Suchergebnisse

While a fast-growing body of research is concerned with the detrimental consequences of disinformation for democracy, the role of visuals in this context has so far only been discussed superficially. Visuals are expected to amplify the impact of disinformation, but it is rarely specified how, and what exactly distinguishes them from text. This article is one of the first to treat visual disinformation as its own type of falsehood, arguing that it differs from textual disinformation in its production, processing and effects. We suggest that visual disinformation is determined by varying levels of modal richness and manipulative sophistication. Because manipulated visuals are processed differently on a psychological level, they have unique effects on citizens' behaviours and attitudes.

This review article provides a critical discussion of empirical studies that deal with the use of online news sources in journalism. We evaluate how online sources have changed the journalist–source relationship regarding selection of sources as well as verification strategies. We also discuss how the use of online sources changes audience perceptions of news. The available research indicates that journalists have accepted online news sourcing techniques into their daily news production process, but that they hesitate to use information retrieved from social media as direct and quoted sources in news reporting. Studies show that there are differences in the use of online sources between media sectors, type of reporting, and country context. The literature also suggests that verification of online sources requires a new set of skills that journalists still struggle with. We propose a research agenda for future studies.

"News Framing Effects is a guide to framing effects theory, one of the most prominent theories in media and communication science. Rooted in both psychology and sociology, framing effects theory describes the ability of news media to influence peoples' attitudes and behaviours by subtle changes to how they report on an issue. The book gives expert commentary on this complex theoretical notion alongside practical instruction on how to apply it to research. The book's structure mirrors the steps a scholar might take to design a framing study. The first chapter establishes a working definition of news framing effects theory. The following chapters focuses on how to identify the independent variable (i.e., the "news frame") and the dependent variable (i.e., the "framing effect"). The book then considers the potential limits or enhancements of the proposed effects (i.e., the "moderators") and how framing effects might emerge (i.e., the "mediators"). Finally, it asks how strong these effects are likely to be. The final chapter considers news framing research in the light of a rapidly and fundamentally changing news and information market, in which technologies, platforms, and changing consumption patterns are forcing assumptions at the core of framing effects theory to be re-evaluated"--

In times of identity politics, journalists use group primes to organize events and reduce their complexity. Because research has mostly investigated the effects of single group primes on opinion formation and news selection, two aspects of group primes in the news have remained understudied: (1) whether they directly affect group identification itself, and (2) how these effects differ between groups. This experiment ( N  =  750) shows that group primes in the news cause awareness of citizens' membership in these groups. However, citizens' perceived group importance diverges between groups: priming groups that likely have a social change mindset increases their perceived importance, while priming groups that likely have a social mobility mindset does not. Accordingly, the effects of group primes in the news depend on shared notions of a group's status in society and the rigidity of its boundary. These findings considerably advance contemporary understanding of differential news effects relating to group identification.

Professional content moderators are responsible for limiting the negative effects of online discussions on news platforms and social media. However, little is known about how they adjust to platform and company moderation strategies while viewing and dealing with uncivil comments. Using qualitative interviews ( N = 18), this study examines which types of comments professional moderators classify as actionable, which (automated) strategies they use to moderate them, and how these perceptions and strategies differ between organizations, platforms, and individuals. Our results show that moderators divide content requiring intervention into clearly problematic and "gray area" comments. They (automatically) delete clear cases but use interactive or motivational moderation techniques for "gray areas." While moderators crave more advanced technologies, they deem them incapable of addressing context-heavy comments. These findings highlight the need for nuanced regulations, emphasize the crucial role of moderators in shaping public discourse, and offer practical implications for (semi-)automated content moderation strategies.

Emotions play an important role in explaining why news framing has effects on opinions about immigration. Yet, our knowledge regarding which emotions are relevant for different types of news frames is limited. This survey experiment ( N = 715) determines to what extent positive and negative emotions mediate framing effects about immigration, and whether mediation depends on the type of frame at stake. We exposed participants to one of four preestablished frames: the emancipation, multicultural, assimilation, or victimization frame. Results show that the emancipation and multicultural frames cause the most emotional response. Positive emotions function as mediators of framing effects on immigration opinions.

Based on a "classic" framing experiment ( N = 1,324), this study empirically mimics the dynamic nature of framing effects over time. We integrate (a) multiple frame exposures as well as (b) various tests for duration of framing effects into our study design. Our results show that exposure to repetitive frames does not systematically strengthen effects on opinion formation. However, effects can get stronger when the delay between two exposures is short. Competitive news framing is characterized by recency effects; that is, the latest frame has the strongest impact on opinion formation. Political knowledge functions as a moderator for both effect mechanisms. Participants with higher levels of political knowledge are less prone to recency effects, but show stronger signs of a cumulative framing effect. The results of this study have important methodological and substantive ramifications for framing effects research, as well as for our understanding of the real-life impact of framed media messages on opinions.

There is no satisfactory account of the psychological processes that mediate a news framing effect. Based on an experimental study ( N = 1,537), this article presents a mediation analysis of a news framing effect on opinion, testing for two important mediation processes: belief importance and belief content change. Results show that framing is mediated by both belief importance and belief content, with belief content being the more prominent variable. The extent to which each process takes effect depends on a person's level of political knowledge. Knowledgeable individuals are affected to a greater extent via both belief content and belief importance change.

Citizens increasingly turn to social media for information, where they often rely on cues to judge the credibility of news messages. In these environments, populist politicians use "fake news" and "anti-elitist" attacks to undermine the credibility of news messages. This article argues that to truly understand the impact of these criticism cues, one must simultaneously consider additional contextual cues as well as individual-level moderators. In a factorial survey, we exposed 715 respondents to tweets by a politician retweeting and discrediting a news message of which topic and source varied. We find that both the fake news cue and the anti-elitist cue have limited across-the-board effects but decrease credibility if the message is incongruent with voters' issue positions. Our results thus offer a more optimistic view on the power of populist media criticism cues and suggest that source and confirmation heuristics are (still) stronger influences on citizens' credibility evaluations.

Framing research has predominantly revealed detrimental effects of episodic news frames, including individualist blame attributions and political cynicism. However, such frames may also discourage group biases and impede motivated reasoning regarding identity politics. In two experiments ( N = 815; N = 1,019), we test the effect of episodic frames on group-consonant attitudes through identity-motivated reasoning. The two studies produce mixed results. Episodic frames might decrease gender-motivated reasoning for women with weaker gender identities when news threatens their identity, but not for men or for women with stronger gender identities. The implications for journalism and democracy are discussed.