Jump to content

Selective exposure theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by LinziMLB (talk | contribs) at 03:28, 2 May 2012 (→Relation of C.S. Herrman's Exposure theory). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The selective exposure theory is a concept in media and communication research that refers to individuals’ tendency to favor information that reinforces pre-existing views while avoiding contradictory information. In this theory people tend to select specific aspects of exposed information based on their perspective, beliefs, attitudes and decisions. People can determine the information exposed to them and select favorable evidence, while ignoring the unfavorable.

This theory has been explored using the cognitive dissonance theory, which suggests information consumers strive for a state of cognitive equilibrium. In order to attain this equilibrium, individuals may either reinterpret the information they are exposed to or select information that are consonant with their view.

The premise of selective exposure relies on the assumptions that information-seeking behavior continues even after an individual has taken a stance on an issue. Previous information-seeking behavior will be colored by various factors of the issue that is activated during the decision-making process.[1] Thus, selective exposure operates by reinforcing beliefs rather than exposing individuals to a diverse array of viewpoints, which is considered an important aspect of a functioning democracy.[2] Furthermore, because information and resources are critical to learning, people decide to stray away from new information because it often conflicts with their own beliefs.

Selective exposure has been displayed in various contexts such as self-serving situations and situations where people hold prejudices regarding out-groups, particular opinions, and personal and group-related issues.[3] This theory...

Selective exposure influences and engages family, friends, co-workers, and doctors. Media forms such as the internet, television and paper sources are also highly influenced. [4]


How does selective exposure theory affect decision-making?

Individual versus group decision-making

Selective exposure can affect the decisions people make because people may not be willing to change their views and beliefs. Changing beliefs about one's self, other people, and the world, are three variables to why people fear new information.[5] A variety of studies have shown that selective exposure effects can occur in context of both individual and group decision making. [6] Numerous situational variables have been identified that increase the tendency toward selective exposure.[7] Social psychology, specifically, includes research with a variety of situational factors and related psychological processes that eventually persuade the efforts to make a quality decision. Additionally, from a psychological perspective, the effects of selective exposure can both stem from motivational and cognitive accounts.[8] Schulz et al. (2010) investigated whether information searches were determined by subjectively perceived information. More specifically, they studied whether the subject receiving the information and those who made the decisions were persuaded by the subject who provided the information to them. From a cognitive perspective, researchers assume that decision makers seek to find the qualitatively best pieces of decision-relevant information, like appearance. Because decision makers are not able to evaluate the information quality independent of their own position, decision-inconsistent information is systematically tested more critically than decision-consistent information.[9] Therefore, decision-consistent information receives a subjectively perceived quality advantage and is thus preferred over inconsistent information.

In another study, selective exposure is defined by the amount of confidence an individual has. Individuals who maintain higher confidence levels reduce the amount of selective exposure.[10] Albarracín and Mitchell (2004) hypothesized that those who displayed higher confidence levels were more willing to seek out information both consistent and inconsistent with their views. The phrase "decision-consistent information" explains the tendency to actively seek decision-relevant information. Selective exposure occurs when individuals search for information and show systematic preferences towards ideas that are consistent, rather than inconsistent, to their beliefs. [11] On the contrary, those who exhibited low levels of confidence, were more inclined to examine information that did not agree with their views. The researchers' found that in three out of five studies participants showed more confident and scored high on the Defensive Confidence Scale,[12] meaning that their hypothesis was correct.

Selective exposure enables prevention of gathering new information. Selective exposure is prevalent in both groups of people and individually. In Jonas et al. (2001) empirical studies were done on four different experiments investigating individuals' and groups' decision making. This article suggests that confirmation bias is prevalent in decision making. Those who find new information often draw their attention to areas where they hold personal attachment too. Thus, information with similar expectations or beliefs to the person is a result of this selective exposure theory. Throughout the four experiments done generalization is always considered valid and confirmation bias is always present when seeking new information and making decisions.[13]

Accuracy motivation and defense motivation

Fischer and Greitemeyer (2010) explored individuals’ decision making in terms of selective exposure to confirmatory information.[14] Selective exposure posed that people make their decisions based on information that is consistent with their decision rather than information that is inconsistent with their decision. Researchers explain that people have the tendency to seek and select information using their integrative model. There are two primary motivation for selective exposure: accuracy motivation and defense motivation. Accuracy motivation explains that one is motivated to be accurate in their decision making and defense motivation explains that one seeks confirmatory information to confirm their beliefs and justify their decisions. Accuracy motivation is not always beneficial during selective exposure and can instead be counterintuitive, increasing the amount of selective exposure. Defense motivation can lead to reduced levels of selective exposure.[15]

Personal attributes

When it comes down to making real-life decisions, how decisions are made and how relevant information is gathered are not the only two factors are taken into account into making a final decision. Fischer et al. (2010) find that it important to consider the information source itself.[16] Selective exposure research generally neglects the influence of indirect decision-related attributes, such as physical appearance. In Fischer et al. (2010) two studies involving physically attractive information sources created an impact on decision making due to selective exposure. Researchers explored the impact of social information and its' level of physical attractiveness, sought its affect on selective exposure to important information needed to make a decision,[17] The same two studies hypothesized that physically attractive information sources resulted in decision makers to be more selective in searching and reviewing decision-relevant information. The more attractive an information source was, the more positive and detailed one was with making their decision. Physically attractive information sources increased the quality of consistent information needed to make decisions and increased the selective exposure in decision-relevant information, supporting the researchers hypothesis.[18] Decision makers allow factors like physical attractiveness affect everyday decisions because of selective exposure. Characteristics like physical attractiveness affect one's decision because it can increase the perceived quality of information. Both studies concluded that attractiveness is driven by a different selection and evaluation of decision-consistent information.

Bozo et al. (2009) investigated the anxiety of fearing death and compared it to age in relation to ‘health-promoting’ behaviors and analyzing the terror management theory. Results found that age had no direct affect to specific behaviors. They found anxiety of death yielding health-promoting behaviors in young adults. Conclusions supported that older adults were consistently better at promoting and practicing good health behaviors, without thinking about death, compared to young adults.[19] Young adults were less motivated to change and practice health-promoting behaviors because they used the selective exposure to confirm their prior beliefs.

Cognitive dissonance theory

Much empirical data on selective exposure has been based on the cognitive dissonance theory. These theories suggest when people make decisions they then perceive an apathetic motivational state because they must accept the disadvantages of their choice.[20] Theories related to cognitive dissonance suggest that individuals strive for cognitive equilibrium and consistency. When they encounter information that is discordant with their pre-existing views, individuals experience an unfavorable psychological state of dissonance, which they are motivated to alleviate. These hypotheses were first proposed by Festinger (1957) and can be summarized with the following basic hypotheses:

  • Dissonance is a state of mental unease and discomfort which helps explain selective perception. It is produced when new information contradicts existing beliefs, attitudes, social norms, or behaviors.
  • People often favor consonance because their ideas flow freely into one another and do not create an unbalance.[21]
  • The existence of dissonance, being psychologically uncomfortable, will motivate the person to try to reduce dissonance and achieve consonance.
  • When dissonance is present, in addition to trying to reduce it, the person will actively avoid situations and information that would likely increase the dissonance.[22]

In Festinger’s theory, the motivation to alleviate dissonance by seeking out information that is concordant with one’s existing beliefs is the motive for selective exposure. However, subsequent research on selective exposure within dissonance theory produced weak empirical support, until dissonance theory was revised and methods conducive to measuring selective exposure were improved.[23] To date, scholars still argue that empirical results supporting the selective exposure hypothesis are still mixed, possibly due to the issues used in experimental studies,[24] or the failure to simulate an authentic media environment in experiments.[25]

One way to avoid dissonance is to selectively expose oneself to information they believe and avoid finding a contradicting element. Selective exposure has been shown to be caused by the need for self-enhancement and consistency in their decisions. People want to defend a position because they have a commitment to their beliefs and want to reduce cognitive dissonance. Additionally, people want to maintain a positive self-image by being good decision makers.[26]

Klapper's selective exposure

Joseph Klapper (1960) considered mass communication do not directly influence people, but just reinforce people’s predisposition. Mass communications play a role as a mediator in persuasive communication. Klapper's five mediating factors and conditions to affect people:

  • Predispositions and the related processes of selective exposure, selective perception, and selective retention.
  • The groups, and the norms of groups, to which the audience members belong.
  • Interpersonal dissemination of the content of communication
  • The exercise of opinion leadership
  • The nature of mass media in a free enterprise society.[27]

Three basic concepts:

  • Selective exposure - people keep away from communication of opposite hue.
  • Selective perception - If people are confronting unsympathetic material, they do not perceive it, or make it fit for their existing opinion.
  • Selective retention - Furthermore, they just simply forget the unsympathetic material.

Groups and group norms work as a mediator. For example, one can be strongly disinclined to change to the Democratic Party if their family has voted for Republican for a long time. In this case, the person’s predisposition to the political party is already set, so they don't perceive information about Democratic Party or change voting behavior because of mass communication. Klapper’s third assumption is inter-personal dissemination of mass communication. If someone is already exposed by close friends, which creates predisposition toward something, it will lead increase of exposure to mass communication and eventually reinforce the existing opinion. An opinion leader is also a crucial factor to form predisposition of someone, lead someone to be exposed by mass communication, and after all, existing opinion would be reinforced. Nature of commercial mass media also leads people to select certain types of media contents.

Media

Selective exposure has achieved more relevance and empirical support in recent studies. Some researchers suggest that media consumers have more options and influence over provided information. Media may tend to select content that exposes and confirms their own ideas and avoid information that argues against their opinion. Studies suggest that more recent media offers a more diverse set of views. Certain topics like politics, are more like to inspire selective exposure as opposed to single exposure decisions.[28] For example, in one study different types of media are compared and evaluated to see which one ignites the most selective exposure. The sheer fact that people can either engage or avoid media to its fullest extent is because of the modern media atmosphere. With that said, that does not conclude that people will automatically seek out congenial media. Four different types of media were investigated in this study: newspapers, political talk radio, cable news, and political websites. Evidence clearly shows that people's political predispositions motivate their types of media selections. Newspapers showed a weak pattern, unlike cable news.

In early research, selective exposure originally provided an explanation for limited media effects. Specifically, in Berelson and Steiner (1964), they stated that people tend to hear and see information favorable to their predispositions, thus they are more likely to hear and see congenial information rather than neutral resources.[29] Stroud (2010) analyzes partisan selective exposure and political polarization. Using data from the 2004 National Annenberg Election Survey, analysts found that over time partisan selective exposure leads to polarization. Variables such as media and normative implications play a large role in the affects of this comparison. Selective exposure explains why media effects limit the influence on people's individual beliefs. Specifically, congenial media exposure significantly contributes to the increase of polarization in one's decisions. Through single-exposure results this article proposes that higher levels of polarization is stemmed from partisan selective exposure. Additionally, this study investigated the causal direction of the relationship leading to congenial media exposure increases polarization.[30]

Limited Effects" models of communication The “limited effects” model of communication emerged in the 1940s with a shift in media effects paradigm. This shift suggested that while media have effects, for example on voting behavior, these effects are limited and influenced indirectly by interpersonal discussions and the influence of opinion leaders. Selective exposure was considered one necessary function in early studies of media’s limited power over citizens’ attitudes and behaviors.[31]

Relation of C.S. Herrman's exposure theory

Basic assumptions of Herrman's theory:

  • Exposure is a state of protected or unprotected risk or danger;
  • Exposure can be positive (adaptive) or negative (maladaptive)
  • Protected exposure presupposes the use of identification or projection to permit the feeling of security or safety despite the reality of risk or danger
  • Unprotected exposure is a state of risk or danger without the availability of identification or projection to obviate feelings producing maladaptive paralysis

Application to Selective exposure processes:

  • People desire protected exposure, so desire to identify with what induces such, for example, favored opinions
  • People desire to avoid unprotected exposure, so attempt to project away from a possible identification with undesirable triggers/stimuli, thus away from undesirable ideas or ideologies

References

  1. ^ Frey, D (1986). "Recent research on selective exposure to information". Advances in experimental social psychology. 19: 41–80.
  2. ^ Chaffee, S., Nichols, S., Graf, J., Sandvig, C., & Hahn, K. S. (2001). Attention to counter-attitudinal messages in a state election campaign. Political Communication, 18, 247-272
  3. ^ Kastenmüller, A., Greitemeyer, T., Jonas, E., Fischer, P., & Frey, D. (2010). Selective exposure: The impact of collectivism and individualism. British Journal Of Social Psychology, 49(4), 745-763. doi:10.1348/014466609X478988
  4. ^ Sweeny, K., Melnyk, D., Miller, W., & Shepperd, J.A. (2010). Information avoidance: Who, what, when and why. Review of General Psychology, 14, 347
  5. ^ Sweeny, K., Melnyk, D., Miller, W., & Shepperd, J. A. (2010). Information avoidance: Who, what, when, and why. Review Of General Psychology, 14(4), 340-353. doi:10.1037/a0021288
  6. ^ Jonas, E., Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., & Thelen, N. (2001). Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: An expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 80(4), 557-571. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.4.557
  7. ^ Fischer, P., Fischer, J. K., Aydin, N., & Frey, D. (2010). Physically attractive social information sources lead to increased selective exposure to information. Basic And Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 340-347. doi:10.1080/01973533.2010.519208
  8. ^ Fischer, P., Fischer, J. K., Aydin, N., & Frey, D. (2010). Physically attractive social information sources lead to increased selective exposure to information. Basic And Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 340-347. doi:10.1080/01973533.2010.519208
  9. ^ Schulz-Hardt , S. , Fischer , P. , & Frey , D. ( 2010 ). Confirmation bias in accuracy-motivated decision-making: A cognitive explanation for biased information seeking . Manuscript under revision
  10. ^ Albarracín, D., & Mitchell, A. L. (2004). The Role of Defensive Confidence in Preference for Proattitudinal Information: How Believing That One is Strong Can Sometimes Be a Defensive Weakness. Personality And Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(12), 1565-1584. doi:10.1177/0146167204271180
  11. ^ Fischer, P., Fischer, J. K., Aydin, N., & Frey, D. (2010). Physically attractive social information sources lead to increased selective exposure to information. Basic And Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 340-347. doi:10.1080/01973533.2010.519208
  12. ^ Albarracín, D., & Mitchell, A. L. (2004). The Role of Defensive Confidence in Preference for Proattitudinal Information: How Believing That One is Strong Can Sometimes Be a Defensive Weakness. Personality And Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(12), 1565-1584. doi:10.1177/0146167204271180
  13. ^ Jonas, E., Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., & Thelen, N. (2001). Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: An expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 80(4), 557-571. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.80.4.557
  14. ^ (Fischer, P., Kastenmüller, A., Greitemeyer, T., Fischer, J., Frey, D., & Crelley, D. (2010). Threat and selective exposure: The moderating role of threat and decision context on confirmatory information search after decisions. Journal Of Experimental Psychology: General, doi:10.1037/a0021595)
  15. ^ (Fischer, P., Kastenmüller, A., Greitemeyer, T., Fischer, J., Frey, D., & Crelley, D. (2010). Threat and selective exposure: The moderating role of threat and decision context on confirmatory information search after decisions. Journal Of Experimental Psychology: General, doi:10.1037/a0021595)
  16. ^ Fischer, P., Fischer, J. K., Aydin, N., & Frey, D. (2010). Physically attractive social information sources lead to increased selective exposure to information. Basic And Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 340-347. doi:10.1080/01973533.2010.519208
  17. ^ Fischer, P., Fischer, J. K., Aydin, N., & Frey, D. (2010). Physically attractive social information sources lead to increased selective exposure to information. Basic And Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 340-347. doi:10.1080/01973533.2010.519208
  18. ^ (Fischer, P., Kastenmüller, A., Greitemeyer, T., Fischer, J., Frey, D., & Crelley, D. (2010). Threat and selective exposure: The moderating role of threat and decision context on confirmatory information search after decisions. Journal Of Experimental Psychology: General, doi:10.1037/a0021595)
  19. ^ Bozo, Ö., Tunca, A., & Şİmşek, Y. (2009). The effect of death anxiety and age on health-promoting behaviors: A terror-management theory perspective. Journal Of Psychology: Interdisciplinary And Applied, 143(4), 377-389. doi:10.3200/JRLP.143.4.377-389
  20. ^ Kastenmüller, A., Greitemeyer, T., Jonas, E., Fischer, P., & Frey, D. (2010). Selective exposure: The impact of collectivism and individualism. British Journal Of Social Psychology, 49(4), 745-763. doi:10.1348/014466609X478988
  21. ^ Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1985). Selective Exposure to Communicationp. 19, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
  22. ^ Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance, p. 5, Evanston, IL: Row & Peterson
  23. ^ Frey, D. (1986). Recent research on selective exposure to information. ‘’Advances in experimental social psychology’’ (Vol. 19, pp. 41-80). New York: Academic Press
  24. ^ Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755-769. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x
  25. ^ Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & others. (2009). Looking the Other Way. Communication Research, 36(3), 426
  26. ^ Kastenmüller, A., Greitemeyer, T., Jonas, E., Fischer, P., & Frey, D. (2010). Selective exposure: The impact of collectivism and individualism. British Journal Of Social Psychology, 49(4), 745-763. doi:10.1348/014466609X478988
  27. ^ Klapper, J. T. (1960). The effects of mass communication, p. 19, New York: Free Press
  28. ^ Stroud, N. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30(3), 341-366. doi:10.1007/s11109-007-9050-9
  29. ^ Berelson, B., & Steiner, G. A. (1964). Human behavior: An inventory of scientific findings. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World
  30. ^ Stroud, N. (2010). Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal Of Communication, 60(3), 556-576. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497
  31. ^ Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1948). ‘’The people's choice: How the voter makes up his mind in a Presidential campaign ‘’(2nd Ed.). New York, Columbia University Press.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Selective_exposure_theory&oldid=490238593"