This study examines selective exposure to political information, arguing that attraction to proattitudinal information and aversion to counterattitudinal information are distinct phenomena, and that the tendency to engage in these behaviors varies by partisanship. Data collected in a strict online experiment support these predictions. Republicans are significantly more likely to engage in selective avoidance of predominantly counterattitudinal information than those with other partisan affiliations, while non-Republicans are significantly more likely to select a story that includes proattitudinal information, regardless of its counterattitudinal content. Individuals across the political spectrum are receptive to predominantly proattitudinal content and to content that offers a mix of views, but the form these preferences take varies by partisanship. The political significance of these findings is discussed.doi: 10.1111/jcom.12105 For much of its history, politically motivated selective exposure has been contested; indeed, many scholars questioned its occurrence (e.g., Chaffee, Saphir, Graf, Sandvig, & Hahn, 2001;Sears & Freedman, 1967). Today, however, the evidence that citizens' news consumption privileges like-minded views over less consonant content is overwhelming (Hart et al., 2009;Stroud, 2011). In an era characterized by unprecedented media choice, uncertainty about the existence of the selective exposure phenomenon has been replaced by questions premised on its existence. Is it on the rise (Garrett, Carnahan, & Lynch, 2013)? What are its consequences (Stroud, 2010)? Under what conditions does it occur (Fischer, Jonas, Frey, & Schulz-Hardt, 2005;Valentino, Banks, Hutchings, & Davis, 2009)? And when and why do partisan differences in selectivity appear (Iyengar, Hahn, Krosnick, & Walker, 2008)?In this paper, we advance our understanding of selective exposure in two ways. First, we offer new evidence in the debate over the need to distinguish between Corresponding author: R. Kelly Garrett; e-mail: garrett.258@osu.edu Partisan Paths to Exposure Diversity selective approach, the tendency to seek information consistent with one's prior beliefs, and selective avoidance, a drive to avoid contradictory information. The conventional understanding of selective exposure as the pairing of selective approach with equally strong selective avoidance has been criticized, both theoretically (e.g., Garrett, 2009b) and empirically (e.g., Gentzkow & Shapiro, 2011), but several prominent scholars recently have embraced the classical view (e.g., Bennett & Iyengar, 2008). This study aims to extend earlier scholarship by offering the most stringent experimental test to date of whether selective approach is the stronger tendency.Building on new evidence for the distinction between selective approach and selective avoidance, our second contribution is to examine partisan differences in these phenomena. Recent research has highlighted not only differences in how partisans approach and think about the world (see, for example, Jost...