM. T. (1997). The Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire. Pastoral Psychology, 45, 375–387.
49.
PornpitakpanC. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades’ evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243–281.
50.
PutnamR. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6, 65–78.
51.
RoeseN. J.ShermanJ. W. (2007). Expectancy. In KruglanskiA. W.HigginsE. T. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 91–115). Guilford Press.
52.
RuiJ. R.StefanoneM. A. (2018). That tagging was annoying: An extension of expectancy violation theory to impression management on social network sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 49–58.
53.
ScaccoJ. M.MuddimanA. (2020). The curiosity effect: Information seeking in the contemporary news environment. New Media & Society, 22(3), 429–448.
54.
SherifM. (1935). An experimental study of stereotypes. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 29(4), 371–375.
55.
StefanoneM. A.VollmerM.CovertJ. M. (2019). In news we trust? Examining credibility and sharing behaviors of fake news. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Social Media and Society, Toronto, ON, Canada, (pp. 136–147).
56.
SternthalB.DholakiaR.LeavittC. (1978). The persuasive effect of source credibility: Tests of cognitive response. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(4), 252–260.
57.
StoutD. A.BuddenbaumJ. M. (Eds.). (1996). Religion and mass media: Audiences and adaptations. SAGE.
58.
TannenbaumP. H. (1953). The effect of headlines on the interpretation of news stories. Journalism Quarterly, 30(2), 189–197.
59.
TocquevilleA. (1969). Democracy in America (MaierJ. P.LawrenceG., Trans.). Anchor Books. (Original work published 1835)
ValenteR. R.Okulicz-KozarynA. (2021). Religiosity and trust: Evidence from the United States. Review of Religious Research, 63(3), 343–379.
62.
ValloneR. P.RossL.LepperM. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut Massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 577–585.
63.
WalsterE.AronsonV.AbrahamsD.RottmanL. (1966). Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(5), 508–516.
64.
WilsonE. J.SherrellD. L. (1993). Source effects in communication and persuasion research: A meta-analysis of effect size. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21(2), 101–112.
65.
WinstonD. (Ed.) (2012). The Oxford handbook of religion and the American news media. Oxford University Press.
WinterS.MetzgerM. J.FlanaginA. J. (2016). Selective use of news cues: A multiple-motive perspective on information selection in social media environments. Journal of Communication, 66(4), 669–693.
69.
YimM. C. (2019). CEOs’ political tweets and perceived authenticity: Can expectancy violation be a pleasant surprise?Public Relations Review, 45(3), 101785.
