Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Original Article

Assessments of User Comments With “Alternative Views” as a Function of Media Trust

Published Online:December 15, 2020https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000287

Abstract

Abstract. Comments sections under news articles have become popular spaces for audience members to oppose the mainstream media’s perspective on political issues by expressing alternative views. This kind of challenge to mainstream discourses is a necessary element of proper deliberation. However, due to heuristic information processing and the public concern about disinformation online, readers of comments sections may be inherently skeptical about user comments that counter the views of mainstream media. Consequently, commenters with alternative views may participate in discussions from a position of disadvantage because their contributions are scrutinized particularly critically. Nevertheless, this effect has hitherto not been empirically established. To address this gap, a multifactorial, between-subjects experimental study (N = 166) was conducted that investigated how participants assess the credibility and argument quality of media-dissonant user comments relative to media-congruent user comments. The findings revealed that media-dissonant user comments are, indeed, disadvantaged in online discussions, as they are assessed as less credible and more poorly argued than media-congruent user comments. Moreover, the findings showed that the higher the participants’ level of media trust, the worse the assessment of media-dissonant user comments relative to media-congruent user comments. Normative implications and avenues for future research are discussed.

References

  • Appelman, A., & Sundar, S. S. (2016). Measuring message credibility: Construction and validation of an exclusive scale. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 93(1), 59–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015606057 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bachl, M. (2018). (Alternative) media sources in AfD-centered Facebook discussions. Studies in Communication and Media, 7(2), 256–270. https://doi.org/10.5771/2192-4007-2018-2-256 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Barrera, O., Guriev, S., Henry, E., & Zhuravskaya, E. (2020). Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of post-truth politics. Journal of Public Economics, 182, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2019.104123 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. ZannaJ. M. OlsenC. P. HermanEds., Social influence: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3–39). Lawrence Erlbaum. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Chen, S., & Chaiken, S. (1999). The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In S. ChaikenY. TropeEds., Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 73–96). Guilford Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Craft, S., Vos, T. P., & Wolfgang, J. D. (2016). Reader comments as press criticism: Implications for the journalistic field. Journalism, 17(6), 677–693. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884915579332 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Debatin, B. (2008). The Internet as a new platform for expressing opinions and as a new public sphere. In W. DonsbachM. W. TraugottEds., The SAGE handbook of public opinion research (pp. 64–72). SAGE. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Edwards, K., & Smith, E. E. (1996). A disconfirmation bias in the evaluation of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.5 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Fletcher, R., & Park, S. (2017). The impact of trust in the news media on online news consumption and participation. Digital Journalism, 5(10), 1281–1299. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1279979 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Frischlich, L., Boberg, S., & Quandt, T. (2019). Comments sections as targets of dark participation? Journalists’ evaluation and moderation of deviant user comments. Journalism Studies, 20(14), 2014–2033. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1556320 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Gaziano, C., & McGrath, K. (1986). Measuring the concept of credibility. Journalism Quarterly, 63(3), 451–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769908606300301 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Green, P., & MacLeod, C. J. (2016). SIMR: An R package for power analysis of generalized linear mixed models by simulation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 7(4), 493–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12504 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Guttman, N. (2008). Deliberative discourse. In W. DonsbachEd., The international encyclopedia of communication (pp. 1–6). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecd069 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hee Sun, P., Levine, T. R., Kingsley Westerman, C. Y., Orfgen, T., & Foregger, S. (2007). The effects of argument quality and involvement type on attitude formation and attitude change: A test of dual-process and social judgment predictions. Human Communication Research, 33(1), 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00290.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hilligoss, B., & Rieh, S. Y. (2008). Developing a unifying framework of credibility assessment: Construct, heuristics, and interaction in context. Information Processing & Management, 44(4), 1467–1484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2007.10.001 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Holt, K. (2019). Right-wing alternative media, Routledge. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kaiser, J. (2017). Public spheres of skepticism: Climate skeptics’ online comments in the German networked public sphere. International Journal of Communication, 11, 1661–1682. http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/5557 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Kohring, M., & Matthes, J. (2007). Trust in news media: Development and validation of a multidimensional scale. Communication Research, 34(2), 231–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650206298071 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kuru, O., Pasek, J., & Traugott, M. W. (2017). Motivated reasoning in the perceived credibility of public opinion polls. Public Opinion Quarterly, 81(2), 422–446. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfx018 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lee, E.-J. (2012). That’s not the way it is: How user-generated comments on the news affect perceived media bias. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(1), 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01597.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McNair, B. (2013). Trust, truth and objectivity: Sustaining quality journalism in the era of the content-generating user. In C. PetersM. J. BroersmaEds., Rethinking journalism: Trust and participation in a transformed news landscape (pp. 75–88). Routledge. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Metzger, M. J., & Flanagin, A. J. (2013). Credibility and trust of information in online environments: The use of cognitive heuristics. Journal of Pragmatics, 59(Part B), 210–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.012 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Medders, R. B. (2010). Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 413–439. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01488.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Meyer, P. (1988). Defining and measuring credibility of newspapers: Developing an index. Journalism Quarterly, 65(3), 567–574. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769908806500301 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Naab, T. K., Heinbach, D., Ziegele, M., & Grasberger, M.-T. (2020). Comments and credibility: How critical user comments decrease perceived news article credibility. Journalism Studies, 21(6), 783–801. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1724181 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Naab, T. K., Naab, T., & Brandmeier, J. (2019). Uncivil user comments increase users’ intention to engage in corrective actions and their support for authoritative restrictive actions. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699019886586 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Perloff, R. M. (2010). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the twenty-first century (6th ed.). Routledge. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Prochazka, F., & Schweiger, W. (2019). How to measure generalized trust in news media? An adaptation and test of scales. Communication Methods and Measures, 13(1), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2018.1506021 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Prochazka, F., Weber, P., & Schweiger, W. (2018). Effects of civility and reasoning in user comments on perceived journalistic quality. Journalism Studies, 19(1), 62–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1161497 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., Speckman, P. L., & Province, J. M. (2012). Default Bayes factors for ANOVA designs. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56(5), 356–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2012.08.001 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Schindler, J., Fortkord, C., Posthumus, L., Obermaier, M., & Reinemann, C. (2018). Woher kommt und wozu führt Medienfeindlichkeit? Zum Zusammenhang von populistischen Einstellungen, Medienfeindlichkeit, negativen Emotionen und Partizipation [Where does media hostility come from and what does it lead to? The connection between populist attitudes, media hostility, negative emotions and participation]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 66(3), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2018-3-283 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Schultheiss, B. M., & Jenzowsky, S. A. (2000). Infotainment: Der Einfluss emotionalisierend-affektorientierter Darstellung auf die Glaubwürdigkeit [Infotainment: The influence of emotionalizing, affect-oriented presentation on credibility]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 48(1), 63–84. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2000-1-63 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Slater, M. D., & Rouner, D. (1996). How message evaluation and source attributes may influence credibility assessment and belief change. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73(4), 974–991. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909607300415 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Stroud, N. J., van Duyn, E., & Peacock, C. (2016). News commenters and news comment readers. Engaging News Project, Center for Media Engagement. https://mediaengagement.org/research/survey-of-commenters-and-comment-readers/ First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 3(50), 755–769. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Toepfl, F., & Piwoni, E. (2015). Public spheres in interaction: Comments sections of news websites as counterpublic spaces. Journal of Communication, 65(3), 465–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12156 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Tsfati, Y., & Cappella, J. N. (2003). Do people watch what they do not trust? Communication Research, 30(5), 504–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650203253371 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • van Dalen, A. (2019). Journalism, trust, and credibility. In K. Wahl-JorgensenT. HanitzschEds., ICA handbook series. The handbook of journalism studies (2nd ed., pp. 356–371). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315167497-23 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Waddell, T. F. (2018). What does the crowd think? How online comments and popularity metrics affect news credibility and issue importance. New Media and Society, 20(8), 3068–3083. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817742905 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Zhang, Y. (1996). Responses to humorous advertising: The moderating effect of need for cognition. Journal of Advertising, 25(1), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1996.10673493 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Ziegele, M., Weber, M., Quiring, O., & Breiner, T. (2018). The dynamics of online news discussions: Effects of news articles and reader comments on users’ involvement, willingness to participate, and the civility of their contributions. Information, Communication & Society, 21(10), 1419–1435. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1324505 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar