The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Selective Exposure to Campaign Communication: The Role of Anticipated Agreement and Issue Public Membership
Abstract
This article explores two hypotheses about how voters encounter information during campaigns. According to the anticipated agreement hypothesis, people prefer to hear about candidates with whom they expect to agree. The “issue publics” hypothesis posits that voters choose to encounter information on issues they consider most important personally. We tested both hypotheses by distributing a multimedia CD offering extensive information about George W. Bush and Al Gore to a representative sample of registered voters with personal computers and home Internet connections during the closing weeks of the 2000 campaign. Exposure to information was measured by tracking individuals' use of the CD. The evidence provided strong support for the issue public hypothesis and partial support for the anticipated agreement hypothesis. Republicans and conservatives preferred to access information about George Bush, but Democrats and liberals did not prefer information about Vice President Gore. No interactions appeared between these two forms of selective exposure.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241
What To Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data
Beck, N., & Katz, J. N. (1995) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2082979 · Cited by 6,840
Facilitating Communication across Lines of Political Difference: The Role of Mass Media
Mutz, D. C. (2001) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055401000223 · Cited by 700
The Effects of Negativity and Motivated Information Processing During a Political Campaign
Meffert, M. F., Chung, S., Joiner, A. J., Waks, L., & Garst, J. (2006) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00003.x · Cited by 305 · cited 2×
“Although a handful of controlled studies did uncover traces of motivated exposure to in-party sources (Bartlett et al. 1974; Stempel 1961; Sweeney and Gruber 1984), most studies did not (e.g., Chaffee and Miyo 1983; Meffert et al. 2006; Sears 1965; for a review, see Sears and Freedman 1967).”
Background
Cited by
A New Era of Minimal Effects? The Changing Foundations of Political Communication
Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00410.x · Cited by 1,558
Self-citationTweeting From Left to Right: Is Online Political Communication More Than an Echo Chamber?
Barberá, P., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., Tucker, J. A., & Bonneau, R. (2015) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797615594620 · Cited by 1,472
Tucker, J. A., Guess, A., Barbera, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., Stukal, D., & Nyhan, B. (2018) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3144139 · Cited by 1,222
Media and Political Polarization
Prior, M. (2013) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135242 · Cited by 1,125
Messing, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2014) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650212466406 · Cited by 902
Metadata
- Authors
- Iyengar, S., Hahn, K. S., Krosnick, J. A., & Walker, J.
- Venue
- The Journal of Politics
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 186-200
- ISSN
- 0022-3816 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2508
- OpenAlex
- W2150660017
- Cited by
- 332
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 66.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Selective Exposure to Campaign Communication: The Role of Anticipated Agreement and Issue Public Membership. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0022381607080139
- The paper
- Iyengar, S., Hahn, K. S., Krosnick, J. A., & Walker, J. (2008). Selective Exposure to Campaign Communication: The Role of Anticipated Agreement and Issue Public Membership. The Journal of Politics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022381607080139
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
