This study examines the role that group consciousness plays in driving corrective action. Drawing from an online survey of Latinos in the United States (N = 588), it tests the relationships among group consciousness, perceived media bias, proattitudinal selective exposure, and political participation. Results show support for a serial mediation model where the relationship between group consciousness and political participation runs through perceptions of media bias and proattitudinal selective exposure. Proattitudinal selective exposure also mediates the relationship between group consciousness and political participation independently. Theoretical contributions to corrective action and the role of minority groups in American politics are discussed.
AbramsJ. R.GilesH. (2007). Ethnic identity gratifications selection and avoidance by African Americans: A group vitality and social identity gratifications perspective. Media Psychology, 9(1), 115–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260709336805
2.
BarnidgeM.GuntherA. C.KimJ.HongY.PerrymanM.TayS. K.KniselyS. (2020). Politically motivated selective exposure and perceived media bias. Communication Research, 47(1), 82–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650217713066
3.
BarnidgeM.RojasH. (2014). Hostile media perceptions, presumed media influence, and political talk: Expanding the corrective action hypothesis. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 26(2), 135–156. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edt032
4.
BarnidgeM.RojasH.BeckP. A.Schmitt-BeckR. (2019). Comparative corrective action: Perceived media bias and political action in 17 countries. International Journal of Public Opinion Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edz043
BarretoM. A.ManzanoS.RamírezR.RimK. (2009). Mobilization, participation, and solidaridad: Latino participation in the 2006 immigration protest rallies. Urban Affairs Review, 44(5), 736–764. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087409332925
7.
BradyH. E.VerbaS.SchlozmanK. L. (1995). Beyond SES: A resource model of political participation. The American Political Science Review, 89(2), 271–294. https://doi.org/10.2307/2082425
8.
ChungM.MunnoG. J.MoritzB. (2015). Triggering participation: Exploring the effects of third-person and hostile media perceptions on online participation. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 452–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.037
9.
DaltonR. J.BeckP. A.HuckfeldtR. (1998). Partisan cues and the media: Information flows in the 1992 Presidential Election. The American Political Science Review, 92, 111–126. https://doi.org/10.2307/2585932
10.
DeSipioL. (2006). Latino civic and political participation. In TiendaM.MitchellF. (Eds.), Hispanics and the future of America (pp. 447–478). National Academies Press.
11.
DilliplaneS. (2011). All the news you want to hear: The impact of partisan news exposure on political participation. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(2), 287–316.
FeezellJ. T. (2016). Predicting online political participation: The importance of selection bias and selective exposure in the online setting. Political Research Quarterly, 69, 495–509. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912916652503
14.
FeldmanL.HartP. S.LeiserowitzA.MaibachE.Roser-RenoufC. (2017). Do hostile media perceptions lead to action? The role of hostile media perceptions, political efficacy, and ideology in predicting climate change activism. Communication Research, 44(8), 1099–1124. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650214565914
15.
FestingerL. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
GarrettR. K. (2009). Echo chambers online? Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(2), 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01440.x
18.
GibsonR.CantijochM. (2013). Conceptualizing and measuring participation in the age of the internet: Is online political engagement really different to offline?The Journal of Politics, 75(3), 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381613000431
19.
GuntherA. C.McLaughlinB.GotliebM. R.WiseD. (2017). Who says what to whom: Content versus source in the hostile media effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 29(3), 363–383. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edw009
20.
GurinP.MillerA. H.GurinG. (1980). Stratum identification and consciousness. Social Psychology Quarterly, 43(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.2307/3033746
21.
HartP. S.FeldmanL.LeiserowitzA.MaibachE. (2015). Extending the impacts of hostile media perceptions: Influences on discussion and opinion polarization in the context of climate change. Science Communication, 37(4), 506–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547015592067
22.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
23.
HolbrookA. L.SterrettD.JohnsonT. P.KrysanM. (2015). Racial disparities in political participation across issues: The role of issue-specific motivators. Political Behavior, 38(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-015-9299-3
24.
KimH. (2015). Perception and emotion: The indirect effect of reported election poll results on political participation: Intention and support for restrictions. Mass Communication and Society, 18(3), 303–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2014.945650
25.
Knobloch-WesterwickS. (2014). Choice and preference in media use: Advances in selective exposure theory and research. Routledge.
26.
Knobloch-WesterwickS.HastallM. R. (2010). Please your self: Social identity effects on selective exposure to news about in- and out-groups. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 515–535. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01495.x
27.
Knobloch-WesterwickS.JohnsonB. K. (2014). Selective exposure for better or worse: Its mediating role for online news’ impact on political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(2), 184–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12036
28.
Knobloch-WesterwickS.JohnsonB. K.WesterwickA. (2015). Confirmation bias in online searches: Impacts of selective exposure before an election on political Attitude Strength and Shifts. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(2), 171–187. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12105
29.
LienP. (1994). Ethnicity and political participation: A comparison between Asian and Mexican Americans. Political Behavior, 16(2), 237–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01498879
30.
LimJ. S.GolanG. J. (2011). Social media activism in response to the influence of political parody videos on YouTube. Communication Research, 38(5), 710–727. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211405649
31.
LinS. J. (2014). Media use and political participation reconsidered: The actual and perceived influence of political campaign messages. Chinese Journal of Communication, 7(2), 135–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2014.905867
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 Psychology, 37(11), 2098–2109. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098
35.
MasuokaN. (2008). Defining the group: Latino identity and political participation. American Politics Research, 36(1), 33–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X07303936
36.
McClainP. D.Johnson CarewJ. D.WaltonE.WattsC. S. (2009). Group membership, group identity, and group consciousness: Measures of racial identity in American politics?Annual Review of Political Science, 12(1), 471–485. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.102452
37.
MillerA. H.GurinP.GurinG.MalanchukO. (1981). Group consciousness and political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 25(3), 494–511. https://doi.org/10.2307/2110816
38.
NiemiR. G.CraigS. C.MatteiF. (1991). Measuring internal political efficacy in the 1988 national election study. The American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1407–1413.
RojasH. (2010). “Corrective” actions in the public sphere: How perceptions of media and media effects shape political behaviors. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(3), 343–363. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq018
SanchezG. R.VargasE. D. (2016). Taking a closer look at group identity: The link between theory and measurement of group consciousness and linked fate. Political Research Quarterly, 69(1), 160–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912915624571
44.
SchieferdeckerD.WesslerH. (2017). Bridging segregation via media exposure? Ingroup identification, outgroup distance, and low direct contact reduce outgroup appearance in media repertoires. Journal of Communication, 67(6), 993–1014. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12338
45.
SchmittK. M.GuntherA. C.LiebhartJ. L. (2004). Why partisans see mass media as biased. Communication Research, 31(6), 623–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650204269390
46.
ShinglesR. D. (1981). Black consciousness and political participation: The missing link. The American Political Science Review, 75(1), 76–91. https://doi.org/10.2307/1962160
StroudN. J. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30(3), 341–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-007-9050-9
50.
SunY.ShenL.PanZ. (2008). On the behavioral component of the third-person effect. Communication Research, 35(2), 257–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650207313167
51.
TsfatiY.ArielyG. (2014). Individual and contextual correlates of trust in media across 44 countries. Communication Research, 41(6), 760–782. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650213485972
ValdezZ. (2011). Political participation among Latinos in the United States: The effect of group Identity and consciousness. Social Science Quarterly, 92(2), 466–482. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2011.00778.x
54.
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(3), 577–585. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.577
55.
VerbaS.NieN. H. (1987). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. University of Chicago Press.
56.
WeeksB. E.LaneD. S.KimD. H.LeeS. S.KwakN. (2017). Incidental exposure, selective exposure, and political information sharing: Integrating online exposure patterns and expression on social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(6), 363–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12199
57.
WeiR.GolanG. (2013). Political advertising on social media in the 2012 presidential election: Exploring the perceptual and behavioral components of the third-person effect. Electronic News, 7(4), 223–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/1931243113506903
58.
WongJ. S.LienP.-T.ConwayM. M. (2005). Group-based resources and political participation among Asian Americans. American Politics Research, 33(4), 545–576. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X04270521
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.
