Cross-cutting Exposure Research Articles

In Need of the Devil’s Advocate? The Impact of Cross-Cutting Exposure on Political Discussion

Cross-cutting exposure (i.e., the exposure to dissonant views) is a central component of political discussion among citizens. Although political discussion is a crucial form of political engagement and a well-known source of dissonance, little is known about the impact of cross-cuttingness (vs. like-mindedness; CCLM) elicited by media news on political discussion. In the present pre-registered online experiment (N = 725), news stories were manipulated to induce CCLM and investigate its positive effect on political discussion via a specific path: deliberative thinking and the repertoire of arguments. Although no total effect of CCLM on participating in a political discussion (operationalized as discussion intent) was found, a structural equation model showed specific indirect positive effects via our hypothesized paths. Our study therefore lends support to the positive democratic implication of cross-cutting exposure. Data and material are publicly available via https://osf.io/cpnzy/.

From Context Collapse to “Safe Spaces”: Selective Avoidance through Tie Dissolution on Social Media

ABSTRACT This study examines whether disconnective practices on social media such as unfriending could constitute a form of selective avoidance and investigates its boundary conditions. To do so, we study whether, to what extent, and under which conditions exposure to disagreement on social media predicts politically motivated unfriending. Specifically, we examine how the relationship varies in different relational contexts and whether it is conditioned by opinion minority status. Using survey data collected shortly before the 2017 Chief Executive Election in Hong Kong, we find cross-cutting exposure to be a significant predictor of politically motivated unfriending. This suggests that the disconnective practices represent a form of selective avoidance, but only among a relatively small number of social media users. We also show that only disagreements arising from political discussion with distant others predict unfriending. Furthermore, opinion minorities are more inclined to cut ties in the face of political disagreement than the majorities. Based on these findings, we discuss the weakness of weak ties on social media and characterize selective avoidance as a means to build digital “safe spaces”.

When Unfamiliarity Breeds Contempt: How Partisan Selective Exposure Sustains Oppositional Media Hostility

Partisans hold unfavorable views of media they associate with the other party. They also avoid out-party news sources. We link these developments and argue that partisans assess out-party media based on negative and inaccurate stereotypes. This means cross-cutting exposure that challenges these misperceptions can improve assessments of out-party media. To support this argument, we use survey-linked web browsing data to show that the public has hostile views of out-party news sources they rarely encounter. We conduct three survey experiments that demonstrate cross-cutting exposure to nonpolitical or neutral political stories, forms of news widely available from online partisan sources, reduces oppositional media hostility. This explains how perceptions of rampant bias from out-party media coexist with more modest differences in the online content of major partisan news outlets. More broadly, we illustrate how negative misperceptions can sustain animus towards an out-group when people avoid encounters with them.

Cross-cutting and Like-minded Discussion on Social Media: The Moderating Role of Issue Importance in the (De)mobilizing Effect of Political Discussion on Political Participation

ABSTRACT Using a student survey with multistage probability sampling in Taiwan, we revisited the deliberation-participation paradox by examining the relationship between cross-cutting/like-minded discussion and online political participation, emphasizing the moderating role of issue importance and focusing particularly on the social media context and two political issues in Taiwan. We found that political ambivalence, which has been proposed as the underlying mechanism between cross-cutting exposure and participation, plays a significant mediating role. Cross-cutting discussion demobilizes participation indirectly through increasing political ambivalence, while like-minded discussion mobilizes participation indirectly through decreasing political ambivalence. More importantly, the two indirect effects are conditioned upon the level of issue importance in that the demobilizing effect of cross-cutting discussion was weakened while the mobilizing effect of like-minded discussion was strengthened when the level of issue importance increased.

Close Relationships in Close Elections

Abstract Close elections are rare, but most Americans have experienced a close election at least once in their lifetime. How does intense politicization in close elections affect our close relationships? Using four national egocentric network surveys during the 1992, 2000, 2008, and 2016 election cycles, I find that close elections are associated with a modest decrease in network isolation in Americans’ political discussion networks. While Americans are more politically engaged in close elections, they also are less likely to be exposed to political dissent and more likely to deactivate their kinship ties to discuss politics. I further investigate a potential mechanism, the extent of political advertising, and show that cross-cutting exposure is more likely to disappear in states with more political ads air. To examine the behavioral consequence of close elections within American families, I revisit large-scale cell phone location data during the Thanksgiving holiday in 2016. I find that Americans are less likely to travel following close elections, and that families comprised of members with strong, opposing political views are more likely to shorten their Thanksgiving dinner. These results illuminate a process in which politicization may “close off” strong-tied relationships in the aftermath of close elections.

Exposure to news grows less fragmented with an increase in mobile access

The abundance of media options is a central feature of today's information environment. Many accounts, often based on analysis of desktop-only news use, suggest that this increased choice leads to audience fragmentation, ideological segregation, and echo chambers with no cross-cutting exposure. Contrary to many of those claims, this paper uses observational multiplatform data capturing both desktop and mobile use to demonstrate that coexposure to diverse news is on the rise, and that ideological self-selection does not explain most of that coexposure. We show that mainstream media outlets offer the common ground where ideologically diverse audiences converge online, though our analysis also reveals that more than half of the US online population consumes no online news, underlining the risk of increased information inequality driven by self-selection along lines of interest. For this study, we use an unprecedented combination of observed data from the United States comprising a 5-y time window and involving tens of thousands of panelists. Our dataset traces news consumption across different devices and unveils important differences in news diets when multiplatform or desktop-only access is used. We discuss the implications of our findings for how we think about the current communication environment, exposure to news, and ongoing attempts to limit the effects of misinformation.

소셜미디어에서 이견(異見) 관련 경험과 의견극화: 접촉, 교류, 회피를 중심으로

연구진은 소셜미디어를 통한 이용자의 정치적 이견노출 경험이 의견극단화와 어떤 연관이 있는지 알아봤다. 결과는 소셜미디어를 통해 정보소비활동을 활발하게 하는 경우 정치적 이견에 많이 노출되지만 단순한 친목목적의 활동은 이견 관련 경험을 확장하지 못함을 보여준다. 연구자들은 소셜미디어 내에서의 이견관련 경험을 이견접촉, 이견교류, 이견회피로 구분해 각각의 경험이 어떤 경로를 통해 의견극화에 영향을 미칠 수 있는지 파악했다. 그 결과 소셜미디어에서의 이견접촉이 이견교류로 이어지는 경우에만 소셜미디어에서의 이견접촉이 의견극화 정도를 완화하는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 이견교류의 의견극화 완화는 이견에 대한 비판적이해 과정이 수반되기 때문에 가능함을 연구결과는 보여준다.

Fighting biased news diets: Using news media literacy interventions to stimulate online cross-cutting media exposure patterns

Online news consumers have the tendency to select political news that confirms their prior attitudes, which may further fuel polarized divides in society. Despite scholarly attention to drivers of selective exposure, we know too little about how healthier cross-cutting news exposure patterns can be stimulated in digital media environments. Study 1 ( N = 553) exposed people to news media literacy (NML) interventions using injunctive and descriptive normative language. The findings reveal the conditional effect of such online interventions: Participants with pro-immigration attitudes engaged in more cross-cutting exposure while the intervention was only to a certain extent effective for Democrats, ineffective for Republicans, and even boomeranged for partisans with anti-immigration attitudes. In response to these findings, Study 2 ( N = 579) aimed to design interventions that work across issue publics and party affiliation. We show that NML messages tailored on immigration beliefs can be effective across the board. These findings inform the design of more successful NML interventions.

Dysfunctional information sharing on WhatsApp and Facebook: The role of political talk, cross-cutting exposure and social corrections

In this study, we investigate dysfunctional information sharing on WhatsApp and Facebook, focusing on two explanatory variables—frequency of political talk and cross-cutting exposure—and potential remedies, such as witnessing, experiencing, and performing social corrections. Results suggest that dysfunctional sharing is pervasive, with nearly a quarter reporting sharing misinformation on Facebook and WhatsApp, but social corrections also occur relatively frequently. Platform matters, with corrections being more likely to be experienced or expressed on WhatsApp than Facebook. Taken together, our results suggest that the intimate nature of WhatsApp communication has important consequences for the dynamics of misinformation sharing, particularly with regard to facilitating social corrections.

대학생의 스피치 효능감과 토론 효능감에 미치는 요인 연구 : 미디어 이용, 이견 노출, 비주장적 태도, 그리고 커뮤니케이션 능력의 영향 탐색

본 연구는 미디어 이용, 이견 노출, 비주장적 태도, 그리고 커뮤니케이션 능력이 스피치 효능감과 토론 효능감에 미치는 영향을 조사하였다. 400명의 대학생을 대상으로 설문조사를 실시하였으며, 연구 가설을 시험하기 위해 회귀분석을 수행하였다. 분석 결과, 첫째, 소셜미디어 뉴스이용을 많이 할수록 토론 효능감이 높았다. 둘째, 이견 노출이 높을수록 스피치와 토론 효능감이 증가한 것으로 나타났다. 셋째, 비주장적 태도가 클수록 스피치와 토론 효능감은 낮은 것으로 발견되었다. 넷째, 커뮤니케이션 능력이 높을수록 스피치와 토론 효능감은 높은 것으로 나타났다. 연구결과를 바탕으로 스피치 효능감과 토론 효능감을 향상시킬 수 있는 방안을 스피치와 토론 교육의 측면에서 논의한다.

From Selective Exposure to Selective Information Processing: A Motivated Reasoning Approach

Literature suggests that while without doubt people engage in selective exposure to information, this does not entail that they also engage in selective avoidance of opinion-challenging information<em>.</em> However, cross-cutting exposure does not always lead to dispassionate deliberation. In this commentary I explore psychological conditions as they apply to attitude-based selection and make an argument that selectivity does not stop at exposure but continues as audiences engage with information they encounter and incorporate in their decision-making. I propose the theory of motivated reasoning as a rich theoretical underpinning that helps us understand selective exposure and selective information processing.

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Cross-Cutting Exposure on Political Participation

Scholars have advanced many theoretical explanations for expecting a negative or positive relationship between individuals’ cross-cutting exposure—either through interpersonal or mediated forms of communication—and their political participation. However, whether cross-cutting exposure is a positive or negative predictor of participation is still an unsettled question. To help fill this gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of 48 empirical studies comprising more than 70,000 participants examining the association between cross-cutting exposure and political participation. The meta-analysis produced two main findings. First, it shows that, over all studies, there is no significant relationship, r = .002, Zr = .002 (95% CI = −.04 to .05). Second, the null relationship cannot be explained by variations in the characteristics of cross-cutting environments (e.g., topic, place, or source of exposure), participation outcomes (e.g., online vs. offline activities), or methods employed (e.g., experiment vs. survey). Taken together, these results should alleviate concerns about negative effects of cross-cutting exposure on political engagement. Implications for future research are discussed.

Testing Partisan Selective Exposure in a Multidimensional Choice Context: Evidence from a Conjoint Experiment

The methodological shortcomings characterizing previous experimental research on selective and cross-cutting exposure (e.g. focusing on the impact of a few experimental factors and providing a limited range of choice alternatives) amount to an incomplete description of news choice behavior. This study proposes an alternative method that addresses these shortcomings in testing partisan news selection in the current media environment. A conjoint experiment (N = 746), which simulates a popular mobile news platform (iOS news app), showed that while partisans preferred selecting news from pro-attitudinal sources, they also selected news from counter-attitudinal sources at least once in five times (20%). The tendency to engage in selective exposure was slightly stronger among strong partisans. Our findings indicate that the concerns over partisan selective exposure may not be an issue of “selection” but more of “access” to news sources with different political views. The implications for future research are discussed.

Friendship and politics don’t mix? The role of sociability for online political talk

ABSTRACT Political talk is valuable for citizens in democracy – particularly cross-cutting talk to heterogeneous others. Yet the role played by sociability in relation to political talk has not been sufficiently understood. When we talk politics with people with whom we have social relationships, does this promote open political talk by creating mutual understanding and intimacy? Or is candid political expression hindered by attempts to maintain harmony? This paper examines the role of sociability for online political talk, through a unique opportunity to compare two naturally occurring groups on the mobile instant-messaging application WhatsApp. Both groups engage in informal political talk, but while one group is devoted to political talk solely, the other mixes politics with social chit-chat, enabling social interaction and friendships among participants. A comparison of the groups based on in-depth interviews with 20 members and the groups’ administrator, complemented by excerpts of discussion content, allows to trace the role of sociability for political talk in online groups. Findings point to an increased personal and emotional dimension to the group combining politics and sociability. This kind of political talk was perceived as riskier and more challenging. At the same time, it is in this group that cross-cutting exposure had a stronger potential to persuade participants to see and understand ‘the other side.’ These findings highlight how not only certain social media – but even certain groups within the same platform – can afford different kinds of political talk.

‘Enclaves of exposure’: A conceptual viewpoint to explore cross-ideology exposure on social network sites

Previous studies indicate mixed results as to whether social media constitutes ideological echo chambers. This inconsistency may arise due to a lack of theoretical frames that acknowledge the fact that contextual and technological factors allow varying levels of cross-cutting exposure on social media. This study suggests an alternative theoretical lens, divergence of exposure – co-existence of user groups with varying degrees of cross-ideology exposure related to the same issue – as a notion that serves as an overarching perspective. We suggest that mediated spaces, such as social media groups, can serve as enclaves of exposure that offer affordances for formation of user groups irrespective of offline social distinctions. Yet social elements cause some of them to display more cross-ideology exchange than others. To establish this claim empirically, we examine two Facebook page user networks (‘Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields’ and ‘Sri Lankans Hate Channel 4’) that emerged in response to Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields, a controversial documentary broadcast by Channel 4 that accused Sri Lankan armed forces of human rights violation during the final stage of the separatist conflict in Sri Lanka. The results showed that the Facebook group network that supported the claims made by Channel 4 is more diverse in terms of ethnic composition, and is neither assortative nor disassortative across ethnicity, suggesting the presence of cross-ethnicity interaction. The pro-allegiant group was largely homogenous and less active, resembling a passive echo chamber. ‘Social mediation’ repurposes enclaves of exposure to represent polarized ideologies where some venues display cross-ideology exposure, while others resemble an ‘echo chamber’.

Live tweeting live debates: How Twitter reflects and refracts the US political climate in a campaign season

ABSTRACTPolitical campaigns mostly run parallel to each other during an election cycle, but intersect when the main candidates face off for televised debates. They offer supporters of these candidates a chance to engage with each other while being exposed to views and opinions different from their own. This study uses a combination of social network analysis and machine learning to examine how the three US presidential debates of 2016 were live tweeted (N = ∼300,000). We find that despite cross-cutting exposure across the ideological divide, people remain highly partisan in terms of who they engage with on Twitter. The issue agendas of Twitter posts during the US presidential debates is set well in advance of the debates themselves; it is highly negative and focused on personality traits of the opposition candidate rather than policy matters. We also detect a shift in the nature of online opinion leadership, with grassroots activists and internet personalities sharing the space with traditional elites such as political leaders and journalists. This shift coincides with the broader anti-establishment turn in the US political climate, as reflected in the early success of Bernie Sanders and the eventual victory of a political outsider like Donald Trump over the seasoned Hillary Clinton.

Bridging Gaps in Cross-Cutting Media Exposure: The Role of Public Service Broadcasting

Previous studies show that individual political interest is an antecedent of news media exposure, particularly of exposure to differing views. Nevertheless, little is known about this effect from a comparative perspective: How do media institutions affect the relationship between political interest and exposure to cross-cutting viewpoints? One institutional feature that varies between countries is the ownership of broadcast media. This study investigates the extent to which the relative dominance of public service broadcasting alters the relationship between political interest and non-like-minded, or cross-cutting, news media exposure across 27 European Union countries. The analyses employ survey data from 27,079 individuals and media content from 48,983 news stories. The results confirm that the extent to which political interest contributes to cross-cutting exposure is contingent on the strength of public service broadcasting. The stronger the broadcaster, the smaller the gaps between the most and least politically engaged individuals.

Hasty discussion, cross-cutting exposure, and tolerance: A comparative study of South Korean and American online discussants

The positive relationship between cross-cutting exposure and tolerance has long been a topic in the political communication field. By reinvestigating this issue, this study further explores whether hasty discussion moderates the relationship from a cross-cultural perspective by comparing South Korea with the United States. The authors posit that hasty discussion—a term that was coined to explain South Korean’s fast lifestyle as reflected in discussion processes—is a South Korean characteristic that can have deleterious effects on deliberative democracy. Nine hundred and sixty survey participants (480 South Koreans and 480 Americans) showed meaningful results: (1) Hasty discussion comprises two factors (ignoring discussion processes and pursuing discussion efficiency). (2) Americans are exposed to more cross-cutting opinions than South Koreans, but the positive relationship between cross-cutting exposure and tolerance is more significant in the South Korean sample. (3) In the South Korean sample, ignoring discussion processes negatively affected tolerance. (4) An interaction effect of ignoring discussion processes and cross-cutting exposure on tolerance was found among South Koreans. That is, ignoring the discussion process lowered tolerance.

All the news that you don't like: Cross-cutting exposure and political participation in the age of social media

This study investigated the factors that affect the relationship between cross-cutting exposure and political participation. It was found that cross-cutting exposure to politically disagreeable news on Facebook, overall, was associated with increased political participation both online and offline. The association was stronger when the cross-cutting exposure came from weak ties, or acquaintances and strangers, and when the individuals were highly engaged with the cross-cutting news. Cross-cutting exposure from strong ties showed no significant relationship with political participation. It is suggested that cross-cutting exposure and political participation in the age of social media are different from those of the offline world, because they are supported by the norm of individual self-expression and take place in more anonymous and comfortable settings.

Twitter and Encountering Diversity: The Moderating Role of Network Diversity and Age in the Relationship Between Twitter Use and Crosscutting Exposure

This article investigates whether Twitter use motivations relate to exposure to discordant information. To this end, this research conducted an online survey of 1,350 adults of South Korea. The results reveal that using Twitter for information-seeking, public-expression, and leisure-seeking purposes helps users to encounter crosscutting exposure, while the use of Twitter for private expression does not. Offline network diversity has a significant association with crosscutting exposure, and it moderates the relationship between Twitter use for public expression or leisure seeking and crosscutting exposure. The positive association between Twitter use for leisure seeking and crosscutting exposure is stronger among younger people than among older people.