Skip to main content
Theoretical Article

Integrating Media Selection and Media Effects Using Decision Theory

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000315

Abstract. Media psychology researchers seek to understand both why people choose certain media over others and how media influence cognitive, emotional, social, and psychological processes. A burgeoning body of literature has emerged in recent years describing media selection and media effects as reciprocally linked dynamic processes, but research approaches empirically investigating them as such have been sparse. In parallel, technological developments like algorithmic personalization and mobile computing have served to blur the lines between media selection and media effects, highlighting novel problems at their intersection. Herein, we propose an integrative approach for building an understanding of these processes rooted in decision theory, a formal framework describing how organisms (and nonbiological agents) select and optimize behaviors in response to their environment.

References

  • Adams, G. K., Watson, K. K., Pearson, J., & Platt, M. L. (2012). Neuroethology of decision-making. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 22(6), 982–989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2012.07.009 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Basten, U., Biele, G., Heekeren, H. R., & Fiebach, C. J. (2010). How the brain integrates costs and benefits during decision making. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(50), 21767–21772. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908104107 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Behrens, T. E. J., Woolrich, M. W., Walton, M. E., & Rushworth, M. F. S. (2007). Learning the value of information in an uncertain world. Nature Neuroscience, 10(9), 1214–1221. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1954 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Benjamin, D. J., Berger, J. O., Johannesson, M., Nosek, B. A., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Berk, R., Bollen, K. A., Brembs, B., Brown, L., Camerer, C., Cesarini, D., Chambers, C. D., Clyde, M., Cook, T. D., De Boeck, P., Dienes, Z., Dreber, A., Easwaran, K., Efferson, C., … Johnson, V. E. (2018). Redefine statistical significance. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0189-z First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Berlo, D. (1960). Process of communication: An introduction to theory and practice. Harcourt School. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Bodó, B., Helberger, N., Eskens, S., & Möller, J. (2019). Interested in diversity: The role of user attitudes, algorithmic feedback loops, and policy in news personalization. Digital Journalism, 7(2), 206–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1521292 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Botvinick, M., Weinstein, A., Solway, A., & Barto, A. (2015). Reinforcement learning, efficient coding, and the statistics of natural tasks. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 5, 71–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.08.009 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bowman, N. D., & Keene, J. R. (2018). A layered framework for considering open science practices. Communication Research Reports, 35(4), 363–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2018.1513273 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Brady, W. J., McLoughlin, K., Doan, T. N., & Crockett, M. (2021). How social learning amplifies moral outrage expression in online social networks. Science Advances, 7(33), Article eabe5641. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abe5641 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Burke, C. J., Tobler, P. N., Baddeley, M., & Schultz, W. (2010). Neural mechanisms of observational learning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(32), 14431–14436. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1003111107 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Busemeyer, J. R., Gluth, S., Rieskamp, J., & Turner, B. M. (2019). Cognitive and neural bases of multi-attribute, multi-alternative, value-based decisions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(3), 251–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.12.003 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cappella, J. N. (1996). Why biological explanation? Journal of Communication, 46(3), 4–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01485.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cappella, J. N., Kim, H. S., & Albarracín, D. (2015). Selection and transmission processes for information in the emerging media environment: Psychological motives and message characteristics. Media Psychology, 18(3), 396–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2014.941112 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Crockett, M. J. (2016). How formal models can illuminate mechanisms of moral judgment and decision making. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(2), 85–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721415624012 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Crockett, M. J., Siegel, J. Z., Kurth-Nelson, Z., Dayan, P., & Dolan, R. J. (2017). Moral transgressions corrupt neural representations of value. Nature Neuroscience, 20(6), 879–885. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4557 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Daw, N. D., Gershman, S. J., Seymour, B., Dayan, P., & Dolan, R. J. (2011). Model-based influences on humans’ choices and striatal prediction errors. Neuron, 69(6), 1204–1215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2011.02.027 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dayan, P., & Balleine, B. W. (2002). Reward, motivation, and reinforcement learning. Neuron, 36(2), 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00963-7 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dayan, P., & Daw, N. D. (2008). Decision theory, reinforcement learning, and the brain. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(4), 429–453. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.8.4.429 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dayan, P., & Niv, Y. (2008). Reinforcement learning: The good, the bad and the ugly. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 18(2), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2008.08.003 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • DeAndrea, D. C., & Holbert, R. L. (2017). Increasing clarity where it is needed most: Articulating and evaluating theoretical contributions. Annals of the International Communication Association, 41(2), 168–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2017.1304163 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dienlin, T., Johannes, N., Bowman, N. D., Masur, P. K., Engesser, S., Kümpel, A. S., Lukito, J., Bier, L. M., Zhang, R., Johnson, B. K., Huskey, R., Schneider, F. M., Breuer, J., Parry, D. A., Vermeulen, I., Fisher, J. T., Banks, J., Weber, R., Ellis, D. A., … de Vreese, C. (2021). An agenda for open science in communication. Journal of Communication, 71(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz052 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dolan, R. J., & Dayan, P. (2013). Goals and habits in the brain. Neuron, 80(2), 312–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.09.007 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Farrell, S., & Lewandowsky, S. (2010). Computational models as aids to better reasoning in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(5), 329–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410386677 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Farrell, S., & Lewandowsky, S. (2018). Computational modeling of cognition and behavior. Cambridge University Press. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Fink, E. L. (1993). Mathematical models for communication: An introduction. Journal of Communication, 43(1), 4–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01245.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Frankenhuis, W. E., Panchanathan, K., & Barto, A. G. (2019). Enriching behavioral ecology with reinforcement learning methods. Behavioural Processes, 161, 94–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2018.01.008 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Friston, K., Schwartenbeck, P., FitzGerald, T., Moutoussis, M., Behrens, T., & Dolan, R. J. (2014). The anatomy of choice: Dopamine and decision-making. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369(1655), Article 20130481. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0481 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gläscher, J., Daw, N., Dayan, P., & O’Doherty, J. P. (2010). States versus rewards: Dissociable neural prediction error signals underlying model-based and model-free reinforcement learning. Neuron, 66(4), 585–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2010.04.016 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gong, X. J., & Duff, B. R. L. (2020, May). An exploration account of media multitasking: The exploration-exploitation model to explain media multitasking behavior. Paper Presented at the 69th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Grabenhorst, F., & Rolls, E. T. (2011). Value, pleasure and choice in the ventral prefrontal cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(2), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.12.004 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Grahek, I., Schaller, M., & Tackett, J. L. (2021). Anatomy of a psychological theory: Integrating construct-validation and computational-modeling methods to advance theorizing. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1745691620966794. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620966794 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Gu, R., Huang, W., Camilleri, J., Xu, P., Wei, P., Eickhoff, S. B., & Feng, C. (2019). Love is analogous to money in human brain: Coordinate-based and functional connectivity meta-analyses of social and monetary reward anticipation. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 100, 108–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.02.017 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Guest, O., & Martin, A. E. (2021). How computational modeling can force theory building in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1745691620970585. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620970585 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Günther, E., & Domahidi, E. (2017). What communication scholars write about: An analysis of 80 years of research in high-impact journals. International Journal of Communication, 11, 3051–3071. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hamilton, K. A., & Benjamin, A. S. (2019). The human-machine extended organism: New roles and responsibilities of human cognition in a digital ecology. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 8(1), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2019.01.001 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hamilton, K. A., & Yao, M. Z. (2018). Cognitive offloading and the extended digital self. In M. KurosuEd., Human-computer interaction. Theories, methods, and human issues (pp. 257–268). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91238-7_22 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Han, J., & Lang, A. (2019). It’s a journey: From media effects to dynamic systems. Media Psychology, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2019.1604236 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hauser, T. U., Fiore, V. G., Moutoussis, M., & Dolan, R. J. (2016). Computational psychiatry of ADHD: Neural gain impairments across Marrian levels of analysis. Trends in Neurosciences, 39(2), 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2015.12.009 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hayden, B., & Niv, Y. (2020). The case against economic values in the brain. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/7hgup First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Huskey, R., Bue, A. C., Eden, A., Grall, C., Meshi, D., Prena, K., Schmälzle, R., Scholz, C., Turner, B. O., & Wilcox, S. (2020). Marr’s tri-level framework integrates biological explanation across communication subfields. Journal of Communication, 70(3), 356–378. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqaa007 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Jackson, J. C., Rand, D., Lewis, K., Norton, M. I., & Gray, K. (2017). Agent-based modeling: A guide for social psychologists. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4), 387–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617691100 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Jolly, E., & Chang, L. J. (2019). The flatland fallacy: Moving beyond low–dimensional thinking. Topics in Cognitive Science, 11(2), 433–454. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12404 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Just, N., & Latzer, M. (2017). Governance by algorithms: Reality construction by algorithmic selection on the Internet. Media, Culture & Society, 39(2), 238–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443716643157 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kable, J. W., & Glimcher, P. W. (2007). The neural correlates of subjective value during intertemporal choice. Nature Neuroscience, 10(12), 1625–1633. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn2007 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kaelbling, L. P., Littman, M. L., & Cassandra, A. R. (1998). Planning and acting in partially observable stochastic domains. Artificial Intelligence, 101(1–2), 99–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(98)00023-X First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Katahira, K. (2015). The relation between reinforcement learning parameters and the influence of reinforcement history on choice behavior. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 66, 59–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2015.03.006 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kobayashi, K., & Hsu, M. (2019). Common neural code for reward and information value. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116, 13061–13066. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1820145116 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Körding, K. (2007). Decision theory: What “should” the nervous system do? Science, 318(5850), 606–610. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1142998 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Krauzlis, R. J., Bollimunta, A., Arcizet, F., & Wang, L. (2014). Attention as an effect not a cause. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(9), 457–464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.05.008 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lakens, D., Adolfi, F. G., Albers, C. J., Anvari, F., Apps, M. A. J., Argamon, S. E., Baguley, T., Becker, R. B., Benning, S. D., Bradford, D. E., Buchanan, E. M., Caldwell, A. R., Van Calster, B., Carlsson, R., Chen, S.-C., Chung, B., Colling, L. J., Collins, G. S., Crook, Z., … Zwaan, R. A. (2018). Justify your alpha. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(3), 168–171. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0311-x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lang, A., & Ewoldsen, D. (2009). Beyond effects: Conceptualizing communication as dynamics, complex, nonlinear, and fundamental. In S. AllenEd., Rethinking communication: Keywords in communication research (pp. 109–120). Hampton Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Lazer, D., & Friedman, A. (2007). The network structure of exploration and exploitation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(4), 667–694. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.52.4.667 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lazer, D., Pentland, A. (Sandy), Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabasi, A. L., Brewer, D., Christakis, N., Contractor, N., Fowler, J., Gutmann, M., Jebara, T., King, G., Macy, M., Roy, D., & Van Alstyne, M. (2009). Life in the network: The coming age of computational social science. Science (New York, NY), 323(5915), 721–723. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1167742 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lee, S. W., Shimojo, S., & O’Doherty, J. P. (2014). Neural computations underlying arbitration between model-based and model-free learning. Neuron, 81(3), 687–699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.11.028 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lee, T.-H., Itti, L., & Mather, M. (2012). Evidence for arousal-biased competition in perceptual learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00241 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Levine, T. R., Weber, R., Hullett, C., Park, H. S., & Lindsey, L. L. M. (2008). A critical assessment of null hypothesis significance testing in quantitative communication research. Human Communication Research, 34(2), 171–187. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00317.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Levine, T. R., Weber, R., Park, H. S., & Hullett, C. R. (2008). A communication researchers’ guide to null hypothesis significance testing and alternatives. Human Communication Research, 34(2), 188–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00318.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Levy, D. J., & Glimcher, P. W. (2012). The root of all value: A neural common currency for choice. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 22(6), 1027–1038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2012.06.001 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lin, H., Saunders, B., Friese, M., Evans, N. J., & Inzlicht, M. (2020). Strong effort manipulations reduce response caution: A preregistered reinvention of the ego-depletion paradigm. Psychological Science, 31(5), 531–547. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620904990 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lindström, B., Bellander, M., Schultner, D. T., Chang, A., Tobler, P. N., & Amodio, D. M. (2021). A computational reward learning account of social media engagement. Nature Communications, 12(1), Article 1311. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19607-x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Littman, M. L. (2009). A tutorial on partially observable Markov decision processes. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53(3), 119–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2009.01.005 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Madsen, J. K., Bailey, R., Carrella, E., & Koralus, P. (2019). Analytic versus computational cognitive models: Agent-based modeling as a tool in cognitive sciences. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(3), 299–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721419834547 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Marr, D. (1982). Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. MIT Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Mather, M., & Sutherland, M. R. (2011). Arousal-biased competition in perception and memory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(2), 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611400234 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Meehl, P. E. (1967). Theory testing in psychology and physics: A methodological paradox. Philosophy of Science, 34, 103–115. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mnih, V., Badia, A. P., Mirza, M., Graves, A., Lillicrap, T. P., Harley, T., Silver, D., & Kavukcuoglu, K. (2016, June 16). Asynchronous methods for deep reinforcement learning. Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning. http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.01783 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Muthukrishna, M., & Henrich, J. (2019). A problem in theory. Nature Human Behaviour, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0522-1 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Napoli, P. M. (2014). Automated media: An institutional theory perspective on algorithmic media production and consumption. Communication Theory, 24(3), 340–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12039 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Nassar, M. R., Wilson, R. C., Heasly, B., & Gold, J. I. (2010). An approximately Bayesian delta-rule model explains the dynamics of belief updating in a changing environment. Journal of Neuroscience, 30(37), 12366–12378. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0822-10.2010 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Niv, Y., & Langdon, A. (2016). Reinforcement learning with Marr. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 11, 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.04.005 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(37), 15583–15587. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903620106 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pearson, J. M., Watson, K. K., & Platt, M. L. (2014). Decision making: The neuroethological turn. Neuron, 82(5), 950–965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2014.04.037 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pedersen, M. L., Frank, M. J., & Biele, G. (2017). The drift diffusion model as the choice rule in reinforcement learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(4), 1234–1251. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1199-y First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Poole, M. S. (2007). Generalization in process theories of communication. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(3), 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450701434979 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (2008). The diffusion decision model: Theory and data for two-choice decision tasks. Neural Computation, 20(4), 873–922. https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.2008.12-06-420 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ratcliff, R., & Smith, P. L. (2004). A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. Psychological Review, 111(2), 333–367. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.333 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ratcliff, R., Smith, P. L., Brown, S. D., & McKoon, G. (2016). Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(4), 260–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.01.007 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Reinecke, L., Vorderer, P., & Knop, K. (2014). Entertainment 2.0? The role of intrinsic and extrinsic need satisfaction for the enjoyment of Facebook use. Journal of Communication, 64(3), 417–438. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12099 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Roberts, I. D., & Hutcherson, C. A. (2019). Affect and decision making: Insights and predictions from computational models. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(7), 602–614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.04.005 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rouder, J. N., Haaf, J. M., & Aust, F. (2018). From theories to models to predictions: A Bayesian model comparison approach. Communication Monographs, 85(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2017.1394581 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rozenblit, L., & Keil, F. (2002). The misunderstood limits of folk science: An illusion of explanatory depth. Cognitive Science, 26(5), 521–562. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2605_1 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rushworth, M. F. S., & Behrens, T. E. J. (2008). Choice, uncertainty and value in prefrontal and cingulate cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 11(4), 389–397. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn2066 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sanbonmatsu, D. M., & Johnston, W. A. (2019). Redefining science: The impact of complexity on theory development in social and behavioral research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(4), 672–690. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619848688 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schramm, W. (1955). Information theory and mass communication. Journalism Quarterly, 32(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769905503200201 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schultz, W., Dayan, P., & Montague, P. R. (1997). A neural substrate of prediction and reward. Science, 275(5306), 1593–1599. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.275.5306.1593 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Shannon, W. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379–423. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Sherry, J. L. (2015). The complexity paradigm for studying human communication: A summary and integration of two fields. Review of Communication Research, 1, 22–65. https://doi.org/10.12840/issn.2255-4165.2015.03.01.007 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Shoemaker, P. J., Tankard, J. W., & Lasorsa, D. L. (2004). How to build social science theories. SAGE Publications. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Siegel, J. Z., Mathys, C., Rutledge, R. B., & Crockett, M. J. (2018). Beliefs about bad people are volatile. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(10), 750–756. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0425-1 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Siegenfeld, A. F., & Bar-Yam, Y. (2020). An introduction to complex systems science and its applications [Review article]. Complexity, https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6105872 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Silver, D., Hubert, T., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I., Lai, M., Guez, A., Lanctot, M., Sifre, L., Kumaran, D., Graepel, T., Lillicrap, T., Simonyan, K., & Hassabis, D. (2018). A general reinforcement learning algorithm that masters chess, shogi, and Go through self-play. Science, 362(6419), 1140–1144. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar6404 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Silver, D., Schrittwieser, J., Simonyan, K., Antonoglou, I., Huang, A., Guez, A., Hubert, T., Baker, L., Lai, M., Bolton, A., Chen, Y., Lillicrap, T., Hui, F., Sifre, L., van den Driessche, G., Graepel, T., & Hassabis, D. (2017). Mastering the game of Go without human knowledge. Nature, 550(7676), 354–359. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24270 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Slater, M. D., & Gleason, L. S. (2012). Contributing to theory and knowledge in quantitative communication science. Communication Methods and Measures, 6(4), 215–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2012.732626 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Smaldino, P. E. (2017). Models are stupid, and we need more of them. In R. R. VallacherS. J. ReadA. NowakEds., Computational social psychology (1st ed., pp. 311–331). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315173726-14 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Smaldino, P. E. (2020). How to translate a verbal theory into a formal model. Social Psychology, 51(4), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000425 First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Strogatz, S. (2014). Nonlinear dynamics and chaos. Taylor & Francis. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Sutton, R. S., & Barto, A. G. (2018). Reinforcement learning: An introduction. MIT press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Tamborini, R., Bowman, N. D., Eden, A., Grizzard, M., & Organ, A. (2010). Defining media enjoyment as the satisfaction of intrinsic needs. Journal of Communication, 60(4), 758–777. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01513.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tavoni, G., Balasubramanian, V., & Gold, J. I. (2019). What is optimal in optimal inference? Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 29, 117–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.07.008 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Van Atteveldt, W., Margolin, D., Shen, C., Trilling, D., & Weber, R. (2019). A roadmap for computational communication research. Computational Communication Research, 1(1), 1–11. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • van Rooij, I., & Baggio, G. (2021). Theory before the test: How to build high-verisimilitude explanatory theories in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1745691620970604. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620970604 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • van Rooij, I., & Blokpoel, M. (2020). Formalizing verbal theories. Social Psychology, 51(5), 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000428 First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • Vandekerckhove, J., Matzke, D., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2015). Model comparison and the principle of parsimony. In J. R. BusemeyerZ. WangJ. T. TownsendA. EidelsEds., Oxford handbook of computational and mathematical psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 300–317). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199957996.013.14 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Vehtari, A., Gelman, A., & Gabry, J. (2017). Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Statistics and Computing, 27(5), 1413–1432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-016-9696-4 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vorderer, P.Hefner, D.Reinecke, L.Klimmt, C. (Eds.). (2018). Permanently online, permanently connected: living and communicating in a POPC World. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Permanently-Online-Permanently-Connected-Living-and-Communicating-in-a/Vorderer-Hefner-Reinecke-Klimmt/p/book/9781138245006 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wagenmakers, E.-J., Van Der Maas, H. L. J., & Grasman, R. P. P. P. (2007). An EZ-diffusion model for response time and accuracy. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194023 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Waldherr, A., & Wettstein, M. (2019). Bridging the gaps: Using agent-based modeling to reconcile data and theory in computational communication science. International Journal of Communication, 13, 3976–3999. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-186794 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wang, Z. J., Busemeyer, J. R., & Lang, A. (2006). Grazing or staying tuned: A stochastic dynamic model of channel changing behavior. In R. SunN. MiyakeEds., Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society & the 5th International Conference of the Cognitive Science (pp. 870–875). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wang, Z. J., Irwin, M., Cooper, C., & Srivastava, J. (2015). Multidimensions of media multitasking and adaptive media selection. Human Communication Research, 41(1), 102–127. First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wang, Z. J., Lang, A., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2011). Motivational processing and choice behavior during television viewing: An integrative dynamic approach. Journal of Communication, 61(1), 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01527.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Watkins, C. J. C. H., & Dayan, P. (1992). Q-learning. Machine Learning, 8(3), 279–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992698 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Watts, D. J. (2017). Should social science be more solution-oriented? Nature Human Behaviour, 1(1), Article 0015. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0015 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Weber, R., Mathiak, K., & Sherry, J. L. (2009). The neurophysiological perspective in mass communication research. In M. BeattyJ. McCroskeyK. FloydEds., Biological dimensions of communication: Perspectives, methods, and research (pp. 43–73). Hampton Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Weber, R., Tamborini, R., Westcott-Baker, A., & Kantor, B. (2009). Theorizing flow and media enjoyment as cognitive synchronization of attentional and reward networks. Communication Theory, 19(4), 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2009.01352.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Westbrook, A., & Braver, T. S. (2015). Cognitive effort: A neuroeconomic approach. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 15(2), 395–415. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-015-0334-y First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Westbrook, A., & Braver, T. S. (2016). Dopamine does double duty in motivating cognitive effort. Neuron, 89(4), 695–710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2015.12.029 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar