Does Disagreement Mitigate Polarization? How Selective Exposure and Disagreement Affect Political Polarization

This study examines how selective exposure and interpersonal political disagreement influence political polarization. Using data sets from two countries, the United States and South Korea, this study investigates the association between individuals’ selective exposure and attitude polarization and p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journalism & mass communication quarterly 2015-12, Vol.92 (4), p.915-937
Main Author: Kim, Yonghwan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attitudes
Beliefs
Cognitive dissonance
Conflict
Democracy
Evidence
Ideology
Information Processing
Interpersonal Communication
Literature Reviews
Mass Media
Networks
Partisanship
Phonemes
Political Attitudes
Political behavior
Political polarization
Politics
Public Opinion
South Korea
United States
Verbal communication
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study examines how selective exposure and interpersonal political disagreement influence political polarization. Using data sets from two countries, the United States and South Korea, this study investigates the association between individuals’ selective exposure and attitude polarization and proposes that disagreement in political discussion networks can be a potential moderating variable attenuating the association between selective exposure and polarization. Results across the two nations confirm that individuals’ selective likeminded media use is associated with greater polarized attitudes. Findings further show that encountering dissimilar opinions through interpersonal discussion networks generally weakens the association between selective exposure and political polarization, despite some evidence indicating that disagreement leads to more polarized attitudes rather than attenuating polarization. The implications of the findings are discussed.
ISSN:1077-6990
2161-430X
DOI:10.1177/1077699015596328