This study uses the politics of global warming in the US to investigate an affective mechanism of hostile media perception and the democratic consequences of such perception, in an effort to delineate audience and journalistic barriers to stimulating urgent concern about climate change. The study confirms that partisanship played a significant role in perceptual differences with regard to media bias in an important area of science journalism—climate change. News consumers’ anger perception was tested as a mediator in seeking an affective mechanism of hostile media perception. Hostile media perception has important democratic consequences in that it is positively associated with individuals’ trust in news coverage of global warming and with selective media use.
ArpanL. M.RaneyA. A. (2003) “An Experimental Investigation of News Source and the Hostile Media Effect,” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly80(2): 265–81.
2.
BaronR. M.KennyD. V. (1986) “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology51: 1173–82.
3.
BordR. J.FisherA.O’ConorR. E. (1998) “Public Perceptions of Global Warming: United States and International Perspectives,” Climate Research11: 75–84.
4.
BoykoffM. T.BoykoffJ. M. (2004) “Balance as Bias: Global Warming and the US Prestige Press,” Global Environmental Change14: 125–36.
5.
BrightD. A.Goodman-DelahuntyJ. (2006) “Gruesome Evidence and Emotion: Anger, Blame, and Jury Decision-making,” Law and Human Behavior30: 183–202.
6.
CampbellA.ConverseP.MillerW.StokesD. (1960) The American Voter. New York: John Wiley.
7.
ChiaS. C.YongS. Y. J.WongZ. W. D.KohW. L. (2007) “Personal Bias or Government Bias? Testing the Hostile Media Effect in a Regulated Press System,” International Journal of Public Opinion Research19(3): 313–30.
8.
ChristenC. T.KannaovakunP.GuntherA. C. (2002) “Hostile Media Perception: Partisan Assessments of Press and Public during the 1997 United Parcel Service Strike,” Political Communication19(4): 423–36.
9.
CorbettJ. B.DurfeeJ. L. (2004) “Testing Public (Un)Certainty of Science,” Science Communication26: 129–51.
10.
CritesS. L.FabrigarL. R.PettyR. E. (1994) “Measuring the Affective and Cognitive Properties of Attitudes: Conceptual and Methodological Issues,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin20: 619–34.
11.
DaltonR. J.BeckP. A.HuckfeldtR. (1998) “Partisan Cues and the Media: Information Flows in the 1992 Presidential Election,” American Political Science Review92(1): 111–26.
12.
DeBonoK. G.GreenS.ShairJ.BensonM. (1995) “Attitude Accessibility and Biased Information Processing: The Moderating Role of Self-monitoring,” Motivation and Emotion19: 269–77.
13.
DillardJ. P.ShenL. (2005) “On the Nature of Reactance and its Role in Persuasive Health Communication,” Communication Monographs72: 144–68.
14.
EvelandW. P.Jr.ShahD. V. (2003) “The Impact of Individual and Interpersonal Factors on Perceived News Media Bias,” Political Psychology24: 101–17.
15.
FazioR. H.Roskos-EwoldsenD. R.PowellM. C. (1994) “Attitudes, Perception, and Attention,” in NiedenthalP. M.KitayamaS. (eds) The Heart’s Eye: Emotional Influences in Perception and Attention, pp. 197–216. New York: Academic Press.
16.
FicoF.RichardsonJ. H.EdwardsS. M. (2004) “Influence of Story Structure on Perceived Story Bias and News Organization Credibility,” Mass Communication & Society7: 301–18.
17.
FischerP.JonasE.FreyD.Schulz-HardtS. (2005) “Selective Exposure to Information: The Impact of Information Limits,” European Journal of Social Psychology35(4): 469–92.
18.
ForgaysD. G.ForgaysD. K.SpielbergerC. D. (1997) “Factor Structure of the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory,” Journal of Personality Assessment69: 497–507.
19.
GelbspanR. (1998) The Heat Is On: The Climate Crisis, the Cover-up, the Prescription. New York: Perseus.
20.
Ginger-SorollaR.ChaikenS. (1994) “The Causes of Hostile Media Judgments,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology30: 165–80.
21.
GreeneS. (2002) “The Social-Psychological Measurement of Partisanship,” Political Behavior24: 171–97.
22.
GuntherA. C. (1988) “Attitude Extremity and Trust in Media,” Journalism Quarterly65: 279–87.
23.
GuntherA. C. (1992) “Biased Press or Biased Public: Attitudes toward Media Coverage of Social Groups,” Public Opinion Quarterly56: 147–67.
24.
GuntherA. C.ChiaS. C.-Y. (2001) “Predicting Pluralistic Ignorance: The Hostile Media Perception and its Consequences,” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly74: 688–701.
25.
GuntherA. C.ChristenC. T. (2002) “Projection or Persuasive Press? Contrary Effects of Personal Opinion and Perceived News Coverage on Estimates of Public Opinion,” Journal of Communication52: 177–95.
26.
GuntherA.LiebhartJ. (2006) “Broad Reach or Broad Source? Decomposing the Hostile Media Effect,” Journal of Communication56: 449–66.
27.
GuntherA. C.SchmittK. (2004) “Mapping Boundaries of the Hostile Media Effect,” Journal of Communication54(1): 55–70.
28.
GuntherA. C.ChristenC. T.LiebhartJ.ChiaS. C.-Y. (2001) “Congenial Public, Contrary Press and Biased Estimates of the Climate of Opinion,” Public Opinion Quarterly65: 295–320.
29.
HernandoR. (2007) “‘Corrective’ Actions in the Public Sphere: How Perceptions of Media Effects Shape Online Behaviors,” Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, August, Washington, DC.
30.
HwangH.SchmierbachM.PaekH.de ZunigaH. G.ShahD. (2006) “Media Dissociation, Internet Use, and Antiwar Political Participation: A Case Study of Political Dissent and Action against the War in Iraq,” Mass Communication & Society9: 461–83.
31.
HwangH.PanZ.SunY. (2008) “Influence of Hostile Media Perception on Willingness to Engage in Discursive Activities: An Examination of Mediating Role of Media Indignation,” Media Psychology11(1): 76–97.
32.
HydeJ. (2006) “News Coverage of Genetic Cloning: When Science Journalism Becomes Future-oriented Speculation,” Journal of Communication Inquiry30: 229–50.
33.
IzardC. E. (1993) “Organizational and Motivational Functions of Discrete Emotions,” in LewisM.HavilandJ. M. (eds) Handbook of Emotions, pp. 631–41. New York: Guilford.
34.
JervisR.LebowR. N.SteinJ. G. (1985) Psychology and Deterrence. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
35.
KimK. S.PasadeosY. (2007) “Study of Partisan News Readers Reveals Hostile Media Perceptions of Balanced Stories,” Newspaper Research Journal28(2): 99–106.
36.
LavineH.BorgidaE.SullivanJ. L. (2000) “On the Relationship between Attitude Involvement and Attitude Accessibility: Toward a Cognitive-Motivational Model of Political Information Processing,” Political Psychology21: 81–106.
37.
LeeT.-T. (2005) “The Liberal Media Myth Revisited: An Examination of Factors Influencing Perceptions of Media Bias,” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media49: 43–64.
LindenW.LeungD.ChawlaA.StosselC.RutledgeT.TancoS. (1997) “Social Determinants of Experienced Anger,” Journal of Behavioral Medicine20: 415–32.
40.
LordC. G.RossL.LepperM. R. (1979) “Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered Evidence,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology37(11): 2098–109.
41.
McCrightA.DunlapR. (2003) “Defeating Kyoto: The Conservative Movement’s Impact on U.S. Climate Change Policy,” Social Problems50(3): 348–73.
42.
MarcusG. E. (2000) “Emotions in Politics,” Annual Review of Political Science3: 221–50.
43.
MarcusG. E.NeumanW. R.MackuenM. (2000) Affective Intelligence and Political Judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44.
MellorF. (2004) “The Place of Polemic: The Need for Politically-Engaged Science Communication Research,” Proceedings for PCST-8 International Conference, Barcelona, pp. 1–3.
45.
MoonsW.MackieD. (2007) “Thinking Straight While Seeing Red: The Influence of Anger on Information Processing,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin33: 706–20.
46.
MunroG. D.DittoP. H.LockhartL. K.FagerlinA.GreadyM.PetersonE. (2002) “Biased Assimilation of Sociopolitical Arguments: Evaluating the 1996 U.S. Presidential Debate,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology24(1): 15–26.
47.
NabiR. N. (1999) “A Cognitive-Functional Model for the Effects of Discrete Negative Emotions on Information Processing, Attitude Change, and Recall,” Communication Theory9: 292–320.
48.
NabiR. N. (2003) “Exploring the Framing Effects of Emotion: Do Discrete Emotions Differentially Influence Information Accessibility, Information Seeking, and Policy Preference?,” Communication Research30: 224–47.
49.
NisbetM. C. (2009) “Framing Science: A New Paradigm in Public Engagement,” in KahlorL.StoutP. (eds) Understanding Science: New Agendas in Science Communication, pp. 40–67. New York: Taylor & Francis.
50.
NisbetM. C.MyersT. (2007) “Twenty Years of Public Opinion about Global Warming,” Public Opinion Quarterly71(3): 444–70.
51.
PengZ. (2005) “Ideology, Source, News Content, and Perception of Media Bias and Credibility,” Unpublished dissertation, University of Missouri.
52.
PerloffR. M. (1989) “Ego-Involvement and the Third Person Effect of Televised News Coverage,” Communication Research16: 236–62.
53.
Pew Research Center (2008) Survey Reports24January.
54.
RosenbergE. L. (1998) “Levels of Analysis and the Organization of Affect,” Review of General Psychology2: 247–70.
55.
RubensteinK. (2006) “Perception of Media Bias and its Effect on Media Choice,” Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, San Francisco, CA.
56.
SchmittK.GuntherA.LiebhartJ. (2004) “Why Partisans See Mass Media as Biased,” Communication Research31(6): 623–41.
57.
SteenbergenM. R.EllisC. (2006) “Fear and Loathing in American Elections: Context, Traits, and Negative Candidate Affect,” in RedlawskD. P. (ed.) Feeling Politics: Emotion in Political Information Processing, pp. 109–34. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
58.
TaberC. S.LodgeM. (2006) “Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs,” American Journal of Political Science50: 755–69.
59.
TrumboC. (1995) “Longitudinal Modeling of Public Issues with the Agenda-setting Process: The Case of Global Warming,” Journalism and Mass Communication MonographNo. 152.
60.
TrumboC. (1996) “Constructing Climate Change: Claims and Frames in U.S. News Coverage of an Environmental Issue,” Public Understanding of Science5: 269–83.
61.
TsfatiY.CohenJ. (2005) “Democratic Consequences of Hostile Media Perceptions: The Case of Gaza Settlers,” International Journal of Press/Politics10: 28–51.
62.
ValloneR.RossL.LepperM. (1985) “The Hostile Media Phenomenon: Biased Perception of Media Bias in Coverage of the Beirut Massacre,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology49: 577–85.
63.
VragaE.TullyM.RojasH. (2009) “Reducing Hostile Media Perceptions: Can News Media Literacy Reduce Perceptions of Bias?,” Newspaper Research Journal30(4): 68–81.
64.
WilkinsL. (1993) “Between Facts and Values: Print Media Coverage of the Greenhouse Effect, 1987–1990,” Public Understanding of Science2: 71–84.
65.
WilliamsJ. L. (2001) The Rise and Decline of Public Interest in Global Warming: Toward a Pragmatic Conception of Environmental Problems. Huntington, NY: Nova Science.
66.
WilsonK. M. (1995) “Mass Media and Sources of Global Warming Knowledge,” Mass Communication Review22: 75–89.
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.
