The key assumption of spiral of silence theory is that opinion climate perceptions affect political opinion expression. We meta-analyzed the strength of this relationship and clarified the impact of ...theoretically relevant moderators. Sixty-six studies collectively including more than 27,000 participants were located. We observed a significant positive relationship (r = .10; Zr = .10) between opinion climate and opinion expression. This relationship was not weaker in online as compared with offline opinion expression environments. Also, the relationship did not vary by the number of the targets of opinion expression, the opinion of the targets, the opinion climate characteristics, and the design, measurement, and sample characteristics. The largest silencing effect (r = .34), however, was observed when participants talk to their family, friends, or neighbors about obtrusive issues. Overall, our findings suggest that the relationship between opinion climate perception and political opinion expression is stronger and more robust than previously thought.
Political scandals are highly relevant for political decision‐making and democratic processes more generally. While most prior research employed experimental and cross‐sectional survey studies, we ...tested the effects of a political scandal in the context of the 2017 Austrian Parliamentary Elections using panel data (N = 559, both waves). Importantly, we used a unique data set collected before and just after a major scandal broke in the final election phase. Drawing on a motivated reasoning perspective, attribution theory, and the inclusion/exclusion model, our results revealed a scandal‐eroding effect particularly damaging a candidate's own base of supporters and leaving followers in disappointment. The findings also showed a negative scandal‐spillover effect for candidate supporters high in scandal knowledge decreasing political trust toward other politicians. Importantly, the results revealed that negative candidate evaluations are not a necessary precondition for negative spillover effects on political trust more generally.
Donald Trump frequently attacks foreign countries such as Germany (e.g., via Twitter). Drawing from social identity theory and intergroup threat theory, I theorized that exposure to news about ...Trump’s anti-German utterances indirectly increases anti-Americanism in Germany. First, I theorized that Trump’s utterances result in negative attitudes toward Trump and, in turn, increase anti-Americanism (spillover effect). Second, I theorized that Trump’s anti-German utterances indirectly affect anti-Americanism via increased European Union (EU) popularity. Furthermore, I assumed that effects would be stronger for individuals low in political interest. A quota-based online experiment (N = 428) revealed that Trump’s anti-German utterances increased EU’s popularity. This effect was moderated by political interest. EU’s popularity was increased for moderately interested individuals and individuals low in political interest. No effects were detected for highly interested individuals. EU popularity, in turn, increased anti-Americanism. Therefore, Trump’s anti-German utterances indirectly increased anti-Americanism burdening relations between Germany and the United States. Implications for journalistic news coverage are discussed.
We examined how the journalistic differentiation of Muslims from Islamist terrorists and terror news proximity (i.e., proximity of terroristic acts to viewing audience) influence the effects of news ...reports about terrorism by the Islamic State on Islamophobic attitudes. Drawing from social identity theory, findings from two experimental studies revealed that coverage not clearly distinguishing Muslims from Islamist terrorists (i.e., undifferentiated coverage) activated negative stereotypes about Muslims and, in turn, heightened Islamophobic attitudes. However, terror news proximity did not affect audiences’ reactions of fear, negative stereotypes about Muslims, or Islamophobic attitudes. We discuss the implications of those findings for research on terrorism as well as for journalistic practice.
Scandal severity may affect public perceptions of both scandalous political actors and news sources reporting political misconduct. Yet, research that has empirically tested these assumptions is ...lacking. Drawing from theory on anchoring effects, the results of two experimental studies conducted using mediation analyses revealed that severe scandals hurt politicians (candidate evaluation) and weaken voting intentions. Although non-severe scandals have no such effects, they increased news consumers’ exaggerated scandalization perceptions and indirectly degraded news source evaluations. Severe scandals had no effect on the news source. Implications for the coverage of political scandals are discussed.
The hostile media phenomenon (HMP) refers to a process in which supporters and opponents of an issue perceive the identical coverage to be biased against their own views. Despite the relevance of ...visual communication in our field, scholars have treated hostile media perceptions as a text-based phenomenon ignoring the unique role of visuals. This paper makes the case for a visual hostile media phenomenon (VHMP). The VHMP posits that completely balanced pictures are perceived as biased both by opponents and supporters of an issue. Two experimental studies on the Israel–Palestine conflict provide clear evidence for this reasoning. Study 1 shows that Palestine (Israel) supporters perceived a balanced photo series as biased toward Israel (Palestine) irrespective of the series’ reach. This effect was also visible for clearly slanted pro-Israel and pro-Palestine pictures (i.e., relative VHMP). Study 2 replicates these findings and sheds some first light on the underlying mechanism. Theoretical and methodological implications are discussed.
Visual political mis- and disinformation is still not well understood by the scholarly community as scientific research about this phenomenon is still in its infancy—leaving many questions ...unanswered. For instance, how can visual misinformation be effectively debunked (Hameleers et al., 2020; Young et al., 2018)? How can backfire effects and continued influence effects of misinformation be best prevented (e.g., Lewandowsky et al., 2020; Nyhan, 2021; Stubenvoll & Matthes, 2021)? Are there ways to inoculate individuals against (visual) misinformation (Basol et al., 2021; Compton et al., 2021)? The aim of the invited forum is to find answers to some of these questions and to bring together leading researchers from the fields of political communication, visual communication, psychology, and data science to provide a comprehensive overview of the state of research, noting key challenges and identifying avenues for future research. The forum brings together expert scholars focusing on key domains of visual political mis- and disinformation. Viorela Dan (University of Munich) focuses on different types of disinformation videos and challenges for journalism and democracy. Britt Paris (Rutgers University) and Joan Donovan (Harvard University) examine online platform functionality and the fight against audiovisual disinformation. Michael Hameleers (University of Amsterdam) points out the effects of multimodal disinformation, and how it can be potentially debunked and efficiently corrected. Based on inoculation theory, Jon Roozenbeek and Sander van der Linden (University of Cambridge) examine an innovative way of prebunking or “vaccinating citizens against visual disinformation” before media users are exposed to multimodal falsehoods. Finally, I will point out “next steps” and future avenues for research on multimodal misinformation. In all, these contributions offer important insights and clarify why we should continue to research and expand our knowledge of multimodal mis- and disinformation in the future.
Islamist terrorist attacks have become a salient threat to Western countries, and news coverage about such crimes is a key predictor of public emotional reactions and policy support. We examine the ...effects of two key characteristics of terrorism news coverage: (1) the victim’s religion and (2) first-person narratives that facilitate perspective taking. A quota-based experiment (N = 354) revealed that irrespective of the narrative type, news reports that mention the victims’ Muslim religion induce less anger and compassion, but more joy among non-Muslim news consumers. However, fear was equally induced by all news articles. As a consequence, fear, anger, and joy predicted support for more restrictive terrorism policies, while anger and compassion were related to more support for victim compensation.
PDF
