新闻价值、认知偏见和评论区的党派不文明

IF 6.1 1区 文学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Journal of Communication Pub Date : 2017-07-18 DOI:10.1111/jcom.12312
Ashley Muddiman, Natalie Jomini Stroud
{"title":"新闻价值、认知偏见和评论区的党派不文明","authors":"Ashley Muddiman,&nbsp;Natalie Jomini Stroud","doi":"10.1111/jcom.12312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Partisan incivility is prevalent in news comments, but we have limited insight into how journalists and news users engage with it. Gatekeeping, cognitive bias, and social identity theories suggest that journalists may tolerate incivility while users actively promote partisan incivility. Using 9.6 million comments from <i>The New York Times</i>, we analyze whether the presence of uncivil and partisan terms affects how journalists and news users engage with comments. Results show that partisanship and incivility increase recommendations and the likelihood of receiving an abuse flag. Swearing increases the likelihood of a comment being rejected and reduces the chances of being highlighted as a NYT Pick. These findings suggest that journalists and news users interact with partisan incivility differently, and that some forms of incivility may be promoted or tacitly accepted in comments.</p>","PeriodicalId":48410,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication","volume":"67 4","pages":"586-609"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2017-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/jcom.12312","citationCount":"130","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"News Values, Cognitive Biases, and Partisan Incivility in Comment Sections\",\"authors\":\"Ashley Muddiman,&nbsp;Natalie Jomini Stroud\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jcom.12312\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Partisan incivility is prevalent in news comments, but we have limited insight into how journalists and news users engage with it. Gatekeeping, cognitive bias, and social identity theories suggest that journalists may tolerate incivility while users actively promote partisan incivility. Using 9.6 million comments from <i>The New York Times</i>, we analyze whether the presence of uncivil and partisan terms affects how journalists and news users engage with comments. Results show that partisanship and incivility increase recommendations and the likelihood of receiving an abuse flag. Swearing increases the likelihood of a comment being rejected and reduces the chances of being highlighted as a NYT Pick. These findings suggest that journalists and news users interact with partisan incivility differently, and that some forms of incivility may be promoted or tacitly accepted in comments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48410,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Communication\",\"volume\":\"67 4\",\"pages\":\"586-609\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/jcom.12312\",\"citationCount\":\"130\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcom.12312\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcom.12312","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 130

摘要

党派间的不文明行为在新闻评论中很普遍,但我们对记者和新闻用户是如何参与其中的了解有限。把关、认知偏见和社会认同理论表明,记者可能容忍不文明行为,而用户则积极推动党派不文明行为。利用《纽约时报》的960万条评论,我们分析了不文明和党派术语的存在是否会影响记者和新闻用户参与评论的方式。结果表明,党派偏见和不文明行为会增加推荐和收到虐待标志的可能性。说脏话会增加评论被拒绝的可能性,并降低被《纽约时报》选中的几率。这些发现表明,记者和新闻用户与党派不文明的互动方式不同,某些形式的不文明可能会在评论中得到促进或默许。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
News Values, Cognitive Biases, and Partisan Incivility in Comment Sections

Partisan incivility is prevalent in news comments, but we have limited insight into how journalists and news users engage with it. Gatekeeping, cognitive bias, and social identity theories suggest that journalists may tolerate incivility while users actively promote partisan incivility. Using 9.6 million comments from The New York Times, we analyze whether the presence of uncivil and partisan terms affects how journalists and news users engage with comments. Results show that partisanship and incivility increase recommendations and the likelihood of receiving an abuse flag. Swearing increases the likelihood of a comment being rejected and reduces the chances of being highlighted as a NYT Pick. These findings suggest that journalists and news users interact with partisan incivility differently, and that some forms of incivility may be promoted or tacitly accepted in comments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Communication
Journal of Communication COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
5.10%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: The Journal of Communication, the flagship journal of the International Communication Association, is a vital publication for communication specialists and policymakers alike. Focusing on communication research, practice, policy, and theory, it delivers the latest and most significant findings in communication studies. The journal also includes an extensive book review section and symposia of selected studies on current issues. JoC publishes top-quality scholarship on all aspects of communication, with a particular interest in research that transcends disciplinary and sub-field boundaries.
期刊最新文献
The visual nature of information warfare: the construction of partisan claims on truth and evidence in the context of wars in Ukraine and Israel/Palestine The link between changing news use and trust: longitudinal analysis of 46 countries “It’s chaos”: affective spaces of journalism in Istanbul A longitudinal examination of collaboration diversity among communication scholars: 1990–2023 “What do you want to do?”: expertise tension and authority negotiation in emergency nurse–physician interactions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1