Who Is Exposed to News? It Depends on How You Measure: Examining Self-Reported Versus Behavioral News Exposure Measures

Abstract

Despite the importance of news exposure to political outcomes, news consumption is notoriously difficult to measure, and misreporting news exposure is common. In this study, we compare participants’ news behaviors measured on a news aggregator website with their self-reported story selection immediately after exposure. We find that both individual and contextual characteristics—especially the presence of political cues in news headlines—influence reporting of news story selection. As a result, the news audience profiles differ using self-reported versus behavioral measures, creating two different pictures of news exposure. More attention is needed to improve news measurement strategies to address misreporting and to improve the accuracy of news audience profiles.

Keywords

news exposure self-report measures website analytics news audiences misreporting

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ajzen

(1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Kuhl

Beckman

(Eds.), Action control (pp. 11–39). Berlin, Germany: Springer.

Andersen

de Vreese

C. H.

Albæk

(2016). Measuring media diet in a high-choice environment—Testing the list-frequency technique. Communication Methods and Measures, 10, 81–98.

Araujo

Wonneberger

Neijens

de Vreese

C. H.

(2017). How much time do you spend online? Understanding and improving the accuracy of self-reported measures of internet use. Communication Methods and Measures, 11, 173–190.

Austin

E. W.

Muldrow

Austin

B. W.

(2016). Examining how media literacy and personality factors predict skepticism toward alcohol advertising. Journal of Health Communication, 21, 600–609.

Bakshy

Messing

Adamic

L. A.

(2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348, 1130–1132.

Barba

Cassidy

De Leon

Williams

B. J.

(2013). Web analytics reveal user behavior: TTU libraries’ experience with Google Analytics Journal of Web Librarianship 7 389–400

Baum

M. A.

(2002). Sex, lies, and war: How soft news brings foreign policy to the inattentive public. American Political Science Review, 96, 91–109.

Bode

(2016). Political news in the news feed: Learning politics from social media. Mass Communication and Society, 19, 24–48.

Bulger

Davison

. (2018). The promises, challenges, and futures of media literacy. Data & Society Research Institute. Retrieved from datasociety.net

10.

Cacioppo

J. T.

Petty

R. E.

(1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131.

11.

Chong

Druckman

J. N.

(2012). Dynamics in mass communication effects research. In Semetko

H. A.

Scammell

(Eds.), The Sage handbook of political communication (pp. 307–323). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

12.

Craft

Ashley

Maksl

(2016). Elements of news literacy: A focus group study of how teenagers define news and why they consume it. Electronic News, 10, 143–160.

13.

de Vreese

C. H.

Neijens

(2016). Measuring media exposure in a changing communications environment. Communication Methods and Measures, 10, 69–80.

14.

Dilliplane

Goldman

S. K.

Mutz

D. C.

(2013). Televised exposure to politics: New measures for a fragmented media environment. American Journal of Political Science, 57, 236–248.

15.

Dvir-Gvirsman

Tsfati

Menchen-Trevino

(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 & Society, 18, 857–877.

16.

Garrett

R. K.

(2009). Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication, 59, 676–699.

17.

Green

Palmquist

Schickler

(2002). Partisan hearts and minds: Political parties and the social identities of voters. Hartford, CT: Yale University Press.

18.

Guess

A. M.

(2015). Measure for measure: An experimental test of online political media exposure. Political Analysis, 23, 59–75.

19.

Guess

A. M.

Nyhan

Reifler

(2018, January 9). Selective exposure to misinformation: Evidence from the consumption of fake news during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign. European Research Council. Retrieved from http://www.ask-force.org/web/Fundamentalists/Guess-Selective-Exposure-to-Misinformation-Evidence-Presidential-Campaign-2018.pdf

20.

Guilbeault

Becker

Centola

. (2018). Social learning and partisan bias in the interpretation of climate trends. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 9714–9719. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1722664115.

21.

Hardy

M. A.

(1993). Regression with dummy variables. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

22.

Hargittai

(2010). Digital na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “net generation.” Sociological Inquiry, 80, 92–113.

23.

Hobbs

(2017). Measuring the digital and media literacy competencies of children and teens. In Blumberg

F. C.

Brooks

P. J.

(Eds.), Cognitive development in digital contexts (pp. 253–274). London, England: Academic Press.

24.

Jerit

Barabas

Pollock

Banducci

Stevens

Schoonvelde

(2016). Manipulated vs. measured: Using an experimental benchmark to investigate the performance of self-reported media exposure. Communication Methods and Measures, 10, 99–114.

25.

Kahn

A. S.

Ratan

Williams

(2014). Why we distort in self-report: Predictors of self-report errors in video game play. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 1010–1023.

26.

Kobayashi

Boase

(2012). No such effect? The implications of measurement error in self-report measures of mobile communication use. Communication Methods and Measures, 6, 126–143.

27.

Maksl

Ashley

Craft

(2015). Measuring news media literacy. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 6, 29–45.

28.

Messing

Westwood

S. J.

(2014). Selective exposure in the age of social media: Endorsements trump partisan source affiliation when selecting news online. Communication Research, 41, 1042–1063.

29.

Metzger

M. J.

(2007). Making sense of credibility on the web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 2078–2091.

30.

Nelson

J. L.

Webster

J. G.

(2017). The myth of partisan selective exposure: A portrait of the online political news audience. Social Media & Society, 3. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117729314

31.

Park

Y. J.

(2013). Digital literacy and privacy behavior online. Communication Research, 40, 215–236.

32.

Potter

W. J.

(2018). Media literacy (8th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

33.

Price

Zaller

(1993). Who gets the news? Alternative measures of news reception and their implications for research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 133–164.

34.

Prior

(2003). Any good news in soft news? The impact of soft news preference on political knowledge. Political Communication, 20, 149–171.

35.

Prior

(2009a). The immensely inflated news audience: Assessing bias in self-reported news. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73, 130–143.

36.

Prior

(2009b). Improving media effects research through better measurement of news exposure. The Journal of Politics, 71, 893–908.

37.

Prior

(2013a). The challenge of measuring media exposure: Reply to Dilliplane, Goldman, and Mutz. Political Communication, 30, 620–634.

38.

Prior

(2013b). Media and political polarization. The Annual Review of Political Science, 16, 101–127.

39.

Revilla

Ochoa

Loewe

(2017). Using passive data from a meter to complement survey data in order to study online behavior. Social Science Computer Review, 35, 521–536.

40.

Rodriguez

C. G.

Moskowitz

J. P.

Salem

R. M.

Ditto

P. H.

(2017). Partisan selective exposure: The role of party, ideology and ideological extremity over time. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 3, 254–271.

41.

Scharkow

(2016). The accuracy of self-reported Internet use—A validation study using client log data. Communication Methods and Measures, 10, 13–27.

42.

Schwarz

Oyserman

(2001). Asking questions about behavior: Cognition, communication, and questionnaire construction. American Journal of Evaluation, 22, 127–160.

43.

Stroud

N. J.

(2011). Niche news: The politics of news choice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

44.

Tsfati

(2016). A new measure for the tendency to select ideologically congruent political information: Scale development and validation. International Journal of Communication, 10, 26.

45.

Tully

Vraga

E. K.

(2017). Effectiveness of a news media literacy advertisement in partisan versus nonpartisan online media contexts. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 61, 144–162.

46.

Vraga

E. K.

Bode

Smithson

A. B.

Troller-Renfree

(2016). Blurred lines: Defining social, news, and political posts on Facebook. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 13, 272–294.

47.

Vraga

E. K.

Bode

Troller-Renfree

(2016). Beyond self-reports: Using eye-tracking to measure topic and style differences in attention to social media content. Communication Methods and Measures, 10, 149–164.

48.

Vraga

E. K.

Tully

(2015). Media literacy messages and hostile media perceptions: Processing of nonpartisan versus partisan political information. Mass Communication and Society, 18, 422–448.

49.

Vraga

E. K.

Tully

(2016). Effective messaging to communicate news media literacy concepts to diverse publics. Communication and the Public, 1, 305–322.

50.

Vraga

E. K.

Tully

(2017). Engaging with the other side: Using news media literacy messages to reduce selective exposure and avoidance. Paper presented to the National Association for Media Literacy Education, Chicago, IL.

51.

Webster

J. G.

Ksiazek

T. B.

(2012). The dynamics of audience fragmentation: Public attention in an age of digital media. Journal of Communication, 62, 39–56.

52.

Wells

Thorson

(2017). Combining big data and survey techniques to model effects of political content flows in Facebook. Social Science Computer Review, 35, 33–52.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.91 MB