Browsing by Subject "Medienwirkung"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

News endorser influence in social media
(2020) Teutsch, Doris; Trepte, Sabine
Social networking sites have become an online realm where users are exposed to news about current affairs. People mainly encounter news incidentally because they are re-distributed by users whom they befriended or follow on social media platforms. In my dissertation project, I draw on shared reality theory in order to examine the question of how the relationship to the news endorser, the person who shares news content, determines social influence on opinion formation about shared news. The shared reality theory posits that people strive to achieve socially shared beliefs about any object and topic because of the fundamental epistemic need to establish what is real. Social verification of beliefs in interpersonal communication renders uncertain and ambiguous individual perceptions as valid and objectively true. However, reliable social verification may be provided only by others who are regarded as epistemic authority, in other words as someone whose judgment one can trust. People assign epistemic authority particularly to socially close others, such as friends and family, or to members of their in-group. I inferred from this that people should be influenced by the view of a socially close news endorser when forming an opinion about shared news content but not by the view of a socially distant news endorser. In Study 1, a laboratory experiment (N = 226), I manipulated a female news endorser’s social closeness by presenting her as an in-group or out-group member. Participants’ opinion and memory of a news article were not affected by the news endorser’s opinion in either of the conditions. I concluded that the news article did not elicit motivation to strive for shared reality because participants were confident about their own judgment. Therefore, they did not rely on the news endorser’s view when forming an opinion about the news topic. Moreover, the results revealed that participants had stronger trust in the news endorser when she expressed a positive (vs. negative) opinion about the news topic, while social closeness to the news endorser did not predict trust. On the one hand, this is in line with the social norm of sharing positive thoughts and experiences on social networking sites: adherence to the positivity norm results in more favorable social ratings. On the other hand, my findings indicate that participants generally had a positive opinion about the topic of the stimulus article and thus had more trust in news endorsers who expressed a similar opinion. In Study 2, an online experiment (N = 1, 116), I exposed participants to a news post by a relational close vs. relational distant news endorser by having them name a close or distant actual Facebook friend. There was a small influence of the news endorser’s opinion on participants’ thought and opinion valence irrespective of whether the news endorser was a close or distant friend. The finding was surprising, particularly because participants reported stronger trust in the view of the close friend than in the view of a distant friend. I concluded that in light of an ambiguity eliciting news article, people may even rely on the views of less trustworthy news endorsers in order to establish a socially shared and, therefore, valid opinion about a news topic. Drawing on shared reality theory, I hypothesized that social influence on opinion formation is mediated by news endorser congruent responses to a news post. The results indicated a tendency for the proposed indirect relation however, the effect size was small and the sample in Study 2 was not large enough to provide the necessary statistical power to detect the mediation. In conclusion, the results of my empirical studies provide first insights regarding the conditions under which a single news endorser influences opinion formation about news shared on social networking sites. I found limited support for shared reality creation as underlying mechanism of such social influence. Thus, my work contributes to the understanding of social influence on news perception happening in social networking sites and proposes theoretical refinements to shared reality theory. I suggest that future research should focus on the role of social and affiliative motivation for social influences on opinion formation about news shared on social networking sites.
VERZERRT. SCHRILL. GESPALTEN. Meinungsklima und Diskursqualität im Internet und ihre Wirkungen auf den Journalismus
(2022) Fulda, Stefanie; Schweiger, Wolfgang
Journalists play a dual role in shaping public opinion. On one hand, they influence public opinion through their publications. At the same time, they themselves continuously monitor public opinion and orient themselves to it. It seems obvious that the way journalists perceive the world can also influence their work. In fact, it has not yet been studied in terms of the perceived climate of opinion. It is similar with the perceived digital debate culture. Quality, tone and content of online discourses are already widely addressed under keywords such as incivility and hate speech. Effects on journalism are also mentioned, but they don´t focus on how journalists perceive the combined climate of opinion and quality of discourse and how this affects their work. In fact, user comments, individual opinions and opinion leaders are of particular importance to journalists in this perception. Due to the still incomplete state of research on the perception effects of public opinion and discourse quality on journalism, qualitative, guideline-supported interviews were therefore set up on the question "How do journalists perceive opinion climate and discourse quality on the Internet and how does this affect their work?" in order to approach the possible manifestations of this topic in an explorative manner. For these interviews, which lasted 1 - 1.5 hours, 20 journalists from all over Germany were interviewed. The net sample of participating journalists differed according to department, type of employment, age, location, gender, subject areas and degree of position, with the aim of obtaining answers from as many different journalists as possible and being able to compare the answers of certain groups with each other. In addition, a website was created as a central information point for the project. With the help of a repetitive change of perspective in the survey, which addresses the approach and considerations of the interviewees, but also inquires how, from the interviewees point of view, other journalists deal with the same issue, it was possible to identify some hidden perceptual effects. Beginning with the question about the central sources of public opinion perception, via processing and the mechanisms in this process, to the recognizable effects on journalistic work, it was thus possible to trace the path of perception of opinion climate and discourse quality to the effects on journalistic topic selection and topic processing. A key finding of the survey is that it remains unclear to the group of journalists surveyed whether the perceived climate of opinion on the Internet is representative of society as a whole - many do not rule out parallels of digital and general public opinion. At the same time, it is rationally clear to many journalists that they should not be too impressed by the experiences on the Net, since these represent only a small section of society, but emotionally it does happen - because the quality of the experienced, digital discourse is so impressive. On the other hand, almost all of the journalists surveyed assume that the perceived climate of opinion influences their journalistic work, but show a lack of clarity about the extent to which they are personally affected by this in their work. They do not know the concrete effects. Finally, it became obvious that journalists base their perception of public opinion quite significantly on the perceived quality of discourse. This is an understandable approach, but one that harbors the risk of misperceptions due to third person, negativity or false uniqueness effects, to name just a few of the most important potential distortions of perception. This has consequences: If those who report on public opinion are subject to a distorted perception, then they bring this into their reporting, which reinforces the tendency for recipients to also be subject to a distorted perception of public opinion. Citizens, in turn, express themselves in social media or below journalistic articles in the comments. These are read by editorial teams and in turn used for journalistic reporting. This is where the circle closes, because this is how recipients and journalists influence each others distorted perceptions and draw conclusions about public opinion in society. Minority opinions are perceived as majority opinions, the emotionally heated discourse on the Internet shapes the impression of a growing polarization of society, and journalism carries this idea into its reporting. The consequence is a possible misinterpretation of public opinion by journalistic media, so that journalism runs the risk of arguing past the actual public opinion of society through a distorted perception of public opinion and discourse quality on the Internet.