This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: tions. . . bias!
bias! over time you end up with a very unbalanced world view A. they selectively recall opposing arguments which are more
salient and memorable than confirming arguments; and/or So,
So, more extreme attitudes, more extreme judgments But.
But. . .
no more persuasive than telekinetic pixies... have to explain the phenomena that's
explaining the phenomena... B. they categorize both opposing and neutral content as hostile
to their views. But.
But. . . If it's true that partisans perceive media differently, need another mechanism... select. recall &
select. categorization. Very little evidence for both select. recall / select. categorization. Ppl tend to be better at
remembering info that conﬁrms their position (disconﬁrm select. recall explanation). Could it be
that select. recall is correct, but ppl differentially weight things? ex. Ppl weight things that
conﬁrm their position as more important than opposing/neutral things? Some evidence for select. categorization? 1 Gunther - media with wide reach (famous newspapers, TV networks, etc) ppl tend to view as hostile
toward ingroup. Reach of source is much lower (ex. opinion of a research person) you tend to get form
of biased assimilation (ex. "Oh yeah, I agree with this"). Gunther proposes Media Reach Effect -->
Hostile Media Effect. prediction: High reach > high hostile media effect, etc? condition: one looks like newspaper editorial, one looks like student essay student essay less likely to produce hostile media effect than newspaper editorial sources: essay vs newspaper editorial confounded with reach. a fair comparison of reach
would've been SB Newspress vs NY Times (still confounded with other things but it's a cleaner
comparison than Gunther's study) Still
Still more explanations. . . Matheson & Dursun (2001) Media
Media reach (Gunther). Hostile media
perceptions found in mass media contexts
where many are influenced, but biased
assimilation in private contexts. So. . . Cognitive
Cognitive differentiation between ingroup and
outgroup no explanation - just an observation... Motivated reasoning associated with activations
View Full Document
- Spring '08