Selective Exposure to a Presidential Campaign Appeal

The selective-exposure hypothesis is a widely-held assumption that people seek consonant information that supports or reinforces their previous beliefs and avoid dissonant, or challenging, information. However, those investigating the literature have reached varied conclusions regarding the viability of this hypothesis. Some have interpreted the relevant studies as offering little supportive evidence;' others have reached the opposite conclusion.2 In evaluating the status of the selective-exposure hypothesis, investigators have enumerated an impressive number of factors to account for the negative findings and an approximately equal number that may spuriously produce positive findings. The following, among others, may have prevented the selective-exposure tendency: laboratory studies frequently use topics, such as jury trials, where cultural norms dictate a fair hearing for both sides of the issue; samples typically consist of college students, presumably trained to evaluate supportive and nonsupportive information equally critically; furthermore, the choice of information is often quite artificial and abstract. Brock and Balloun have pointed out that the dependent variable most often consists of subjects indicating preferences among messages whereas, in real life, the choice more often involves tuning out or in impinging messages.3