Political Behavior

, Volume 35, Issue 1, pp 113–134 | Cite as

A Turn Toward Avoidance? Selective Exposure to Online Political Information, 2004–2008

  • R. Kelly GarrettEmail author
  • Dustin Carnahan
  • Emily K. Lynch
Original Paper


Scholars warn that avoidance of attitude-discrepant political information is becoming increasingly common due in part to an ideologically fragmented online news environment that allows individuals to systematically eschew contact with ideas that differ from their own. Data collected over a series of national RDD surveys conducted between 2004 and 2008 challenge this assertion, demonstrating that Americans’ use of attitude-consistent political sources is positively correlated with use of more attitudinally challenging sources. This pattern holds over time and across different types of online outlets, and applies even among those most strongly committed to their political ideology, although the relationship is weaker for this group. Implications for these findings are discussed.


Selective exposure Media Polarization Online news Elections 



Thanks to Paul Beck, Lance Holbert, Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick, Brendan Nyhan, and the anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful criticisms and suggestions, to Jim Danziger for his support of and Debbie Dunkle for her assistance with data collection and preparation of the 2008 NSF-funded survey, and to Lee Rainie and the Pew Internet and American Life Project for providing the other datasets. This research was supported by NSF (SES 0121232).


  1. Abramowitz, A. I. (2010). The disappearing center: Engaged citizens, polarization, and American democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (2008). Is polarization a myth? Journal of Politics, 70(2), 542–555.Google Scholar
  3. Adamic, L., & Glance, N. (2005). The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: Divided they blog. Paper Read at 2nd Annual Workshop on the Weblogging Ecosystem: Aggregation, Analysis and Dynamics, at Chiba, Japan.Google Scholar
  4. Albarracín, D., & Mitchell, A. (2004). The role of defensive confidence in preference for proattitudinal information: How believing that one is strong can sometimes be a defensive weakness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(12), 1565–1584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. AlterNet. (2011, October 11). About AlterNet 2011. Retrieved October 11, 2011, from
  6. American Association for Public Opinion Research. (2008). Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys (5th ed.). Lenexa, KS: AAPOR.Google Scholar
  7. Bafumi, J., & Shapiro, R. Y. (2009). A new partisan voter. The Journal of Politics, 71(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baum, M. A., & Groeling, T. (2008). New media and the polarization of American political discourse. Political Communication, 25(4), 345–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Benkler, Y., Shawa, A., & Stoddend, V. (2010). A tale of two blogospheres: Discursive practices on the left and right. Cambridge, MA: Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University.Google Scholar
  10. Bennett, W. L., & Shanto, I. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 707–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bimber, B. (1998). The Internet and political transformation: Populism, community, and accelerated pluralism. Polity, 31(1), 133–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chaffee, S. H., Saphir, M. N., Graf, J., Sandvig, C., & Hahn, K. S. (2001). Attention to counter-attitudinal messages in a state election campaign. Political Communication, 18, 247–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Curran, P. J., & Hussong, A. M. (2009). Integrative data analysis. Psychological Methods, 14(2), 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davis, R. (2009). Typing politics: The role of blogs in American politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Festinger, L. (1964). Conflict, decision, and dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fiorina, M. P., Abrams, S. J., & Pope, J. (2005). Culture war?: The myth of a polarized America. New York, NY: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
  18. Fiorina, M. P., Abrams, S. A., & Pope, J. C. (2008). Polarization in the American public: Misconceptions and misreadings. The Journal of Politics, 70(2), 556–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. FOX News Network. (2011). FOX news careers. FOX News Network 2011. Retrieved August 9, 2011, from
  20. Freedman, J. L. (1965). Confidence, utility, and selective exposure: A partial replication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 778–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Frey, D. (1986). Recent research on selective exposure to information. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 41–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Galston, W. A. (2003). If political fragmentation is the problem, is the Internet the solution? In D. M. Anderson & M. Cornfield (Eds.), The civic web. New York, NY: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  23. Garrett, R. K. (2009a). Echo chambers online?: Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(2), 265–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Garrett, R. K. (2009b). Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication, 59(4), 676–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2010a). Ideological segregation online and offline. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2010b). What drives media slant? Evidence from U.S. daily newspapers. Econometrica, 78(1), 35–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Groseclose, T., & Milyo, J. (2005). A measure of media bias. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(4), 1191–1237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hargittai, E., Gallo, J., & Kane, M. (2008). Cross-ideological discussions among conservative and liberal bloggers. Public Choice, 134(1–2), 67–86.Google Scholar
  29. Holbert, R. L. (2005). Intramedia mediation: The cumulative and complementary effects of news media use. Political Communication, 22(4), 447–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holtzman, N., Schott, J., Jones, M., Balota, D., & Yarkoni, T. (2011). Exploring media bias with semantic analysis tools: Validation of the Contrast Analysis of Semantic Similarity (CASS). Behavior Research Methods, 43(1), 193–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hunter, J. D. (1991). Culture war: The struggle to define America. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  32. Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59, 19–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Iyengar, S., Hahn, K. S., Krosnick, J. A., & Walker, J. (2008). Selective exposure to campaign communication: The role of anticipated agreement and issue public membership. The Journal of Politics, 70(1), 186–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Kleinman, S. (2011). Pre-election selective exposure: Confirmation bias versus informational utility. Communication Research.Google Scholar
  35. Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2006). How voters decide: Information processing during election campaigns. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lawrence, E., Sides, J., & Farrell, H. (2010). Self-segregation or deliberation? Blog readership, participation, and polarization in American politics. Perspectives on Politics, 8(1), 141–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mendelberg, T. (2002). The deliberative citizen: Theory and evidence. Political Decision Making, Deliberation and Participation, 6, 151–193.Google Scholar
  38. Mutz, D. C., & Martin, P. S. (2001). Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: The role of mass media. American Political Science Review, 95(1), 97–114.Google Scholar
  39. NewsMax. (2011). About 2011. Retrieved October 11, 2011, from
  40. Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2008). November 2008 post-election tracking survey dataset. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  41. Pew Research Center. (2008). Internet overtakes newspapers as news outlet. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.Google Scholar
  42. Price, V., & Neijens, P. (1997). Opinion quality in public opinion research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 9(4), 336–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Prior, M. (2009). Improving media effects research through better measurement of news exposure. The Journal of Politics, 71(03), 893–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rainie, L., Horrigan, J., & Cornfield, M. (2005). The Internet and campaign 2004. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.Google Scholar
  45. Sears, D. O., & Freedman, J. L. (1967). Selective exposure to information: A critical review. Public Opinion Quarterly, 31(2), 194–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stroud, N. J. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30, 341–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Town Hall. (2011). Conservative news, politics, opinion, breaking news analysis, political cartoons and commentary—Townhall 2011. Retrieved August 9, 2011, from
  50. Turner Broadcasting System. (2011). Career and job opportunities. Turner Broadcasting System 2011. Retrieved August 9, 2011, from
  51. U.S. Census Bureau. (2009). Households with a computer and Internet use: 1984 to 2009. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  52. Valentino, N. A., Banks, A. J., Hutchings, V. L., & Davis, A. K. (2009). Selective exposure in the Internet age: The interaction between anxiety and information utility. Political Psychology, 30(4), 591–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Webster, J. G. (2005). Beneath the veneer of fragmentation: Television audience polarization in a multichannel world. Journal of Communication, 55(2), 366–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Westen, D., Blagov, P. S., Harenski, K., Kilts, C., & Hamann, S. (2004). The neural basis of motivated reasoning: An fMRI study of emotional constraints on political judgment during the U.S. Presidential election of 2004. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(11), 1947–1958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zúniga, M. M. (2011). DailyKos FAQ | dKosopedia. DailyKos 2011. Retrieved August 9, 2011, from

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Kelly Garrett
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dustin Carnahan
    • 2
  • Emily K. Lynch
    • 2
  1. 1.School of CommunicationOhio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  2. 2.Department of Political ScienceOhio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations