Raymond J. Pingree

News Recommendations from Social Media Opinion Leaders: Effects on Media Trust and Information Seeking

Polls show a strong decline in public trust of traditional news outlets; however, social media offers new avenues for receiving news content. This experiment used the Facebook API to manipulate whether a news story appeared to have been posted on Facebook by one of the respondents real-life Facebook friends. Results show that social media recommendations improve levels of media trust, and also make people want to follow more news from that particular media outlet in the future. Moreover, these effects are amplified when the real-life friend sharing the story on social media is perceived as an opinion leader. Implications for democracy and the news business are discussed.

Distinguishing Effects of Game Framing and Journalistic Adjudication on Cynicism and Epistemic Political Efficacy

An online experiment tested the influence of “he said/she said” coverage versus active adjudication of factual disputes, as well as strategy versus policy framing in postdebate news coverage. Adjudication in policy-framed stories increased epistemic political efficacy (EPE), a measure of confidence in one’s own ability to determine the truth in politics. However, adjudicated policy stories also elicited greater cynicism than passive policy framing. This suggests a caveat for the spiral of cynicism, calling into question its assumption that all policy framing behaves similarly in reducing cynicism. Results also provide several forms of evidence that effects of adjudication on EPE differ from spiral of cynicism effects while further validating the EPE construct as distinct from the reverse of political cynicism. Adjudication also positively affected evaluations of the coverage as interesting and informative.

Effects of Journalistic Adjudication on Factual Beliefs, News Evaluations, Information Seeking, and Epistemic Political Efficacy

A frequent critique of contemporary journalism is that journalists rarely adjudicate factual disputes when covering politics; however, very little research has been done on the effects of such passive journalism on audiences. This study tests effects of active adjudication versus “he said/she said” journalism on a variety of outcomes, finding that adjudication can correct factual beliefs, increase perceived news quality, satisfy perceived informational needs, and increase the likelihood of future news use. However, for readers who were less interested in the issues under dispute, adjudication also reduced epistemic political efficacy, which is confidence in ones ability to find the truth in politics.

Agenda Cueing Effects of News and Social Media

ABSTRACT Agenda cues, in which individuals perceive that media has frequently covered a problem regardless of actual exposure to that coverage, have initially been shown to produce powerful agenda setting effects (Pingree and Stoycheff, 2013). This study uses two experiments to test the presence and prominence cueing effects across a variety of issues and whether the cue originates from traditional news or Twitter users. Agenda cues produced significant effects on five of six issues studied for news and four of six for Twitter. For one issue (gun control/rights), both types of agenda cues produced effect sizes rivaling those of the strongest effects found in Iyengar and Kinder’s (News That Matters: Television and American Opinion, University of Chicago Press, 1987) classic agenda setting experiments. On average, news agenda cues were stronger than Twitter agenda cues, and were about 78% as strong as classic news agenda setting effects, suggesting that cueing may be the dominant mechanism driving agenda setting effects. The role of gatekeeping trust as a moderator of agenda cueing was only inconsistently replicated.s

Setting a Non-Agenda: Effects of a Perceived Lack of Problems in Recent News or Twitter

The mere perception that news has given certain problems more coverage can lead the audience to assume that those problems are more important. Given that the news media, at times, obsesses over relatively trivial matters, and given that the audience is increasingly able to filter media exposure, it is worth asking what happens when audience members perceive that recent media coverage has not emphasized any very important problems. In such cases, audience members might assume that any problems facing the nation must not be particularly important. We explicate this attitude of political complacency, test whether perceived media agendas lacking important problems can influence it, and explore whether complacency helps explain political disengagement. We also explore whether these effects generalize beyond news, to new media gatekeepers such as Twitter. Two experiments tested effects of a perceived absence of important problems in recent news or Twitter content. In the case of news, but not Twitter, this increased complacency in both studies. Study 2 added a no-exposure control and found that effects on complacency were driven by the cueing of nonproblem stories, not by the absence of problem story cues. Both studies validated complacency as a predictor of political disengagement.

Here’s What You’ll Learn From This News Story Prior Framing and Learning Reasons From News

In the online news environment, audience information processing may be influenced by the framing not only of a news story itself but also of other messages that introduce, link to, or accompany the news content. We test these mixed media framing effects on audience reason acquisition from news content with an experiment, in which we manipulate the frame—value or strategy—of a text introduction about the issue of stem cell research, followed by exposure, or no exposure, to a video news report about stem cell research. Value framing (as opposed to strategy framing) prior to a news story increased the number of reasons for one’s own side of the issue acquired from the news report, but no effects were found on learning reasons for the other side.