CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 291Media Influence and PoliticsSocial Media and PoliticsNews Media Framing and Political Communication

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

No Need to Watch: How the Effects of Partisan Media Can Spread via Interpersonal Discussions

Druckman, James N., Levendusky, Matthew S., McLain, Audrey·2018·American Journal of Political Science
DOI 10.1111/ajps.12325
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

To what extent do partisan media sources shape public opinion? On its face, it would appear that the impact of partisan media is limited, given that it attracts a relatively small audience. We argue, however, that its influence may extend beyond its direct audience via a two‐step communication flow. Specifically, those who watch and are impacted by partisan media outlets talk to and persuade others who did not watch. We present experimental results that demonstrate this process. We therefore show that previous studies may have significantly underestimated the effect of these outlets. We also illustrate that how the two‐step communication flow works is contingent upon the precise composition of the discussion group (e.g., is it consistent of all fellow partisans or a mix of partisans?). We conclude by highlighting what our results imply about the study of media, preference formation, and partisan polarization.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ajps.12325

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 42 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Baum Matthew, 2010, War Stories
  2. Berelson Bernard, 1954, Voting
  3. Hornikx Jos, 2009, Adapting Consumer Advertising Appeals to Cultural Values, Communication Yearbook, 33, 39
  4. Katz Elihu, 1955, Personal Influence
  5. Pew Research Center, 2014, Political Polarization and Media Habits
  6. Sunstein Cass R., 2007, Republic.com 2.0

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–288 of 288

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Druckman, J. N., Levendusky, M. S., & McLain, A.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Temple University (US)
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Political Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-08-08
Volume
62
Issue
1
Pages
99-112
ISSN
  • 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-5907
DOI
10.1111/ajps.12325
OpenAlex
W1684208437
Cited by
291
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 77 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 1
FWCI
78.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
American Journal of Political Science (publishedVersion)
Funders
Penn's PORES program and Northwestern's Institute for Policy Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › News Media Framing and Political Communication
Keywords
partisan media, two-step flow of communication, interpersonal persuasion, public opinion formation, media influence, partisan polarization, preference formation

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