Selection Neglect and Political Beliefs

Individuals, including researchers, often have to form beliefs about the political world from nonrepresentative samples—e.g., their friends, what they see on TV, or content on social media. Substantial evidence indicates that many struggle to account for this selection problem and generally form bel...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annual review of political science 2024-01, Vol.27 (1), p.63-85
Hauptverfasser: Brundage, Matt, Little, Andrew T, You, Soosun
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 85
container_issue 1
container_start_page 63
container_title Annual review of political science
container_volume 27
creator Brundage, Matt
Little, Andrew T
You, Soosun
description Individuals, including researchers, often have to form beliefs about the political world from nonrepresentative samples—e.g., their friends, what they see on TV, or content on social media. Substantial evidence indicates that many struggle to account for this selection problem and generally form beliefs as if what they observe is representative. In this review, we provide a formal typology of how this phenomenon of selection neglect affects political beliefs. We identify three types of selection neglect: homophily leads individuals to believe others’ traits and beliefs are closer to their own; the squeaky wheel effect biases beliefs toward more visible or vocal groups; and the man bites dog effect leads to excessive belief in extreme or unusual events. Selection neglect is a unifying way to understand disparate literatures on perceptions of the economy and demographics, beliefs about others’ beliefs, partisan media, and social media. Much empirical research is consistent with biased beliefs driven by selection neglect but rarely directly tests this mechanism outside of lab settings. We discuss how future research can provide more direct evidence.
doi_str_mv 10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-033325
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_annua</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3151893328</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3151893328</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a281t-cb159a76f269ae289b6fde29765031493a4233aac937d33ecb436b07ca004cab3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkE1LAzEQhoMoWKv_YUHEUzTJJNnNwYMt9QOKCuo5zKZZSVl3a7JV_PembP-Ap5nD877DPIRccHbFudTX2HXb6L_ppm9DcoEyyUEIygBAqAMy4UoqylVZHuadGUmFAXNMTlJaM8a0ENWEXL761rsh9F3x5D92a4HdqnjJlUNw2BYz3wbfpFNy1GCb_Nl-Tsn73eJt_kCXz_eP89slRVHxgbqaK4OlboQ26EVlat2svDClVgy4NIBSACA6A-UKwLtagq5Z6ZAx6bCGKTkfezex_9r6NNh1v41dPmmBK16Z_FuVqZuRcrFPKfrGbmL4xPhrObM7N3bvxu7d2NGNHd3k_GzM7zBsMxj8T_pnyR8kAXI-</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3151893328</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Selection Neglect and Political Beliefs</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Brundage, Matt ; Little, Andrew T ; You, Soosun</creator><creatorcontrib>Brundage, Matt ; Little, Andrew T ; You, Soosun</creatorcontrib><description>Individuals, including researchers, often have to form beliefs about the political world from nonrepresentative samples—e.g., their friends, what they see on TV, or content on social media. Substantial evidence indicates that many struggle to account for this selection problem and generally form beliefs as if what they observe is representative. In this review, we provide a formal typology of how this phenomenon of selection neglect affects political beliefs. We identify three types of selection neglect: homophily leads individuals to believe others’ traits and beliefs are closer to their own; the squeaky wheel effect biases beliefs toward more visible or vocal groups; and the man bites dog effect leads to excessive belief in extreme or unusual events. Selection neglect is a unifying way to understand disparate literatures on perceptions of the economy and demographics, beliefs about others’ beliefs, partisan media, and social media. Much empirical research is consistent with biased beliefs driven by selection neglect but rarely directly tests this mechanism outside of lab settings. We discuss how future research can provide more direct evidence.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1094-2939</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1545-1577</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-033325</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Palo Alto: Annual Reviews</publisher><subject>Beliefs ; Bias ; demographic perceptions ; Mass media ; media bias ; Political attitudes ; political beliefs ; Research methodology ; sampling ; Social media ; Social networks ; Television</subject><ispartof>Annual review of political science, 2024-01, Vol.27 (1), p.63-85</ispartof><rights>Copyright Annual Reviews, Inc. 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a281t-cb159a76f269ae289b6fde29765031493a4233aac937d33ecb436b07ca004cab3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Brundage, Matt</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Little, Andrew T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>You, Soosun</creatorcontrib><title>Selection Neglect and Political Beliefs</title><title>Annual review of political science</title><description>Individuals, including researchers, often have to form beliefs about the political world from nonrepresentative samples—e.g., their friends, what they see on TV, or content on social media. Substantial evidence indicates that many struggle to account for this selection problem and generally form beliefs as if what they observe is representative. In this review, we provide a formal typology of how this phenomenon of selection neglect affects political beliefs. We identify three types of selection neglect: homophily leads individuals to believe others’ traits and beliefs are closer to their own; the squeaky wheel effect biases beliefs toward more visible or vocal groups; and the man bites dog effect leads to excessive belief in extreme or unusual events. Selection neglect is a unifying way to understand disparate literatures on perceptions of the economy and demographics, beliefs about others’ beliefs, partisan media, and social media. Much empirical research is consistent with biased beliefs driven by selection neglect but rarely directly tests this mechanism outside of lab settings. We discuss how future research can provide more direct evidence.</description><subject>Beliefs</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>demographic perceptions</subject><subject>Mass media</subject><subject>media bias</subject><subject>Political attitudes</subject><subject>political beliefs</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>sampling</subject><subject>Social media</subject><subject>Social networks</subject><subject>Television</subject><issn>1094-2939</issn><issn>1545-1577</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkE1LAzEQhoMoWKv_YUHEUzTJJNnNwYMt9QOKCuo5zKZZSVl3a7JV_PembP-Ap5nD877DPIRccHbFudTX2HXb6L_ppm9DcoEyyUEIygBAqAMy4UoqylVZHuadGUmFAXNMTlJaM8a0ENWEXL761rsh9F3x5D92a4HdqnjJlUNw2BYz3wbfpFNy1GCb_Nl-Tsn73eJt_kCXz_eP89slRVHxgbqaK4OlboQ26EVlat2svDClVgy4NIBSACA6A-UKwLtagq5Z6ZAx6bCGKTkfezex_9r6NNh1v41dPmmBK16Z_FuVqZuRcrFPKfrGbmL4xPhrObM7N3bvxu7d2NGNHd3k_GzM7zBsMxj8T_pnyR8kAXI-</recordid><startdate>20240101</startdate><enddate>20240101</enddate><creator>Brundage, Matt</creator><creator>Little, Andrew T</creator><creator>You, Soosun</creator><general>Annual Reviews</general><general>Annual Reviews, Inc</general><scope>ZYWBE</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240101</creationdate><title>Selection Neglect and Political Beliefs</title><author>Brundage, Matt ; Little, Andrew T ; You, Soosun</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a281t-cb159a76f269ae289b6fde29765031493a4233aac937d33ecb436b07ca004cab3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Beliefs</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>demographic perceptions</topic><topic>Mass media</topic><topic>media bias</topic><topic>Political attitudes</topic><topic>political beliefs</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>sampling</topic><topic>Social media</topic><topic>Social networks</topic><topic>Television</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Brundage, Matt</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Little, Andrew T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>You, Soosun</creatorcontrib><collection>Annual Reviews Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Annual review of political science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Brundage, Matt</au><au>Little, Andrew T</au><au>You, Soosun</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Selection Neglect and Political Beliefs</atitle><jtitle>Annual review of political science</jtitle><date>2024-01-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>63</spage><epage>85</epage><pages>63-85</pages><issn>1094-2939</issn><eissn>1545-1577</eissn><abstract>Individuals, including researchers, often have to form beliefs about the political world from nonrepresentative samples—e.g., their friends, what they see on TV, or content on social media. Substantial evidence indicates that many struggle to account for this selection problem and generally form beliefs as if what they observe is representative. In this review, we provide a formal typology of how this phenomenon of selection neglect affects political beliefs. We identify three types of selection neglect: homophily leads individuals to believe others’ traits and beliefs are closer to their own; the squeaky wheel effect biases beliefs toward more visible or vocal groups; and the man bites dog effect leads to excessive belief in extreme or unusual events. Selection neglect is a unifying way to understand disparate literatures on perceptions of the economy and demographics, beliefs about others’ beliefs, partisan media, and social media. Much empirical research is consistent with biased beliefs driven by selection neglect but rarely directly tests this mechanism outside of lab settings. We discuss how future research can provide more direct evidence.</abstract><cop>Palo Alto</cop><pub>Annual Reviews</pub><doi>10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-033325</doi><tpages>23</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1094-2939
ispartof Annual review of political science, 2024-01, Vol.27 (1), p.63-85
issn 1094-2939
1545-1577
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_3151893328
source Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Beliefs
Bias
demographic perceptions
Mass media
media bias
Political attitudes
political beliefs
Research methodology
sampling
Social media
Social networks
Television
title Selection Neglect and Political Beliefs
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T21%3A31%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_annua&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Selection%20Neglect%20and%20Political%20Beliefs&rft.jtitle=Annual%20review%20of%20political%20science&rft.au=Brundage,%20Matt&rft.date=2024-01-01&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=63&rft.epage=85&rft.pages=63-85&rft.issn=1094-2939&rft.eissn=1545-1577&rft_id=info:doi/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-033325&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_annua%3E3151893328%3C/proquest_annua%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3151893328&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true