Suchergebnisse

Der vorliegende Beitrag beschäftigt sich mit den Herausforderungen eines Feldexperiments aus der Umfragemethodologie. Zielsetzung des experimentellen Designs war die Evaluierung von Methodeneffekten bei Web-Befragungen mittels eines empirischen Vergleichs alternativer Befragungsmethoden. Als Methodeneffekte werden Verzerrungen von Antworten und anderen Messergebnissen aufgrund der gewählten Befragungs- bzw. Messmethode bezeichnet. In der Regel handelt es sich dabei um vergleichsweise geringe Verzerrungen. Da Methodeneffekte aber methodenimmanent, also untrennbar mit einer Erhebungsmethode verbunden sind, werden sie vereinzelt als bedeutsamste Quelle von Messfehlern beschrieben. Während bezüglich der Web-Befragung häufig die mit der Auswahl dieser Befragungsmethode auftretenden Probleme der Stichprobenqualität und der erreichbaren Repräsentativität thematisiert wurden, standen die Messfehler, insbesondere die Methodeneffekte zunächst abseits des Fokus. Dieses Forschungsdesiderat war der Anlass für die Durchführung eines empirischen Methodenvergleichs, bei dem die Web-Befragung mit den telefonischen und postalischen Befragungsmethoden verglichen wurde. Dieser wurde als Feldexperiment mittels eines Test-Retest-Ansatzes realisiert. Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden sowohl die Gründe für diese Entscheidung als auch die damit verbundenen Probleme sowie deren konkrete Lösungsmöglichkeiten dargestellt. (ICI2)

The political, societal or economic impact of algorithms is seen as one of the most debated issues in recent history. In this introduction to the special issue "Algorithms and Communication", we elaborate on the importance of algorithms as research objects for communication science. We discuss why algorithms are such an intensively discussed topic. We describe different kinds of "communicating algorithms" that affect processes of political, social and interpersonal communication. In this context, we elaborate on new research questions for communication sciences that arise out of the importance of algorithms. Finally, we conclude with a call for a transformation of traditional models of mass communication. Particularly, we highlight the necessity to systematically describe and define the role of algorithms as "autonomous" senders in communication processes.

The role of algorithms for producing and curating content as well as potential outcomes of these mechanisms is one of the most debated issues in existing communication research. "Communicating algorithms" affect processes of political, social and interpersonal communication. A broad variety of communication fields is thus currently touched on by algorithms, ranging from news exposure, public opinion forming, information retrieval, and political communication processes among others. However, a scientific sound and objective consideration of algorithms as actors in digital (mass) communication is still scarce. The special issue "Algorithms and Communication" addresses this research gap. It presents theoretical as well as empirical results in important fields of communication science, such as media literacy, news aggregation or robotics. With this, it aims to shed light on the black-box of algorithms as "hidden actors" in communication processes.

The emergence of disinformation challenges today's democracies. Selective exposure research assumes that psychological biases cause people to turn to attitude-reinforcing disinformation, though studies indicate that this only holds true for small niches of online audiences. However, when online, unbiased users as well may encounter disinformation, which for them appear to be attitude-challenging. How unbiased online users experience and cope with dissonance triggered by this, and whether this affects their pre-existing attitudes, has hardly been explored. This research gap is addressed using the polarized topic of climate change as an example. An experimental research design is applied combining stimulus exposure, survey research, eye tracking, and interviews ( n = 50). The findings indicate that unbiased users are not entirely resistant to disinformation influence. However, attitude effects could not be fully explained by selection behavior but instead through different feelings and strategies of coping with dissonance and patterns of performing online information searches.

In view of events such as the public denial of climate change research by well-known politicians, the effects of postfactual disinformation and emotionalisation are discussed for science. Here, so-called 'fake news' are of focus. These are considered problematic, particularly in a high-choice media environment as users tend to show selective behaviour. Much research has demonstrated this selective exposure approach, which has roots in the Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Festinger, 1957). However, research on the processes of coping with dissonance is still considered sparse. In particular, communication scholars have overlooked emotional states and negotiations. This article analyses the affects that are aroused when users are confronted with opinion-challenging disinformation and how they (emotionally) cope by using different strategies for online information. For this, we used the context of climate change that is widely accepted in Germany. The innovative research design included pre- and post-survey research, stimulus exposure (denying 'fake news'), observations, and retrospective interviews (n = 50). Through this, we find that perceptions and coping strategies vary individually and that overt behaviour, such as searching for counter-arguments, should be seen against the background of individual ideas and motivations, such as believing in an easy rejection of arguments. Confirming neuroscientific findings, participants felt relieved and satisfied once they were able to dissolve their dissonant state and negative arousal. Dissatisfaction and frustration were expressed if this had not been accomplished.

In view of events such as the public denial of climate change research by well-known politicians, the effects of postfactual disinformation and emotionalisation are discussed for science. Here, so-called 'fake news' are of focus. These are considered problematic, particularly in a high-choice media environment as users tend to show selective behaviour. Much research has demonstrated this selective exposure approach, which has roots in the Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Festinger, 1957). However, research on the processes of coping with dissonance is still considered sparse. In particular, communication scholars have overlooked emotional states and negotiations. This article analyses the affects that are aroused when users are confronted with opinion-challenging disinformation and how they (emotionally) cope by using different strategies for online information. For this, we used the context of climate change that is widely accepted in Germany. The innovative research design included pre- and post-survey research, stimulus exposure (denying 'fake news'), observations, and retrospective interviews (n = 50). Through this, we find that perceptions and coping strategies vary individually and that overt behaviour, such as searching for counter-arguments, should be seen against the background of individual ideas and motivations, such as believing in an easy rejection of arguments. Confirming neuroscientific findings, participants felt relieved and satisfied once they were able to dissolve their dissonant state and negative arousal. Dissatisfaction and frustration were expressed if this had not been accomplished.

In the field of science communication, there is currently a great deal of discussion on how individuals can be reached, not only through fact-oriented communication, but also through emotional appeals and 'edutainment' approaches. This discussion has been further intensified by the changing conditions of new media environments. From an academic viewpoint, the discussion is often met with scepticism. However, categorical statements about a supposed dichotomy of emotion and rationality are misleading. What is needed are differentiated arguments and analyses. Nevertheless, emotions in science communication are an often overseen research field. With this thematic issue, we seek to enrich the scientific discourse by providing research from authors coming from different perspectives using different concepts, methods, and cases. In this editorial, we summarise the contribution of ten different articles on three levels: (1) emotions of science communicators, (2) emotional(ised) content, and (3) emotions of science communication audiences.

In view of events such as the public denial of climate change research by well-known politicians, the effects of postfactual disinformation and emotionalisation are discussed for science. Here, so-called 'fake news' are of focus. These are considered problematic, particularly in a high-choice media environment as users tend to show selective behaviour. Much research has demonstrated this selective exposure approach, which has roots in the Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Festinger, 1957). However, research on the processes of coping with dissonance is still considered sparse. In particular, communication scholars have overlooked emotional states and negotiations. This article analyses the affects that are aroused when users are confronted with opinion-challenging disinformation and how they (emotionally) cope by using different strategies for online information. For this, we used the context of climate change that is widely accepted in Germany. The innovative research design included pre- and post-survey research, stimulus exposure (denying 'fake news'), observations, and retrospective interviews (n = 50). Through this, we find that perceptions and coping strategies vary individually and that overt behaviour, such as searching for counter-arguments, should be seen against the background of individual ideas and motivations, such as believing in an easy rejection of arguments. Confirming neuroscientific findings, participants felt relieved and satisfied once they were able to dissolve their dissonant state and negative arousal. Dissatisfaction and frustration were expressed if this had not been accomplished.

AbstractThis paper argues the relevance of the internet for scientific communication. It is not only an immense source of information, it also empowers laypeople to interact by commenting, rating, and sharing online content. Previous studies have found that users' contributions to online content affect the reception processes. However, research on who actually uses these participatory possibilities is scarce. This paper characterizes engaged (and non-engaged) online users by analyzing online engagement (using search engines and different participatory forms) with a representative German online survey (