The rise of homogenization and polarization in the news may inhibit individuals’ understanding of an issue and the functioning of a democratic society. This study applies a network approach to understanding patterns of semantic similarity and divergence across news coverage. Specifically, we focus on how (a) inter-organizational networks based on media ideology, (b) inter-organizational networks based on news truthfulness, and (c) public engagement that news articles received on social media may affect semantic similarity in the news. We use large-scale user logs data on social media platforms (i.e., Facebook and Twitter) and news text data from more than 100 news organizations over 10 months to examine the three potential processes. Our results show that the similarity between news organizations in terms of media ideology and news truthfulness is positively associated with semantic similarity, whereas the public engagement that news articles received on social media is negatively associated with semantic similarity. Our study contributes to theory development in mass communication by shifting to a network paradigm that connects news organizations, news content, and news audiences. We demonstrate how scholars across communication disciplines may collaborate to integrate distinct theories, connect multiple levels, and link otherwise separate dimensions. Methodologically, we demonstrate how synchronizing network science with natural language processing and combining social media log data with text data can help to answer research questions that communication scholars are interested in. The findings’ implications for news polarization are discussed.
{"title":"Examining semantic (dis)similarity in news through news organizations’ ideological similarity, similarity in truthfulness, and public engagement on social media: a network approach","authors":"Yue Li, Robert M. Bond","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqac020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac020","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The rise of homogenization and polarization in the news may inhibit individuals’ understanding of an issue and the functioning of a democratic society. This study applies a network approach to understanding patterns of semantic similarity and divergence across news coverage. Specifically, we focus on how (a) inter-organizational networks based on media ideology, (b) inter-organizational networks based on news truthfulness, and (c) public engagement that news articles received on social media may affect semantic similarity in the news. We use large-scale user logs data on social media platforms (i.e., Facebook and Twitter) and news text data from more than 100 news organizations over 10 months to examine the three potential processes. Our results show that the similarity between news organizations in terms of media ideology and news truthfulness is positively associated with semantic similarity, whereas the public engagement that news articles received on social media is negatively associated with semantic similarity. Our study contributes to theory development in mass communication by shifting to a network paradigm that connects news organizations, news content, and news audiences. We demonstrate how scholars across communication disciplines may collaborate to integrate distinct theories, connect multiple levels, and link otherwise separate dimensions. Methodologically, we demonstrate how synchronizing network science with natural language processing and combining social media log data with text data can help to answer research questions that communication scholars are interested in. The findings’ implications for news polarization are discussed.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46374514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ezgi Ulusoy, Neha Sethi, Joshua Baldwin, Sara M. Grady, D. Ewoldsen
Retrospective imaginative involvement (RII) is a concept that encapsulates how audiences reflect back on a narrative’s characters and events after the story has ended. The current study aims to explicate the antecedents of RII in order to provide initial steps toward creating a theory of RII. Through two studies, we tested the role of familiarity, traits (e.g., curiosity), entertainment experiences broadly (e.g., parasocial relationships), and content- or exposure-specific experiences (e.g., boundary expansion). Results suggest that RII plays an important role in self-regulation through repeated asynchronous engagement with specific narratives. This demonstrates a further mechanism by which narratives impact our lives even after the exposure. Further results and implications are discussed.
{"title":"Can’t stop thinking about Star Wars and The Office: antecedents of retrospective imaginative involvement","authors":"Ezgi Ulusoy, Neha Sethi, Joshua Baldwin, Sara M. Grady, D. Ewoldsen","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqac019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac019","url":null,"abstract":"Retrospective imaginative involvement (RII) is a concept that encapsulates how audiences reflect back on a narrative’s characters and events after the story has ended. The current study aims to explicate the antecedents of RII in order to provide initial steps toward creating a theory of RII. Through two studies, we tested the role of familiarity, traits (e.g., curiosity), entertainment experiences broadly (e.g., parasocial relationships), and content- or exposure-specific experiences (e.g., boundary expansion). Results suggest that RII plays an important role in self-regulation through repeated asynchronous engagement with specific narratives. This demonstrates a further mechanism by which narratives impact our lives even after the exposure. Further results and implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43218758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article develops an updated version of formality as an analytical framework in the comparative study of communicative situations, and especially of meetings. The discussion remakes Judith Irvine’s formality framework by adding to it the explanatory principle of practical rationality as used within Weber’s Interpretive Sociology. This conceptual move provides an efficient and accurate means by which to infer the final causes, reasons, or ends of communicative situations. To illustrate this analytical approach and how it can contribute to qualitative theorization in general, the article conducts an in-depth ethnographic and comparative examination of civic software production meetings in Israel and the United States. The overall argument of the article is that practical rationality can provide a valuable means for deepening explanations of cultural difference in qualitative communication research.
{"title":"Practical rationality as a determinant of formality in communicative situations: toward a procedure for causal interpretation in qualitative communication research","authors":"Nimrod Shavit","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqac018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac018","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article develops an updated version of formality as an analytical framework in the comparative study of communicative situations, and especially of meetings. The discussion remakes Judith Irvine’s formality framework by adding to it the explanatory principle of practical rationality as used within Weber’s Interpretive Sociology. This conceptual move provides an efficient and accurate means by which to infer the final causes, reasons, or ends of communicative situations. To illustrate this analytical approach and how it can contribute to qualitative theorization in general, the article conducts an in-depth ethnographic and comparative examination of civic software production meetings in Israel and the United States. The overall argument of the article is that practical rationality can provide a valuable means for deepening explanations of cultural difference in qualitative communication research.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45945118","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Bryan Mclaughlin, K. Wilkinson, Hector Rendon, T. Martinez
In our research examining how people think and talk about immigration, we consistently find that people want to have a reasonable conversation about politics, but they often decide that productive conversations are not possible because other people are uninformed, irrational, close-minded, and uncivil. We argue that self-serving biases and phenomenological experiences lead to the biased perception that the self is far more capable of adhering to the ideals of rational deliberation than others, a process that we refer to as deliberative bias. In Study 1, we use data from in-depth interviews to develop the concept of deliberative bias. In Study 2, we use a survey to demonstrate that perceptions that other people are uninformed, irrational, close-minded, and uncivil are related to a decreased likelihood of talking politics with loose ties or those with opposing perspectives. These results suggest that deliberative bias may be a significant impediment to productive political conversations.
{"title":"Deliberating alone: deliberative bias and giving up on political talk","authors":"Bryan Mclaughlin, K. Wilkinson, Hector Rendon, T. Martinez","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqac016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac016","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In our research examining how people think and talk about immigration, we consistently find that people want to have a reasonable conversation about politics, but they often decide that productive conversations are not possible because other people are uninformed, irrational, close-minded, and uncivil. We argue that self-serving biases and phenomenological experiences lead to the biased perception that the self is far more capable of adhering to the ideals of rational deliberation than others, a process that we refer to as deliberative bias. In Study 1, we use data from in-depth interviews to develop the concept of deliberative bias. In Study 2, we use a survey to demonstrate that perceptions that other people are uninformed, irrational, close-minded, and uncivil are related to a decreased likelihood of talking politics with loose ties or those with opposing perspectives. These results suggest that deliberative bias may be a significant impediment to productive political conversations.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44936822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A substantial body of research has investigated consumer perceptions of a product based on the country where it originated (CoO). Such judgments have been shown to fluctuate due to a number of factors, among them changes in political conditions. The current research shows that a key factor in CoO-based evaluations of products is the image of respective national leaders. In two experimental studies, conducted in the United States, we found that exposure to a news article that positively (vs. negatively) characterizes a foreign leader led to more positive perceptions of that leader’s country; more positive evaluations of products and brands manufactured there; and thereby also to greater willingness to purchase these products. The results amply demonstrate that the news coverage of modern leaders can significantly affect their national trade, and that therefore the responsibility they carry may extend beyond their official role as political figures.
{"title":"Buy me: the effect of leaders’ perceived personality abroad on consumption of their national products","authors":"M. Balmas, Renana Atia","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqac017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac017","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 A substantial body of research has investigated consumer perceptions of a product based on the country where it originated (CoO). Such judgments have been shown to fluctuate due to a number of factors, among them changes in political conditions. The current research shows that a key factor in CoO-based evaluations of products is the image of respective national leaders. In two experimental studies, conducted in the United States, we found that exposure to a news article that positively (vs. negatively) characterizes a foreign leader led to more positive perceptions of that leader’s country; more positive evaluations of products and brands manufactured there; and thereby also to greater willingness to purchase these products. The results amply demonstrate that the news coverage of modern leaders can significantly affect their national trade, and that therefore the responsibility they carry may extend beyond their official role as political figures.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":"48 20","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41244281","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Algorithms are a ubiquitous part of organizations as they enable, guide, and restrict organizing at the level of everyday interactions. This essay focuses on algorithms and organizing by reviewing the literature on algorithms in organizations, examining the viewpoint of relationality and relational agency on algorithms and organizing, exploring the properties of algorithms, and concluding what these mean from an organizational communication viewpoint. Algorithms need data to be collected. The data are always biased, and algorithms exclude everything that is not in their code. They define what is seen as important. Their operating principles are opaque, and they are political due to human interference. Algorithms are not just used. Rather, they are co-actors in organizing. We argue that algorithms demand rethinking communication in the communicative constitution of organizations and call for more empirical research emphasizing the properties of algorithms, the relationality of algorithms, and the temporality of the materialization of algorithms.
{"title":"Algorithms and Organizing","authors":"Tomi Laapotti, Mitra Raappana","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqac013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac013","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Algorithms are a ubiquitous part of organizations as they enable, guide, and restrict organizing at the level of everyday interactions. This essay focuses on algorithms and organizing by reviewing the literature on algorithms in organizations, examining the viewpoint of relationality and relational agency on algorithms and organizing, exploring the properties of algorithms, and concluding what these mean from an organizational communication viewpoint. Algorithms need data to be collected. The data are always biased, and algorithms exclude everything that is not in their code. They define what is seen as important. Their operating principles are opaque, and they are political due to human interference. Algorithms are not just used. Rather, they are co-actors in organizing. We argue that algorithms demand rethinking communication in the communicative constitution of organizations and call for more empirical research emphasizing the properties of algorithms, the relationality of algorithms, and the temporality of the materialization of algorithms.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42170751","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Zening Duan, Jianing Li, Josephine Lukito, Kai-Cheng Yang, Fan Chen, Dhavan V. Shah, Sijia Yang
Social bots, or algorithmic agents that amplify certain viewpoints and interact with selected actors on social media, may influence online discussion, news attention, or even public opinion through coordinated action. Previous research has documented the presence of bot activities and developed detection algorithms. Yet, how social bots influence attention dynamics of the hybrid media system remains understudied. Leveraging a large collection of both tweets (N = 1,657,551) and news stories (N = 50,356) about the early COVID-19 pandemic, we employed bot detection techniques, structural topic modeling, and time series analysis to characterize the temporal associations between the topics Twitter bots tend to amplify and subsequent news coverage across the partisan spectrum. We found that bots represented 8.98% of total accounts, selectively promoted certain topics and predicted coverage aligned with partisan narratives. Our macro-level longitudinal description highlights the role of bots as algorithmic communicators and invites future research to explain micro-level causal mechanisms.
{"title":"Algorithmic Agents in the Hybrid Media System: Social Bots, Selective Amplification, and Partisan News about COVID-19","authors":"Zening Duan, Jianing Li, Josephine Lukito, Kai-Cheng Yang, Fan Chen, Dhavan V. Shah, Sijia Yang","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqac012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Social bots, or algorithmic agents that amplify certain viewpoints and interact with selected actors on social media, may influence online discussion, news attention, or even public opinion through coordinated action. Previous research has documented the presence of bot activities and developed detection algorithms. Yet, how social bots influence attention dynamics of the hybrid media system remains understudied. Leveraging a large collection of both tweets (N = 1,657,551) and news stories (N = 50,356) about the early COVID-19 pandemic, we employed bot detection techniques, structural topic modeling, and time series analysis to characterize the temporal associations between the topics Twitter bots tend to amplify and subsequent news coverage across the partisan spectrum. We found that bots represented 8.98% of total accounts, selectively promoted certain topics and predicted coverage aligned with partisan narratives. Our macro-level longitudinal description highlights the role of bots as algorithmic communicators and invites future research to explain micro-level causal mechanisms.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45084178","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
People are more likely to seek out romantic partners who are politically similar to themselves. Nonetheless, romantic partners who disagree politically do exist. This study examines the influence of political (dis)similarity in romantic relationships on both political participation and relationship satisfaction. We found that (1) people in politically similar romantic relationships are more satisfied in their relationships and more politically participative than those who are in dissimilar relationships, (2) discussion expressiveness mediates the relationships between political similarity and satisfaction, (3) discussion frequency and expressiveness mediate the relationship between political similarity and participation, and (4) whereas political conflict intensity mediates the relationship between political similarity and satisfaction, it does not affect participation. Findings indicate that the quality of discussion and conflict, not merely their occurrence, help explain the political and relational results of political (dis)similarity within romantic relationships.
{"title":"Love and Politics: The Influence of Politically (Dis)Similar Romantic Relationships on Political Participation and Relationship Satisfaction","authors":"Cynthia Peacock, Joshua R. Pederson","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqac011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 People are more likely to seek out romantic partners who are politically similar to themselves. Nonetheless, romantic partners who disagree politically do exist. This study examines the influence of political (dis)similarity in romantic relationships on both political participation and relationship satisfaction. We found that (1) people in politically similar romantic relationships are more satisfied in their relationships and more politically participative than those who are in dissimilar relationships, (2) discussion expressiveness mediates the relationships between political similarity and satisfaction, (3) discussion frequency and expressiveness mediate the relationship between political similarity and participation, and (4) whereas political conflict intensity mediates the relationship between political similarity and satisfaction, it does not affect participation. Findings indicate that the quality of discussion and conflict, not merely their occurrence, help explain the political and relational results of political (dis)similarity within romantic relationships.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45558018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
John Banas, Nicholas A. Palomares, A. Richards, David M. Keating, Nick Joyce, Stephen A. Rains
Three experiments tested if the machine and bandwagon heuristics moderate beliefs in fact-checked claims under different conditions of human/machine (dis)agreement and of transparency of the fact-checking system. Across experiments, people were more likely to align their belief in the claim when artificial intelligence (AI) and crowdsourcing agents’ fact-checks were congruent rather than incongruent. The heuristics provided further nuance to the processes, especially as a particular agent suggested truth verdicts. That is, people with stronger belief in the machine heuristic were more likely to judge the claim as true when an AI agent’s fact-check suggested the claim was likely true but not false; likewise, people with stronger belief in the bandwagon heuristic were more likely to judge the claim as true when the crowdsource agent fact-checked the claim to be true but not false. Making the system more transparent to users does not appear to change results.
{"title":"When Machine and Bandwagon Heuristics Compete: Understanding Users’ Response to Conflicting AI and Crowdsourced Fact-Checking","authors":"John Banas, Nicholas A. Palomares, A. Richards, David M. Keating, Nick Joyce, Stephen A. Rains","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqac010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac010","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Three experiments tested if the machine and bandwagon heuristics moderate beliefs in fact-checked claims under different conditions of human/machine (dis)agreement and of transparency of the fact-checking system. Across experiments, people were more likely to align their belief in the claim when artificial intelligence (AI) and crowdsourcing agents’ fact-checks were congruent rather than incongruent. The heuristics provided further nuance to the processes, especially as a particular agent suggested truth verdicts. That is, people with stronger belief in the machine heuristic were more likely to judge the claim as true when an AI agent’s fact-check suggested the claim was likely true but not false; likewise, people with stronger belief in the bandwagon heuristic were more likely to judge the claim as true when the crowdsource agent fact-checked the claim to be true but not false. Making the system more transparent to users does not appear to change results.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46814916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Artificially intelligent communication technologies (AICTs) that operate autonomously with high degrees of conversational fluency can make communication decisions on behalf of their principal users and communicate with those principals’ audiences on their behalf. In this study, we explore how the involvement of AICTs in communication activities shapes how principals engage in impression management and how their communication partners form impressions of them. Through an inductive, comparative field study of users of two AI scheduling technologies, we uncover three communicative practices through which principals engaged in impression management when AICTs communicate on their behalf: interpretation, diplomacy, and staging politeness. We also uncover three processes through which communication partners formed impressions of principals when communicating with them via AICTs: confirmation, transference, and compartmentalization. We show that communication partners can transfer impressions of AICTs to principals themselves and outline the conditions under which such transference is and is not likely. We discuss the implications of these findings for the study of technological mediation of impression management and formation in the age of artificial intelligence and present propositions to guide future empirical research.
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence and Impression Management: Consequences of Autonomous Conversational Agents Communicating on One’s Behalf","authors":"Camille G Endacott, Paul M Leonardi","doi":"10.1093/hcr/hqac009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqac009","url":null,"abstract":"Artificially intelligent communication technologies (AICTs) that operate autonomously with high degrees of conversational fluency can make communication decisions on behalf of their principal users and communicate with those principals’ audiences on their behalf. In this study, we explore how the involvement of AICTs in communication activities shapes how principals engage in impression management and how their communication partners form impressions of them. Through an inductive, comparative field study of users of two AI scheduling technologies, we uncover three communicative practices through which principals engaged in impression management when AICTs communicate on their behalf: interpretation, diplomacy, and staging politeness. We also uncover three processes through which communication partners formed impressions of principals when communicating with them via AICTs: confirmation, transference, and compartmentalization. We show that communication partners can transfer impressions of AICTs to principals themselves and outline the conditions under which such transference is and is not likely. We discuss the implications of these findings for the study of technological mediation of impression management and formation in the age of artificial intelligence and present propositions to guide future empirical research.","PeriodicalId":51377,"journal":{"name":"Human Communication Research","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138504938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：