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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Annual review of political science 2024-01, Vol.27 (1), p.63-85 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
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 |