CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 16Social Media and PoliticsMedia and Digital CommunicationMisinformation and Its Impacts

Beyond Filter Bubbles and Echo Chambers: The Integrative Potential of the Internet

Open access
Mahrt, Merja·2019·ifpuk - Institute for Media and Communication Studies at FU Berlin
DOI 10.17174/dcr.v5.0
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Are online audiences today fragmented into echo chambers or filter bubbles? Do users only see what digital platforms (like search engines or social media) let them see? And if so, what are the consequences for the cohesion of a society? Concerns like these abound in recent years. They attest to widely held assumptions about a negative influence of digital media or even the Internet in general on society. Empirical studies on these phenomena are, however, not as unequivocal. To understand why results from previous research are so far inconclusive, this study investigates the role of the Internet for social integration from a more general point of view. The integrative potential of the Internet is assessed to compare it with other media and ultimately better understand to what degree and due to which factors the Internet may or may not help bring society together. Using survey data, clickstream data on actual usage of websites, and data on content structures, the present work investigates how user behavior and structural features of the Internet determine its positive or negative effects on social integration. The results reveal that the Internet in general is not as bad as popular accounts of digital fragmentation may suggest. How much integrative potential can be realized via online offerings, however, depends on numerous factors on the side of the users as well as content and platform providers.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.17174/dcr.v5.0

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The echo chamber construct is controversial and was ill-defined from the beginning.

    “Firstly, the echo chamber construct is controversial, and researchers claim that it was ill-defined from the beginning and that researchers should either abandon or conceptualize it properly [91].”

    From A systematic review of echo chamber research: comparative analysis of conceptualizations, operationalizations, and varying outcomes (2025) · cites this paper as [91]

    Section 3.4 reports mixed evidence for online echo chambers, supporting the claim that the idea is contested. Section 4.3 says research lacks a clear threshold for *fragmentation*, but our copy does not say the echo-chamber construct was ill-defined from the beginning or recommend abandoning or reconceptualizing it. No page numbers were available for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 235

  1. 2nd broadcasting decision, BVerfG, 31, 314 (1971). Retrieved from http://www. servat.unibe.ch/dfr/bv031314.html
  2. Ackermann, J. (2017a). Einleitung. Phänomen Let's Play -Entstehung und wissenschaftliche Relevanz eines Remediatisierungsphänomens [Introduction. The let's play phenomenon-Development and scientific relevance of a phenomenon of remediatization]. In J. Ackermann (Ed.), Phänomen Let's Play-Video. Entstehung, Ästhetik, Aneignung und Faszination aufgezeichneten Computerspielhandelns (pp. 1-15). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.
  3. Ackermann, J. (Ed.). (2017b). Phänomen Let's Play-Video. Entstehung, Ästhetik, Aneignung und Faszination aufgezeichneten Computerspielhandelns [The let's play phenomenon. Development, aesthetics, appropriation, and fascination of recorded computer game play]. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.
  4. Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S.-W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17-40. doi:10.2307/4134367 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Anarbaeva, S. M. (2016). YouTubing difference: Performing identity in video communities. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research, 9(2), 1-14. doi:10.4101/jvwr. v9i2.7193 · DOI
  6. Appel, L., Dadlani, P., Dwyer, M., Hampton, K., Kitzie, V., Matni, Z. A., . . . Teodoro, R. (2014). Testing the validity of social capital measures in the study of information and communication technologies. Information, Communication & Society, 17(4), 398-416. doi:10.1080/1369118x.2014.884612 · DOI
  7. Baek, Y. M., Jeong, I., & Rhee, J. W. (2015). Political homophily on social network sites and users' poll skepticism. Asian Journal of Communication, 25(3), 271-287. doi:10.1080/01292986.2014.955861 · DOI
  8. Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130-1132. doi:10.1126/ science.aaa1160 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Bakshy, E., Rosenn, I., Marlow, C., & Adamic, L. (2012). The role of social networks in information diffusion. Proceedings of the 21st international conference on World Wide Web, Lyon, France. doi:10.1145/2187836.2187907 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Ball-Rokeach, S. J., Kim, Y.-C., & Matei, S. (2001). Storytelling neighborhood: Paths to belonging in diverse urban environments. Communication Research, 28(4), 392-428. doi:10.1177/009365001028004003 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Barbier, G., & Liu, H. (2011). Data mining in social media. In C. C. Aggarwal (Ed.), Social network data analytics (pp. 327-352). New York, NY: Springer.
  12. Berelson, B. (1970). What "missing the newspaper" means. In W. Schramm (Ed.), The process and effects of mass communication (8th ed., pp. 36-47). Urbana: University of Illinois Press. (Reprinted from Communications Research, 1948-1949, pp. 111-129, by P. F. Lazarsfeld & F. N. Stanton, Eds., 1949, New York, NY: Harper & Brothers)
  13. Berger, J. (2011). Arousal increases social transmission of information. Psychological Science, 22(7), 891-893. doi:10.1177/0956797611413294 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Berger, J., & Milkman, K. L. (2012). What makes online content viral? Journal of Marketing Research, 49(2), 192-205. doi:10.1509/jmr.10.0353 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Berry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A. M. Padilla (Ed.), Accul- turation: Theory, models and some new findings (pp. 9-26). Boulder, CO: Westview.
  16. Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology, 46(1), 5-34. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.1997.tb01087.x · DOI
  17. Berth, H., Förster, P., & Brähler, E. (2004). Psychosoziale Folgen einer Migration aus den neuen in die alten Bundesländer. Ergebnisse einer Längsschnittstudie [Psycho-social effects of migrating from the new to the old länder. Results from a longitudinal study]. psychosozial, 27(1), 81-95. Retrieved from http:// www.wiedervereinigung.de/sls/PDF/psychosozial2004.pdf References
  18. Black, J., & Barnes, J. L. (2015). Fiction and social cognition: The effect of viewing award-winning television dramas on theory of mind. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 9(4), 423-429. doi:10.1037/aca0000031 · DOI
  19. Bobkowski, P. S. (2009). Adolescent religiosity and selective exposure to television. Journal of Media & Religion, 8(1), 55-70. doi:10.1080/15348420802670942 · DOI
  20. Bock, A., & Mahrt, M. (2017). Was Jugendliche online schauen -YouTube als medialer Raum für Rollenrepräsentation [What adolescents watch online- YouTube as a mediated space for role representation]. merz medien + erziehung, 61(1), 40-47.
  21. Boczkowski, P. J., & Mitchelstein, E. (2012). How users take advantage of different forms of interactivity on online news sites: Clicking, e-mailing, and commenting. Human Communication Research, 38(1), 1-22. doi:10.1111/j.1468- 2958.2011.01418.x · DOI
  22. Bode, L. (2016). Political news in the news feed: Learning politics from social media. Mass Communication and Society, 19(1), 24-48. doi:10.1080/15205436.201 5.1045149 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Bond, R. M., Fariss, C. J., Jones, J. J., Kramer, A. D. I., Marlow, C., Settle, J. E., & Fowler, J. H. (2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature, 489(7415), 295-298. doi:10.1038/nature11421 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Bonfadelli, H. (1985). Die Wissenskluft-Konzeption: Stand und Perspektiven der Forschung [The knowledge gap hypothesis: State of the art and perspectives for research]. In U. Saxer (Ed.), Gleichheit oder Ungleichheit durch Massenmedien? (pp. 65-86). Munich, Germany: Oelschläger.
  25. boyd, d. m. (2010). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), Networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites (pp. 39-58). New York, NY: Routledge.
  26. Bright, J. (2016). The social news gap: How news reading and news sharing diverge. Journal of Communication, 66(3), 343-365. doi:10.1111/jcom.12232 · DOI
  27. Brodersen, A., Scellato, S., & Wattenhofer, M. (2012). YouTube around the world: Geographic popularity of videos. Proceedings of the 21st international conference on World Wide Web, Lyon, France. doi:10.1145/2187836.2187870 · DOI
  28. Bruns, T. (1996). Fernseh-Serien als Indikator medialen und sozialen Wandels. Eine Analyse der Veränderungen von Werten und sozialen Strukturen im fiktionalen Programm des Fernsehens [Television series as indicators of mediated and social change. An analysis of changes in values and social structures in fictional TV programs]. In H. Schatz (Ed.), Fernsehen als Objekt und Moment des sozialen Wandels. Faktoren und Folgen der aktuellen Veränderungen des Fernsehens (pp. 203-253). Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
  29. Bucher, H.-J., & Schumacher, P. (2006). The relevance of attention for selecting news content. An eye-tracking study on attention patterns in the reception of print and online media. Communications, 31(3), 347-368. doi:10.1515/ COMMUN.2006.022 · DOI
  30. Burgess, J. (2008). All your chocolate rain are belong to us? Viral video, YouTube and the dynamics of participatory culture. In G. Lovink & S. Niederer (Eds.), Video vortex reader: Responses to YouTube (pp. 101-109). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Institute of Network Cultures.
  31. Burgess, J., & Green, J. (2009). YouTube. Online video and participatory culture. Cambridge, UK: polity.
  32. Butsch, R. (2011). Audiences and publics, media and public spheres. In V. Nightingale (Ed.), The handbook of media audiences (pp. 149-168). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  33. Cantor, J. R. (1976). What is funny to whom? Journal of Communication, 26(3), 164- 172. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1976.tb01920.x · DOI
  34. Carroll, S. (2008). The practical politics of step-stealing and textual poaching: YouTube, audio-visual media and contemporary swing dancers online. Convergence: The Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 14(2), 183-204. doi:10.1177/1354856507087943 · DOI
  35. Cha, M., Kwak, H., Rodriguez, P., Ahn, Y.-Y., & Moon, S. (2007). I tube, you tube, everybody tubes: Analyzing the world's largest user generated content video system. Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement, San Diego, CA. doi:10.1145/1298306.1298309 · DOI
  36. Cheng, x., Fatourechi, M., Ma, x., Zhang, C., Zhang, L., & Liu, J. (2014). Insight data of YouTube from a partner's view. Proceedings of Network and Operating System Support on Digital Audio and Video Workshop, Singapore. doi:10.1145/2597176.2578274 · DOI
  37. Coe, K., Tewksbury, D., Bond, B. J., Drogos, K. L., Porter, R. W., Yahn, A., & Zhang, Y. (2008). Hostile news. Partisan use and perceptions of cable news programming. Journal of Communication, 58(2), 201-219. doi:10.1111/j.1460- 2466.2008.00381.x · DOI
  38. Cohen, Jacob (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Cohen, Jonathan (2002). Television viewing preferences: Programs, schedules, and the structure of viewing choices made by Israeli adults. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46(2), 204-221. doi:10.1207/ s15506878jobem4602_3 · DOI
  40. Colletta, L. (2009). Political satire and postmodern irony in the age of Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. The Journal of Popular Culture, 42(5), 856-874. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5931.2009.00711.x · DOI
  41. Couldry, N., Hepp, A., & Krotz, F. (Eds.). (2009). Media events in a global age. London, UK: Routledge.
  42. D'Alessio, D., & Allen, M. (2007). The selective exposure hypothesis and media choice processes. In R. W. Preiss, B. M. Gayle, N. Burrell, M. Allen, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Mass media effects research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 103-118).
  43. Davidson, J., Liebald, B., Liu, J., Nandy, P., van Vleet, T., Gargi, U., . . . Sampath, D. (2010). The YouTube video recommendation system. Proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on Recommender systems, Barcelona, Spain. doi:10.1145/1864708.1864770 · DOI
  44. Dayan, D., & Katz, E. (1992). Media events: The live broadcasting of history. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  45. Dill-Shackleford, K. E., Vinney, C., & Hopper-Losenicky, K. (2016). Connecting the dots between fantasy and reality: The social psychology of our engagement with fictional narrative and its functional value. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(11), 634-646. doi:10.1111/spc3.12274 · DOI
  46. Döbler, T. (2012). Strukturelle Ungleichheit zwischen West-und Ostdeutschland -Eine Erklärung für Mediennutzungsunterschiede? [Structural inequality between West and East Germany-An explanation for differences in media use?]. In C. Stegbauer (Ed.), Ungleichheit. Medien-und kommunikationssoziologische Perspektiven (pp. 73-100). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.
  47. Domahidi, E. (2016). Online-Mediennutzung und wahrgenommene soziale Ressourcen. Eine Metaanalyse [Online media use and perceived social resources. A meta- analysis]. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.
  48. Donsbach, W. (2009). Cognitive dissonance theory-A roller coaster career. How communication research adapted the theory of cognitive dissonance. In T. Hartmann (Ed.), Media choice. A theoretical and empirical overview (pp. 128-148). New York, NY: Routledge.
  49. Dunbar, R. (2011). How many "friends" can you really have? Spectrum, 48(6), 81- 83. doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2011.5783712 · DOI
  50. Eisemann, C. (2015). C Walk auf YouTube. Sozialraumkonstruktion, Aneignung und Entwicklung in einer digitalen Jugendkultur [C walk on YouTube. Construction of a social space, appropriation, and development of a youth culture]. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.
  51. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook "friends:" Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x · DOI · Paper page
  52. Erhart, J. (2014). 'Mr G is deffinately bringin' sexy back': Characterizing Chris Lilley's YouTube audience. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 28(2), 176-187. doi:10.1080/10304312.2014.888039 · DOI
  53. Feldman, L., Myers, T. A., Hmielowski, J. D., & Leiserowitz, A. (2014). The mutual reinforcement of media selectivity and effects: Testing the reinforcing spirals framework in the context of global warming. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 590-611. doi:10.1111/jcom.12108 · DOI
  54. Ferdinand, P. (2000). The Internet, democracy and democratization. Democratization, 7(1), 1-17. doi:10.1080/13510340008403642 · DOI
  55. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  56. Feuß, S. (2013). Auf den ersten Blick. Wie Medieninhalte wahrgenommen und rezipiert werden [At first sight. How media content is perceived and received]. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.
  57. Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298-320. doi:10.1093/poq/nfw006 · DOI · Paper page
  58. Förster, P., Brähler, E., Stöbel-Richter, Y., & Berth, H. (2012). Sächsische Längsschnittstudie -Welle 19, 2005 [Saxonian longitudinal study-Wave 19, 2005]. GESIS Data Archive (ZA6237). Cologne, Germany. doi:10.4232/1.11317 · DOI
  59. Friedland, L. A. (2001). Communication, community, and democracy: Toward a theory of the communicatively integrated community. Communication Research, 28(4), 358-391. doi:10.1177/009365001028004002 · DOI
  60. Friedland, L. A., & McLeod, J. M. (1999). Community integration and mass media: A reconsideration. In D. Demers & K. Viswanath (Eds.), Mass media, social control, and social change. A macrosocial perspective (pp. 197-226). Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
  61. Fujioka, Y. (2005). Black media images as a perceived threat to African American ethnic identity: Coping responses, perceived public perception, and attitudes towards affirmative action. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(4), 450-467. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4904_6 · DOI
  62. Garrett, R. K. (2009a). Echo chambers online?: Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(2), 265-285. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01440.x · DOI · Paper page
  63. Garrett, R. K. (2009b). Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication, 59(4), 676-699. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01452.x · DOI · Paper page
  64. Garrett, R. K., & Stroud, N. J. (2014). Partisan paths to exposure diversity: Differences in pro-and counterattitudinal news consumption. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 680-701. doi:10.1111/jcom.12105 · DOI
  65. Gehrau, V. (2013). Issue diversity in the internetage. Changes in nominal issue diversity in Germany between 1994 and 2005. Studies in Communication and Media, 2(1), 129-142. Retrieved from http://www.scm.nomos.de/fileadmin/ scm/doc/SCM_13_01_04.pdf
  66. Gehrau, V., & Goertz, L. (2010). Gespräche über Medien unter veränderten medialen Bedingungen [Conversations about media in a changed media environment]. Publizistik, 55(2), 153-172. doi:10.1007/s11616-010-0082-5 · DOI
  67. GESIS -Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften. (2015). Allgemeine Bevölkerungsumfrage der Sozialwissenschaften ALLBUS 2014 [General population survey of the social sciences ALLBUS 2014]. GESIS Data Archive (ZA5240). Cologne, Germany. doi:10.4232/1.13141 · DOI
  68. Gillespie, T. (2014). The relevance of algorithms. In T. Gillespie, P. J. Boczkowski, & K. Foot (Eds.), Media technologies (pp. 167-194). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  69. Goel, S., Mason, W., & Watts, D. J. (2010). Real and perceived attitude agreement in social networks. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 99(4), 611-621. doi:10.1037/a0020697 Goldmedia. (n.d.). BLM/LFK-Web-TV-Monitor 2015. Online-Video-Angebote in Deutschland [BLM/LFK web TV monitor 2015. Online video offerings in Germany] (Report). Retrieved from https://www.blm.de/files/pdf1/160119- web-tv-monitor-2015_langversion.pdf · DOI · Paper page
  70. Gonçalves, B., Perra, N., & Vespignani, A. (2011). Modeling users' activity on Twitter networks: Validation of Dunbar's number. PLoS One, 6(8), e22656. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0022656 · DOI · Paper page
  71. Greenberg, B. S. (1974). Gratifications of television viewing and their correlates for British children. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communication: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 71-92). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  72. Guo, L., & Lee, L. (2013). The critique of YouTube-based vernacular discourse: A case study of YouTube's Asian community. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 30(5), 391-406. doi:10.1080/15295036.2012.755048 · DOI
  73. Haas, A., & Brosius, H.-B. (2013). Fragmentierung der Publikumsagenda im Zeitverlauf? [Fragmentation of the audience agenda over time?]. In K. Imhof, R. Blum, H. Bonfadelli, & O. Jarren (Eds.), Stratifizierte und segmentierte Öffentlichkeit (pp. 187-202). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
  74. Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society (T. Burger, Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Polity. (Original work published 1962)
  75. Hart, W., Albarracín, D., Eagly, A. H., Brechan, I., Lindberg, M. J., & Merrill, L. (2009). Feeling validated versus being correct: A meta-analysis of selective exposure to information. Psychological Bulletin, 135(4), 555-588. doi:10.1037/ a0015701 · DOI · Paper page
  76. Hasebrink, U. (1997). "Ich bin viele Zielgruppen." Anmerkungen zur Debatte um die Fragmentierung des Publikums aus kommunikationswissenschaftlicher Sicht ["I am many target groups." Annotations on the debate about audience fragmentation from a communication-science perspective]. In H. Scherer & H.-B. Brosius (Eds.), Zielgruppen, Publikumssegmente, Nutzergruppen: Beiträge aus der Rezeptionsforschung (pp. 262-280). Munich, Germany: R. Fischer.
  77. Hasebrink, U., & Domeyer, H. (2010). Zum Wandel von Informationsrepertoires in konvergierenden Medienumgebungen [On changes in information repertoires in converging media environments]. In M. Hartmann & A. Hepp (Eds.), Die Mediatisierung der Alltagswelt (pp. 49-64). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
  78. Hasebrink, U., & Domeyer, H. (2012). Media repertoires as patterns of behaviour and as meaningful practices: A multimethod approach to media use in converging media environments. Participations. Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 9(2), 757-779. Retrieved from http://www.participations.org/ Volume%209/Issue%202/40%20Hasebrink%20Domeyer.pdf
  79. Hasebrink, U., & Popp, J. (2006). Media repertoires as a result of selective media use. A conceptual approach to the analysis of patterns of exposure. Communications, 31(2), 369-387. doi:10.1515/COMMUN.2006.023 · DOI
  80. Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77-89. doi:10.1080/19312450709336664 · DOI · Paper page
  81. Heeter, C. (1985). Program selection with abundance of choice. A process model. Human Communication Research, 12(1), 126-152. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1985.tb00070.x · DOI · Paper page
  82. Heitmeyer, W., Kühnel, S., Schmidt, P., Wagner, U., & Mansel, J. (2013). Gruppenbezogene Menschenfeindlichkeit (GMF-Survey 2002) [Group-specific misanthropy (GMF survey 2002)]. GESIS Data Archive (ZA4391). Cologne, Germany. doi:10.4232/1.11808 · DOI
  83. Hepp, A., Bozdag, C., & Suna, L. (2010). Herkunfts-, Ethno-und Weltorientierte: Aneignungstypen der kulturellen Identität und kommunikativen Vernetzung in der Diaspora [Origin-, ethno-, and world-oriented types of appropriating a cultural identity and networking via communication in the diaspora]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 58(3), 320-342. doi:10.5771/1615-634x-2010-3-320 · DOI
  84. Hermida, A., Fletcher, F., Korell, D., & Logan, D. (2012). Share, like, recommend. Decoding the social media news consumer. Journalism Studies, 13(5-6), 815-824. doi:10.1080/1461670x.2012.664430 · DOI
  85. Herzog, H. (1944). What do we really know about daytime serial listeners? In P. F. Lazarsfeld & F. N. Stanton (Eds.), Radio research 1942-1943 (pp. 3-33). New York: Duell, Sloane and Pearce.
  86. Hoffman, L. H., & Eveland, W. P., jr. (2010). Assessing causality on the relationship between community attachment and local news media use. Mass Communication & Society, 13(2), 174-195. doi:10.1080/15205430903012144 · DOI
  87. Hollander, B. A. (2008). Tuning out or tuning elsewhere? Partisanship, polarization, and media fragmentation from 1998 to 2006. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 85(1), 23-40. doi:10.1177/107769900808500103 · DOI
  88. Holmes, D. (Ed.). (1997). Virtual politics. Identity & community in cyberspace. London, UK: Sage.
  89. Holmqvist, K., Holsanova, J., Barthelson, M., & Lundqvist, D. (2003). Reading or scanning? A study of newspaper and net paper reading. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (Eds.), The mind's eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 657-670). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
  90. Holtz-Bacha, C., & Peiser, W. (1999). Verlieren die Massenmedien ihre Integrations- funktion? Eine empirische Analyse zu den Folgen der Fragmentierung des Medienpublikums [Are the mass media losing their integrative function? An empirical analysis of the effects of audience fragmentation]. In U. Hasebrink & P. Rössler (Eds.), Publikumsbindungen. Medienrezeption zwischen Individualisierung und Integration (pp. 41-53). Munich, Germany: R. Fischer.
  91. Honkala, M., & Cui, Y. (2012). Automatic on-device filtering of social networking feeds. Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Making Sense Through Design, Copenhagen, Denmark. doi:10.1145/2399016.2399126 · DOI
  92. Hurrelmann, K. (2006). Einführung in die Sozialisationstheorie [Introduction to socialization theory] (9th ed.). Weinheim, Germany: Beltz.
  93. Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59(1), 19-39. doi:10.1111/ j.1460-2466.2008.01402.x · DOI · Paper page
  94. Jansz, J. (2005). The emotional appeal of violent video games for adolescent males. Communication Theory, 15(3), 219-241. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2005.tb00334.x · DOI
  95. Jarren, O. (2000). Gesellschaftliche Integration durch Medien? Zur Begründung normativer Anforderungen an Medien [Social integration through media? On the reasons for normative requirements of the media]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 48(1), 22-41. doi:10.5771/1615-634x-2000-1-22 · DOI
  96. Jarvis, S. E., & Stephens, M. (2015). News-seekers vs. gate-keepers: How audiences and newsrooms prioritize stories in print and online content. International Journal of Signs and Semiotic Systems, 4(2), 50-63. doi:10.4018/IJSSS.2015070104 · DOI
  97. Jeffres, L. W. (2000). Ethnicity and ethnic media use: A panel study. Communication Research, 27(4), 496-535. doi:10.1177/009365000027004004 · DOI
  98. Johnson, J. (1996). Viewpoint: The information superhighway: A worst-case scenario. Communications of the ACM, 39(2), 15-17. doi:10.1145/230798.246816 · DOI
  99. Jones, S. G. (Ed.). (1998). Cybersociety 2.0. Revisiting computer-mediated communication and community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  100. Katz, E. (1996). And deliver us from segmentation. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546(1), 22-33. doi:10.1177/0002716296546001003 · DOI
  101. Katz, E., & Liebes, T. (2007). 'No more peace!': How disaster, terror and war have upstaged media events. International Journal of Communication, 1, 157-166. Retrieved from http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/44/23
  102. Katz, W. A. (1982). TV viewer fragmentation from cable TV. Journal of Advertising Research, 22(6), 27-30.
  103. Kennedy, Ü. (2016). Exploring YouTube as a transformative tool in the "The power of MAKEUP!" movement. M/C Journal, 19(4). Retrieved from http:// journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/view/1127
  104. Kepplinger, H. M., & Martin, V. (1986). Die Funktion der Massenmedien in der Alltagskommunikation [The function of mass media in everyday communication]. Publizistik, 31(1-2), 118-128.
  105. Keuneke, S. (2011). Medienangst als Maßstab. Der wechselhafte Umgang mit dem Populären am Beispiel der Literatur [Fear of media as a benchmark. The changing treatment of the popular, using literature as an example]. In R. Lüdeke (Ed.), Kommunikation im Populären. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven auf ein ganzheitliches Phänomen (pp. 273-296). Bielefeld, Germany: transcript.
  106. Kim, S. J. (2016). A repertoire approach to cross-platform media use behavior. New Media & Society, 18(3), 353-372. doi:10.1177/1461444814543162 · DOI
  107. Kim, S. J., & Viswanathan, V. (2015). The role of individual and structural factors in explaining television channel choice and duration. International Journal of Communication, 9, 3502-3522. Retrieved from http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/ article/view/2574/1501
  108. Kim, Y. (2011). The contribution of social network sites to exposure to political difference: The relationships among SNSs, online political messaging, and exposure to cross-cutting perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 971-977. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.001 · DOI
  109. Kim, Y., Hsu, S.-H., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2013). Influence of social media use on discussion network heterogeneity and civic engagement: The moderating role of personality traits. Journal of Communication, 63(3), 498-516. doi:10.1111/ jcom.12034 · DOI
  110. Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (2007). Online memes, affinities, and cultural production. In M. Knobel & C. Lankshear (Eds.), A new media literacies sampler (pp. 199-227). New York, NY: Lang.
  111. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Brück, J., & Hastall, M. R. (2006). The gender news use divide: Impacts of sex, gender, self-esteem, achievement, and affiliation motive on German newsreaders' exposure to news topics. Communications, 31(3), 329-345. doi:10.1515/COMMUN.2006.021 · DOI
  112. Kopacz, M., & Lee Lawton, B. (2011). The YouTube Indian: Portrayals of Native Americans on a viral video site. New Media & Society, 13(2), 330-349. doi:10.1177/1461444810373532 · DOI
  113. Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Problems and opportunities in agenda-setting research. Journal of Communication, 43(2), 100-127. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01265.x · DOI
  114. Krause, B., & Gehrau, V. (2007). Das Paradox der Medienwirkung auf Nichtnutzer [The paradoxon of media effects on non-users]. Publizistik, 52(2), 191-209. doi:10.1007/s11616-007-0083-1 · DOI
  115. Krüger, U. M. (1998). Zum Stand der Konvergenzforschung im Dualen Rundfunksystem [The state of research on convergence in the dual broadcasting system]. In W. Klingler, G. Roters, & O. Zöllner (Eds.), Fernsehforschung in Deutschland (pp. 151-184). Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos.
  116. Ksiazek, T. B. (2011). A network analytic approach to understanding cross- platform audience behavior. Journal of Media Economics, 24(4), 237-251. doi:10.1080/08997764.2011.626985 · DOI · Paper page
  117. Lee, A. M., Lewis, S. C., & Powers, M. (2014). Audience clicks and news placement: A study of time-lagged influence in online journalism. Communication Research, 41(4), 505-530. doi:10.1177/0093650212467031 · DOI
  118. Lee, J. K. (2009). Incidental exposure to news: Limiting fragmentation in the new media environment (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://repositories.lib. utexas.edu/bitstream/handle/2152/6686/leej54127.pdf?sequence=2
  119. Lee, J. K., Choi, J., Kim, C., & Kim, Y. (2014). Social media, network heterogeneity, and opinion polarization. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 702-722. doi:10.1111/ jcom.12077 · DOI
  120. Leskovec, J., Adamic, L. A., & Huberman, B. A. (2007). The dynamics of viral marketing. ACM Transactions on the Web, 1(1), 5. doi:10.1145/1232722.1232727 · DOI
  121. Leskovec, J., Lang, K. J., Dasgupta, A., & Mahoney, M. W. (2009). Community structure in large networks: Natural cluster sizes and the absence of large well-defined clusters. Internet Mathematics, 6(1), 29-123. doi:10.1080/15427951.2009.10129177 · DOI
  122. Light, B., Griffiths, M., & Lincoln, S. (2012). 'Connect and create': Young people, YouTube and graffiti communities. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 26(3), 343-355. doi:10.1080/10304312.2012.665833 · DOI
  123. Lin, C. A. (1994). Audience fragmentation in a competitive video marketplace. Journal of Advertising Research, 34(6), 30-38.
  124. Lockwood, D. (1991). Social integration and system integration. In S. Lash (Ed.), Post-structuralist and post-modernist sociology (pp. 35-48). Aldershot, UK: Elgar. (Reprinted from Explorations in social change, pp. 244-257, by G. K. Zollschan & W. Hirsch, Eds., 1964, Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin)
  125. Mahrt, M. (2008). Conversations about local media and their role in community integration. Communications, 33(2), 233-246. doi:10.1515/COMMUN.2008.013 · DOI
  126. Mahrt, M. (2017a). Themenkenntnis und Integrationsfunktion der Medien: Sind Onlinenutzung und Onlineinhalte mit Massenmedien vergleichbar? [Content awareness and the integrative function of media. Are online use and online content comparable to mass media?]. In M. Beiler & B. Bigl (Eds.), 100 Jahre Kommunikationswissenschaft in Deutschland. Von einem Spezialfach zur Integrationsdisziplin (pp. 305-318). Constance, Germany: UVK.
  127. Mahrt, M. (2017b). YouTube-Hits zwischen Diversifikation und Integration [YouTube hits between diversification and integration]. In O. Jandura, M. Wendelin, M. Adolf, & J. Wimmer (Eds.), Integration und Diversifikation (pp. 171-185). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
  128. Mahrt, M., & Begenat, M. (2013). Von Lebenswelten und ihren Horizonten. Mediennutzung und Themenwahrnehmung in politischen Milieus [Of lifeworlds and their horizons. Media use and perception of content in political milieus]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 61(1), 21-37. doi:10.5771/1615-634x-2013-1-21 · DOI
  129. Maletzke, G. (1980). Integration -eine gesellschaftliche Funktion der Massenkommunikation [Integration-A social function of mass communication]. Publizistik, 25(2-3), 199-206.
  130. Marcinkowski, F. (2010). Das Fernsehen als Politikvermittlungsfalle. "Versehentliche" Nutzung und "beiläufiges" Lernen von Nachrichten [Television as a trap for conveying politics. "Accidental" use and "incidental" learning of news]. In C. Schemer, W. Wirth, & C. Wünsch (Eds.), Politische Kommunikation: Wahrnehmung, Verarbeitung, Wirkung (pp. 171-192). Baden- Baden, Germany: Nomos.
  131. McCombs, M., & Reynolds, A. (2009). How the news shapes our civic agenda. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects. Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 1-16). New York, NY: Routledge.
  132. McLeod, J. M., Daily, K., Guo, Z., Eveland, W. P., Bayer, J., Yang, S., & Wang, H. (1996). Community integration, local media use, and democratic processes. Communication Research, 23(2), 179-209. doi:10.1177/009365096023002002 · DOI
  133. McQuail, D. (2005). McQuail's mass communication theory (5th ed.). London, UK: Sage.
  134. McQuail, D., Blumler, J. G., & Brown, J. R. (1972). The television audience: A revised perspective. In D. McQuail (Ed.), Sociology of mass communications (pp. 135-165). Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
  135. McQuire, S. (2010). Rethinking media events: Large screens, public space broadcasting and beyond. New Media & Society, 12(4), 567-582. doi:10.1177/1461444809342764 · DOI
  136. Messing, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2013). Friends that matter: How social distance affects selection and evaluation of content in social media. Paper presented at the 63rd annual conference of the International Communication Association, London, UK.
  137. Messing, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2014). Selective exposure in the age of social media: Endorsements trump partisan source affiliation when selecting news online. Communication Research, 41(8), 1042-1063. doi:10.1177/0093650212466406 · DOI · Paper page
  138. Mitchelstein, E., & Boczkowski, P. J. (2010). Online news consumption research: An assessment of past work and an agenda for the future. New Media & Society, 12(7), 1085-1102. doi:10.1177/1461444809350193 · DOI
  139. Molyneaux, H., O'Donnell, S., Gibson, K., & Singer, J. (2008). Exploring the gender divide on YouTube: An analysis of the creation and reception of vlogs. American Communication Journal, 10(1), 8-8. Retrieved from https://www.it.uu. se/edu/course/homepage/avint/vt09/1.pdf
  140. Morgan, M., Shanahan, J., & Signorielli, N. (2009). Growing up with television. Cultivation processes. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects. Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 34-49). New York, NY: Routledge.
  141. Moy, P., Scheufele, D. A., & Holbert, R. L. (1999). Television use and social capital: Testing Putnam's time displacement hypothesis. Mass Communication and Society, 2(1-2), 27-45. doi:10.1080/15205436.1999.9677860 · DOI
  142. Muller, A. (2011). Virtual communities and translation into physical reality in the 'It Gets Better' project. Journal of Media Practice, 12(3), 269-277. doi:10.1386/jmpr.12.3.269_1 Müller, T. (2013). Habitualisierte Mobilnutzung -Smartphones und Tablets gehören zum Medienalltag. Ergebnisse der ARD-Mobilstudie [Habitualized media use-Smartphones and tablets are part of mediated everyday life. Results of the ARD mobile study]. Media Perspektiven, n.v.(9), 410-422. Retrieved from http://www.ard-werbung.de/fileadmin/user_upload/media- perspektiven/pdf/2013/09-2013_Mueller.pdf · DOI
  143. Napoli, P. M. (2003). Audience economics. Media institutions and the audience marketplace. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
  144. Napoli, P. M. (2011). Audience evolution. New technologies and the transformation of media audiences. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
  145. Nelson-Field, K., Riebe, E., & Newstead, K. (2013). The emotions that drive viral video. Australasian Marketing Journal, 21(4), 205-211. doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2013.07.003 · DOI
  146. Noam, E. M. (2005). Why the Internet is bad for democracy. Communications of the ACM, 48(10), 57-58. doi:10.1145/1089107.1089138 · DOI
  147. Norris, P. (1996). Does television erode social capital? A reply to Putnam. PS: Political Science and Politics, 29(3), 474-480. doi:10.2307/420827 · DOI
  148. Oatley, K. (2016). Fiction: Simulation of social worlds. Trends in Cognitive Science, 20(8), 618-628. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.002 · DOI · Paper page
  149. Oschatz, C., Maurer, M., & Haßler, J. (2014). (R)Evolution der Politikberichterstattung im Medienwandel? Die Inhalte von nachrichtenjournalistischen Online-und Offline- Angeboten im Vergleich [(R)Evolution of political coverage in a changing media environment? Comparing the content of journalistic online and offline offerings]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 62(1), 25-41. doi:10.5771/1615-634x-2014-1-25 · DOI
  150. Paek, T., Gamon, M., Counts, S., Chickering, D. M., & Dhesi, A. (2010). Predicting the importance of newsfeed posts and social network friends. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-10), Atlanta, GA. Retrieved from http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AAAI/AAAI10/ paper/viewFile/1878/2222
  151. Papacharissi, Z., & Gibson, P. L. (2011). Fifteen minutes of privacy: Privacy, sociality, and publicity on social network sites. In S. Trepte & L. Reinecke (Eds.), Privacy online. Perspectives on privacy and self-disclosure in the social web (pp. 75-89). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
  152. Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. London, UK: Penguin.
  153. Phillips, W. (2015). This is why we can't have nice things. Mapping the relationship between online trolling and mainstream culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  154. Prior, M. (2007). Post-broadcast democracy: How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  155. Putnam, R. D. (1995a). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78. doi:10.1353/jod.1995.0002 · DOI · Paper page
  156. Putnam, R. D. (1995b). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. PS: Political Science and Politics, 28(4), 664-683. doi:10.2307/420517 · DOI
  157. Quandt, T. (2008). Neues Medium, alter Journalismus? Eine vergleichende Inhaltsanalyse tagesaktueller Print-und Online-Nachrichtenangebote [New medium, old journalism? A comparative content analysis of topical print and online news offerings]. In T. Quandt & W. Schweiger (Eds.), Journalismus online -Partizipation oder Profession? (pp. 131-155). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
  158. Quintelier, E., & Hooghe, M. (2011). Television and political participation among adolescents: The impact of television viewing, entertainment and information preferences. Mass Communication and Society, 14(5), 620-642. doi:10.1080/15205436.2010.530383 · DOI
  159. Reagan, J. (1996). The "repertoire" of information sources. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40(1), 112-121. doi:10.1080/08838159609364336 · DOI
  160. Rentfrow, P. J., Goldberg, L. R., & Zilca, R. (2011). Listening, watching, and reading: The structure and correlates of entertainment preferences. Journal of Personality, 79(2), 223-258. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00662.x · DOI
  161. Reuband, K.-H. (2010). How people learned about the September 11 terrorist attack and how it affected them. A study in news diffusion and psychosocial reactions in Germany. In T. Beckers, K. Birkelbach, J. Hagenah, & U. Rosar (Eds.), Komparative empirische Sozialforschung (pp. 437-466). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
  162. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
  163. Rogers, E. M., & Seidel, N. (2002). Diffusion of news of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Prometheus, 20(3), 209-219. doi:10.1080/0810902021014326 · DOI
  164. Rohan, M. J. (2000). A rose by any name? The values construct. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(3), 255-277. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0403_4 · DOI
  165. Rojas, H., Shah, D. V., & Friedland, L. A. (2011). A communicative approach to social capital. Journal of Communication, 61(4), 689-712. doi:10.1111/j.1460- 2466.2011.01571.x · DOI
  166. Ronneberger, F. (1964). Die politischen Funktionen der Massenkommunikationsmittel [The political effects of media of mass communication]. Publizistik, 9(4), 291-304.
  167. Röper, H. (2016). Zeitungsmarkt 2016: Pressekonzentration erneut leicht gestiegen [The newspaper market in 2016: Press concentration slightly increases again]. Media Perspektiven, n.v.(5), 254-269. Retrieved from http://www.ard-werbung. de/fileadmin/user_upload/media-perspektiven/pdf/2016/05-2016_Roeper.pdf
  168. Rotman, D., Golbeck, J., & Preece, J. (2009). The community is where the rapport is-On sense and structure in the YouTube community. Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Communities and technologies, University Park, PA. doi:10.1145/1556460.1556467 · DOI
  169. Rotman, D., & Preece, J. (2010). The 'WeTube' in YouTube -Creating an online community through video sharing. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 6(3), 317-333. doi:10.1504/ijwbc.2010.033755 · DOI
  170. Rowe, D., & Baker, S. A. (2012). Live sites in an age of media reproduction: Mega events and transcontinental experience in public space. Global Media Journal: Australian Edition, 6(1), 1-10. Retrieved from http://researchdirect. westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws:15065
  171. Rudat, A., & Buder, J. (2015). Making retweeting social: The influence of content and context information on sharing news in Twitter. Computers in Human Behavior, 46, 75-84. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.005 · DOI
  172. Rudat, A., Buder, J., & Hesse, F. W. (2014). Audience design in Twitter: Retweeting behavior between informational value and followers' interests. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 132-139. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.006 · DOI
  173. Salganik, M. J., Dodds, P. S., & Watts, D. J. (2006). Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Science, 311(5762), 854-856. doi:10.1126/science.1121066 · DOI · Paper page
  174. Sayre, B., Bode, L., Shah, D., Wilcox, D., & Shah, C. (2010). Agenda setting in a digital age: Tracking attention to California Proposition 8 in social media, online news and conventional news. Policy & Internet, 2(2), 7-32. doi:10.2202/1944-2866.1040 · DOI
  175. Schmidt, J.-H. (2011). (Micro)blogs: Practices of privacy management. In S. Trepte & L. Reinecke (Eds.), Privacy online. Perspectives on privacy and self- disclosure in the social web (pp. 159-173). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
  176. Schönbach, K. (2007). 'The own in the foreign': Reliable surprise-an important function of the media? Media, Culture & Society, 29(2), 344-353. doi:10.1177/0163443707074269 · DOI
  177. Schönbach, K., & Lauf, E. (2002). The "trap" effect of television and its competitors. Communication Research, 29(5), 564-583. doi:10.1177/009365002236195 · DOI
  178. Schönbach, K., & Lauf, E. (2004). Another look at the 'trap' effect of television- and beyond. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 16(2), 169-182. doi:10.1093/ijpor/16.2.169 · DOI
  179. Schönhagen, P. (2000). Evaluation des Integrationspotenzials von Massenmedien -Theoretische und methodische Überlegungen [Evaluation of the integrative potential of mass media-Theoretical and methodological considerations]. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 48(4), 554-570. doi:10.5771/1615-634x-2000-4-554 · DOI
  180. Schulz, W. (1999). Fernsehen und sozialer Wandel. Untersuchungen zur Integrations-und Fragmentierungsthese [Television and social change. Investigations of the integration and fragmentation hypothesis]. In J. Wilke (Ed.), Massenmedien und Zeitgeschichte (pp. 90-105). Constance, Germany: UVK.
  181. Schweiger, W. (2010). Informationsnutzung online: Informationssuche, Selektion, Rezeption und Usability von Online-Medien [Online information usage: Search for information, selection, reception, and usability of online media]. In W. Schweiger & K. Beck (Eds.), Handbuch Online-Kommunikation (pp. 184-210). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
  182. Sears, D. O., & Freedman, J. L. (1967). Selective exposure to information: A critical review. Public Opinion Quarterly, 31(2), 194-213. doi:10.1086/267513 · DOI
  183. Shah, D. V. (1998). Civic engagement, interpersonal trust, and television use: An individual-level assessment of social capital. Political Psychology, 19(3), 469-496. doi: 10.1111/0162-895x.00114 · DOI
  184. Shah, D. V., McLeod, J. M., & Yoon, S.-H. (2001). Communication, context, and community: An exploration of print, broadcast, and Internet influences. Communication Research, 28(4), 464-506. doi:10.1177/009365001028004005 · DOI
  185. Shields, M. (2009). YouTube plays partner. MediaWeek, 19(11), 7. Retrieved from http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/youtube-plays-partner-111638
  186. Shifman, L. (2012). An anatomy of a YouTube meme. New Media & Society, 14(2), 187-203. doi:10.1177/1461444811412160 · DOI · Paper page
  187. Slater, M. D. (2007). Reinforcing spirals: The mutual influence of media selectivity and media effects and their impact on individual behavior and social identity. Communication Theory, 17(3), 281-303. doi:10.1111/j.1468- 2885.2007.00296.x · DOI · Paper page
  188. Smith, S. M., Fabrigar, L. R., & Norris, M. E. (2008). Reflecting on six decades of selective exposure research: Progress, challenges, and opportunities. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 464-493. doi:10.1111/j.1751- 9004.2007.00060.x · DOI
  189. Stamm, K. R., & Guest, A. M. (1991). Communication and community integration: An analysis of the communication behavior of newcomers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 68(4), 644-656. doi:10.1177/107769909106800405 · DOI
  190. Stark, B. (2013). Fragmentierung Revisited: Eine theoretische und methodische Evaluation im Internetzeitalter [Fragmentation revisited: A theoretical and methodological evaluation in the online era]. In W. Seufert & F. Sattelberger (Eds.), Langfristiger Wandel von Medienstrukturen (pp. 199-218). Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos.
  191. Stark, B., Magin, M., & Jürgens, P. (2014). Navigieren im Netz. Befunde einer qualitativen und quantitativen Nutzerbefragung [Navigating the net. Results of a qualitative and quantitative user survey]. In B. Stark, D. Dörr, & S. Aufenanger (Eds.), Die Googleisierung der Informationssuche. Suchmaschinen zwischen Nutzung und Regulierung (pp. 20-74). Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.
  192. Stroud, N. J. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30(3), 341-366. doi:10.1007/s11109-007- 9050-9 · DOI · Paper page
  193. Sunstein, C. R. (2007). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  194. Taneja, H., Webster, J. G., Malthouse, E. C., & Ksiazek, T. B. (2012). Media consumption across platforms: Identifying user-defined repertoires. New Media & Society, 14(6), 951-968. doi:10.1177/1461444811436146 · DOI
  195. Tenenboim, O., & Cohen, A. A. (2015). What prompts users to click and comment: A longitudinal study of online news. Journalism, 16(2), 198-217. doi:10.1177/1464884913513996 · DOI
  196. Tewksbury, D. (2003). What do Americans really want to know? Tracking the behavior of news readers on the Internet. Journal of Communication, 53(4), 694-710. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2003.tb02918.x · DOI
  197. Tewksbury, D., & Riles, J. (2015). Political polarization as a function of citizen predispositions and exposure to news on the Internet. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59(3), 381-398. doi:10.1080/08838151.2015.1054996 · DOI · Paper page
  198. Tewksbury, D., & Rittenberg, J. (2012). News on the Internet. Information and citizenship in the 21st century. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  199. Tewksbury, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (2009). News framing theory and research. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects. Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 17-33). New York, NY: Routledge.
  200. Thomä, M. (2014). Der Zerfall des Publikums. Nachrichtennutzung zwischen Zeitung und Internet [The breakup of the audience. News use between newspapers and Internet] (2nd ed.). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer VS.

200 of 235 shown

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mahrt, M.
Affiliations
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
Corresponding author
Mahrt, Merja
Venue
ifpuk - Institute for Media and Communication Studies at FU Berlin
Publisher
ifpuk - Institute for Media and Communication Studies at FU Berlin
Published
2019
Volume
5
Pages
246
DOI
10.17174/dcr.v5.0
OpenAlex
W2947238330
Cited by
16
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1
FWCI
3.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) (publishedVersion)
  • 5
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
Keywords
filter bubbles, echo chambers, social integration, internet, online audiences, digital fragmentation, social cohesion, user behavior, platform providers, media effects on society

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