Ashley Muddiman

Changing Deliberative Norms on News Organizations' Facebook Sites

Comments posted to news sites do not always live up to the ideals of deliberative theorists. Drawing from theories about deliberation and group norms, this study investigates whether news organizations can affect comment section norms by engaging directly with commenters. We conducted a field study with a local television station in a top-50 Designated Market Area. For 70 political posts made on different days, we randomized whether an unidentified staff member from the station, a recognizable political reporter, or no one engaged with commenters. We assessed if these changes affected whether the comments (n = 2,403) were civil, were relevant, contained genuine questions, and provided evidence. The findings indicate that a news organization can affect the deliberative behavior of commenters.

Correcting Political and Consumer Misperceptions: The Effectiveness and Effects of Rating Scale Versus Contextual Correction Formats

While fact-checking has grown dramatically in the last decade, little is known about the relative effectiveness of different formats in correcting false beliefs or overcoming partisan resistance to new information. This article addresses that gap by using theories from communication and psychology to compare two prevailing approaches: An online experiment examined how the use of visual “truth scales” interacts with partisanship to shape the effectiveness of corrections. We find that truth scales make fact-checks more effective in some conditions. Contrary to theoretical predictions and the fears of some journalists, their use does not increase partisan backlash against the correction or the organization that produced it.

Like, recommend, or respect? Altering political behavior in news comment sections

Drawing from the stereotype content model, we examine how people respond to likeminded and counter-attitudinal political comments appearing after a news article. We experimentally test how citizens behave when they are able to click on one of three different buttons posted next to others’ comments—“Like,” “Recommend,” or “Respect.” In the experiment, political attitudes predicted button clicking, but the button label affected the strength of the relationship. In some instances, people clicked on fewer buttons associated with likeminded comments and more buttons associated with counter-attitudinal comments when the button was labeled with “Respect” as opposed to “Like” or “Recommend.” The pattern of results for the “Recommend” button differed across two issues. The results suggest that political comments can trigger stereotypical reactions. Although the “Like” button is well known, news organizations interested in promoting less partisan behaviors should consider using a “Respect” button rather than the “Like” or “Recommend” button in comment sections.

Saving Media or Trading on Trust

Extending research from Wojdynski and Evans, this experimental study replicates the challenges of effectively disclosing native advertising to readers and demonstrates a promising inoculation method that increases likelihood of recognition. Moreover, this quantitative research indicates that both legacy and online news publishers were evaluated less favorably for displaying native advertising. Attitudes toward the publisher and perceptions of its credibility declined for both, although online publishers suffered greater attitudinal damage than did legacy publishers who may benefit from their established reputation.

Searching for the Next U.S. President: Differences in Search Engine Results for the 2008 U.S. Presidential Candidates

ABSTRACT Studies have examined online campaigns, but none have researched the role of search engines during elections. This study analyzes search engine results from the 2008 U.S. presidential election. Analyses show that the sources and content generated by three search engines differed among the search engines. The top-three results from each search engine, however, originated from large, well-trafficked sites. The results indicate that search engines act according to a market model by providing access to mainstream sites rather than diverse, less familiar information. These results allow scholars to understand the types of political information accessible to citizens during elections.

The influence of online quizzes on the acquisition of public affairs knowledge

ABSTRACT Drawing from a “mix of attributes” approach, this study analyzes whether interactive online news quizzes engage site visitors and help individuals acquire news knowledge. Results of a nationwide experiment (n = 456) indicate that online quizzes, whether using a multiple-choice or slider format, help citizens acquire public affairs knowledge and lead them to spend more time with public affairs information relative to presenting information without a quiz. Two field tests show that news site visitors engage with slider and multiple-choice quizzes at similar rates, and engage more and for longer amounts of time if two different interactive quiz formats are available on a Web page.