Cited by 150Social and Intergroup PsychologyMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationElectoral Systems and Political Participation

Social Identity, Selective Exposure, and Affective Polarization: How Priming National Identity Shapes Attitudes Toward Immigrants Via News Selection

Wojcieszak, Magdalena, Garrett, R Kelly·2018·Human Communication Research

Abstract

We use three online experiments—two selection-based and one forced-exposure—to demonstrate that increasing the salience of national identity can promote affective polarization toward undocumented immigrants, both directly and indirectly, via the selection of pro- and counter-attitudinal articles about immigration. As anticipated, across both selection studies, priming national identity exacerbates polarization among immigration opponents. For that group, priming national identity also indirectly increases polarization via enhanced exposure to pro-attitudinal (i.e., anti-immigration) news. In one selection study, however, the prime’s polarizing effect is attenuated by increased exposure to counter-attitudinal (i.e., pro-immigration) news. These polarizing effects do not emerge among immigration supporters. Finally, a forced-exposure experiment more rigorously tests the causal model by assessing polarization when both the identity prime and message exposure are randomly assigned. We discuss practical and theoretical implications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/hcr/hqx010

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • El uso de Twitter/X en contextos electorales reduce la exposición selectiva al contenido y aumenta la exposición incidental, permitiendo que los políticos alcancen a públicos específicos con mensajes adaptados a sus intereses y preferencias.

    “El uso de la plataforma en contextos electorales reduce la exposición selectiva al contenido y aumentan la exposición incidental, permitiendo que los políticos alcancen a públicos específicos con mensajes adaptados a sus intereses y preferencias (Fletcher & Nielsen, 2018;Wojcieszak & Garrett, 2018).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Wojcieszak, M., & Garrett, R. K.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
Wojcieszak, Magdalena
Venue
Human Communication Research
Published
2018-03-30
Volume
44
Issue
3
Pages
247-273
ISSN
  • 0360-3989 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2958
OpenAlex
W2794887715
Cited by
150
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2
FWCI
30.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Human Communication Research (publishedVersion)
Funders
Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration, Refugees, and Integration
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Keywords
affective polarization, immigration attitudes, undocumented immigrants, selective exposure, news selection, social identity, political attitudes

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