Challenging Politicians on Race in Interviews: Social Dominance Orientation, Perceived Journalistic Credibility, Bias, and Appropriateness

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study uses a randomized posttest-only between-subjects experiment (N = 148) to investigate the communication rules participants perceive after a journalist interviews a politician about race-related housing policies. Perceived question appropriateness, journalistic bias, and perceived credibility (journalist and politician) were examined depending on the journalist’s varying adversarial stances (no challenge, simple challenge, contextualized challenge). Social dominance orientation (SDO), a key concept associated with racial intolerance, was used as a moderator to understand perceptions of the interview style, the journalist, and the politician. Overall, SDO weighs more heavily than does level of challenge, with high-SDO participants perceiving journalistic challenges on the question of race less appropriate than do low-SDO individuals. Contrary to expectations, low-SDO participants viewed a contextual challenge as less appropriate and the journalist as more biased than when a simple challenge was used. Overall, participants endorsed journalists engaging in the watchdog role.