Beyond assimilation and contrast: Information effects, ideological magnification, and the vote

Hostile Media Perceptions of Friendly Media Do Reinforce Partisanship

“…Although trust in the media and the news are high in the Netherlands (den Ridder et al, 2018, pp. 15-16; Newman et al, 2018, pp.16-17), on the issue of the EU they were perceived as hostile, both as compared to personal EU attitudes (Calvo et al, 2014; Hovland et al, 1957; contrast-based HME) and as compared to the presumed standards of an “imagined community” of like-minded people that choose the same media (Anderson, 2006; Gruzd et al, 2011; standards-based HME). An answer to the research question requires an assessment of the direction and the strength of indirect causal effects of HMEs in response to media that were partly chosen on the basis of partisan predispositions on corrective action in the vote for a pro- or con-EU party.…”

“…First, in their study, partisans on both sides categorized a majority of the arguments included in the coverage as leaning against them. This mechanism, addressed in the literature as selective categorization, adheres to the principles of assimilation and contrast (Calvo, Chang, & Hellwig, 2014; Hovland, Harvey, & Sherif, 1957; Merrill, Grofman, & Adams, 2001), according to which stronger attitudes increase the range of arguments that are rejected as being in contrast to one’s position. The FMP and the HME may co-occur, because, in line with the attitude-based assimilation-contrast principle, people might be so deeply involved with an issue that their latitude of rejection becomes so wide that it even includes objectively friendly or even-handed news items.…”

#PolarizedFeeds: Three Experiments on Polarization, Framing, and Social Media

“…This is certainly true for all users that are located in-between candidates, given that any increase in contrast will push both candidates away in opposite directions. This will also be true for ideologically extreme users if ideological distances increase above unity (Calvo et al 2014).…”

“…5 As a result, very conservative voters perceive the ideological distance that separates Clinton and Trump as greater than moderate or liberal voters do. As described by Calvo et al (2014), policy and non-policy information can be used to model these effects, altering the perceived distance between users and parties. Positive valence frames augment assimilation while negative ones increase contrast, thereby producing increased perceived polarization.…”

A massive experiment on choice blindness in political decisions: Confidence, confabulation, and unconscious detection of self-deception

“…A further difference with the Swedish case is that we had no access to party platforms with a detailed government’s plan, even after the winner of the first round (incumbent candidate Daniel Scioli) took more extreme positions to present himself as the antithesis of his opponent Mauricio Macri. In order to cope with this problem, we selected statements for the questionnaire according to the support or opposition they expressed to the then president Cristina Fernandez Kirchner, which addressed directly the key issues that lead to the political fracture in Argentinian voting inclinations [ 23 ]. This allowed us to base the statements on unambiguous policy positions instead of the fluctuating political discourse of the campaign.…”