Extending the Impacts of Hostile Media Perceptions: Influences on Discussion and Opinion Polarization in the Context of Climate Change
Abstract
Researchers recently have begun to examine how hostile media perceptions may promote discursive activities aimed at correcting the media’s perceived negative influence. We use nationally representative survey data to test a moderated-mediation model that finds that hostile media perceptions significantly affect support for climate mitigation policies through the mediator of discussion and that the link between discussion and policy support is moderated in a three-way interaction with social network heterogeneity and political ideology. Discussion in homogeneous social networks increases opinion polarization between liberals and conservatives by intensifying conservatives’ opinions, whereas discussion in heterogeneous social networks decreases polarization by moderating liberals’ opinions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Possessing ideologically homogeneous networks exacerbates issue and affective polarization, whereas having a heterogeneous network facilitates the correction of stereotypical misconceptions and decreases polarization.
“possessing ideologically homogeneous networks exacerbates issue and affective polarization, whereas having a heterogeneous network facilitates the correction of stereotypical misconceptions and decreases polarization223–227.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [225]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 67 · Cited by 51
- Authors
- Hart, P. S., Feldman, L., Leiserowitz, A., & Maibach, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
- Yale University (US)
- George Mason University (US)
- Venue
- Science Communication
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-07-09
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 506-532
- ISSN
- 0164-0259 (ISSN-L)
- 1075-5470
- 1552-8545
- OpenAlex
- W1873947634
- Cited by
- 51
- References
- 67
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5
- FWCI
- 11.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Science Communication (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
- Keywords
- hostile media perception, online discourse, political ideology, opinion polarization, liberals and conservatives, moderated mediation, climate change communication
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